If the SSPX were sincere in all this, where is the statement regarding their favorite scapegoat, the late great Bishop Richard Williamson, that he was right all along?
Excellent analysis of the unfortunate situation! Bishop Williamson has always stressed that setting aside principles for practical cooperation is a Marxist tactic. Jesus warned against the same proto-Marxist tactic in relation to the Pharisees in Matthew 23:3: "All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not."
Do you know anything more about the fact that the great peacemaker and Holy Fathers legitimizer Schneider is a member of the Order of the Holy Cross, refounded by the Kabbalistic Opus Angelorum?
"In 1982 in Austria, Schneider joined the Canons Regular of the Holy Cross of Coimbra, a Roman Catholic religious order within the Opus Sanctorum Angelorum, and took the religious name Athanasius." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius_Schneider
Your revelations about +Schneider’s links to Opus Angelorum is news to me, and I have no knowledge other than what you have shared here.
Regarding the Marxist tactic of dialogue, the goal of which is not truth but acceptance, the recent installation on the GREC in the Resistance Writings section contained interesting insights on the dialoguing between modernist Rome and the SSPX:
“When one no longer seeks the truth, all that is left is “dialogue”, in order to find a way of living together without waging war on one another and in order to arrive at a certain unity which respects our differences.”
This is an acceptance of doctrinal pluralism.
Then quoting Romano Amerio in Iota Unum on dialogue (Chapter 11: 22):
“This term is totally unknown and unused in pre-Vatican II doctrine (p. 347). […] Dialogue, it is said today, does not have either the refutation of error, or the conversion of the interlocutor as its goal23.”
I don’t think there was ever a canonical impediment against converts receiving holy orders (eg., the Jewish brothers Lehman, Cardinal Newman, etc.).
But what is new is the conciliar church seemingly wanting to be more accommodating to heretics by making their conversions and ministry less overtly Catholic (eg., creating an Anglican use rite which will be more familiar and comfortable to Anglicans, etc).
Hello. While your views are valid, I would humbly recommend replacing the word "moron" by an academically more suited word which you think appropriate from a Catholic perspective (example: ideologue)
I leave the correction entirely to your discretion.
If your assessment is correct, then I suspect there being a step closer to the Novus Ordo by the SSPX, maybe just a small one. I can't imagine all this just to maintain the status quo. Maybe they get permission for the consecrations, but somehow the Novus Ordo has a hand in it (pun intended), as the only consecraters, primary consecrater, or co-consecrater.
Who know, maybe that’s why Francis sent +Huonder to soften them up and prepare the terrain for the eventuality you suggest. The faithful didn’t mind it then, so why would they complain today?
As much as it pains me to say so, I suspect your analysis of the likely outcome is bang-on the money. Watching the Prevostian Vatican operate is like watching a cobra hypnotize it's victim with its somnolent swaying. That the victim seems willing is at best perverse but symptomatic of the depth of the infiltration and the disarming of those good priests who nevertheless lack the moral fortitude to put principle over comfort and stay put in a compromised society.
"Could this be a trap? This isn't a traaap!" says a fish named Filet. Reading "As We Are?" is like icy cold water from a Colorado stream splashed in your face first thing in the morning! After reading the first few pages, one would be a fool, an abused spouse, or a kidnapped hostage with Stockholm syndrome to believe the Generals are sincere. However, on the other hand, the only thing that might be behind it all is Our Lady's love of Her true priests; so this about-face could be a means to save them from themselves.
So if there are no excommunications, where should a faithful Catholic go for sacraments? There are a few authentic and trustworthy sede bishops, but their chapels are very few....
I'm not a proponent of the "red light" position which began in 2013 (i.e.,. nobody may ever go to any SSPX Mass or avail themselves of any of their sacraments for any reason whatever).
I've always been a proponent of the "yellow light" position (i.e., one of caution, which assesses conditions locally in order to determine the level of danger in deciding whether or not to attend Mass there).
The reason is because unlike, say, the 1984 indult (for which, according to the letter promulgating it, just by walking in the door you are acknowledging the doctrinal uprightness of the New Mass), attending this or that SSPX Mass does not implicate the individual layman with an unconscionable compromise.
Of course, if the priest is not conditionally ordained, that's checkmate.
But if I had no other choice, and knew the priest was validly ordained, and nothing else at this particular chapel was contrary or dangerous to faith or morals, etc., I would still attend until I could find something better.
Others might see things differently, but you asked me, and that what I think.
PS: And I know plenty of sedes who attend SSPX Masses.
If the SSPX were sincere in all this, where is the statement regarding their favorite scapegoat, the late great Bishop Richard Williamson, that he was right all along?
Excellent analysis of the unfortunate situation! Bishop Williamson has always stressed that setting aside principles for practical cooperation is a Marxist tactic. Jesus warned against the same proto-Marxist tactic in relation to the Pharisees in Matthew 23:3: "All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not."
Do you know anything more about the fact that the great peacemaker and Holy Fathers legitimizer Schneider is a member of the Order of the Holy Cross, refounded by the Kabbalistic Opus Angelorum?
"In 1982 in Austria, Schneider joined the Canons Regular of the Holy Cross of Coimbra, a Roman Catholic religious order within the Opus Sanctorum Angelorum, and took the religious name Athanasius." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius_Schneider
https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bschna.html
https://ordosantaecrucis.org/history/
https://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/OpusAngelorumSatanic.htm
Hello Zita-
Your revelations about +Schneider’s links to Opus Angelorum is news to me, and I have no knowledge other than what you have shared here.
Regarding the Marxist tactic of dialogue, the goal of which is not truth but acceptance, the recent installation on the GREC in the Resistance Writings section contained interesting insights on the dialoguing between modernist Rome and the SSPX:
“When one no longer seeks the truth, all that is left is “dialogue”, in order to find a way of living together without waging war on one another and in order to arrive at a certain unity which respects our differences.”
This is an acceptance of doctrinal pluralism.
Then quoting Romano Amerio in Iota Unum on dialogue (Chapter 11: 22):
“This term is totally unknown and unused in pre-Vatican II doctrine (p. 347). […] Dialogue, it is said today, does not have either the refutation of error, or the conversion of the interlocutor as its goal23.”
Thanks Sean, I'll read your GREC articles!
I've only recently stumbled upon the OA connection. Anyway, it's pretty scary to find esotericism everywhere in influential traditionalists.
I wouldn't be surprised if things could be revealed about the GREC laymen, beyond their ignorance and idealized betrayal!
By the way, in the pre-conciliar Church, priests could not be converts or of illegitimate origin. Do you know when this was changed?
Thank you for your great work with your careful archive!
Ps: Yes, I was very surprised to have recently found names like Coloumbe, Kwasniewski, Os Justi Press, and others connected to esotericism.
Hi Zita-
I don’t think there was ever a canonical impediment against converts receiving holy orders (eg., the Jewish brothers Lehman, Cardinal Newman, etc.).
But what is new is the conciliar church seemingly wanting to be more accommodating to heretics by making their conversions and ministry less overtly Catholic (eg., creating an Anglican use rite which will be more familiar and comfortable to Anglicans, etc).
Could it be that SSPX must take this road for TLM TO survive anywhere(?)
If Modernists had all of TLM under their thumb would it survive?
Hello. While your views are valid, I would humbly recommend replacing the word "moron" by an academically more suited word which you think appropriate from a Catholic perspective (example: ideologue)
I leave the correction entirely to your discretion.
God bless.
I am well rebuked (change coming)!
No rebuke. Just a minor correction in Catholic charity🙏I have been perhaps bad at it myself at times. God bless.
Hello Sean,
If your assessment is correct, then I suspect there being a step closer to the Novus Ordo by the SSPX, maybe just a small one. I can't imagine all this just to maintain the status quo. Maybe they get permission for the consecrations, but somehow the Novus Ordo has a hand in it (pun intended), as the only consecraters, primary consecrater, or co-consecrater.
Pax et bonum +
Who know, maybe that’s why Francis sent +Huonder to soften them up and prepare the terrain for the eventuality you suggest. The faithful didn’t mind it then, so why would they complain today?
That would be wild.
Keep an eye on Strickland. Very supportive of the SSPX all of a sudden and... "lookin' for a home" as the old song goes.
Sean,
very good assessment of the well founded worries that we can have for the safety of the SSPX.
"Yellow Light" is a good term describing the current situation.
As much as it pains me to say so, I suspect your analysis of the likely outcome is bang-on the money. Watching the Prevostian Vatican operate is like watching a cobra hypnotize it's victim with its somnolent swaying. That the victim seems willing is at best perverse but symptomatic of the depth of the infiltration and the disarming of those good priests who nevertheless lack the moral fortitude to put principle over comfort and stay put in a compromised society.
Great imagery (i.e., with the cobra comment)!
My thoughts exactly Sean.
"Could this be a trap? This isn't a traaap!" says a fish named Filet. Reading "As We Are?" is like icy cold water from a Colorado stream splashed in your face first thing in the morning! After reading the first few pages, one would be a fool, an abused spouse, or a kidnapped hostage with Stockholm syndrome to believe the Generals are sincere. However, on the other hand, the only thing that might be behind it all is Our Lady's love of Her true priests; so this about-face could be a means to save them from themselves.
So if there are no excommunications, where should a faithful Catholic go for sacraments? There are a few authentic and trustworthy sede bishops, but their chapels are very few....
Hi Stan-
I'm not a proponent of the "red light" position which began in 2013 (i.e.,. nobody may ever go to any SSPX Mass or avail themselves of any of their sacraments for any reason whatever).
I've always been a proponent of the "yellow light" position (i.e., one of caution, which assesses conditions locally in order to determine the level of danger in deciding whether or not to attend Mass there).
The reason is because unlike, say, the 1984 indult (for which, according to the letter promulgating it, just by walking in the door you are acknowledging the doctrinal uprightness of the New Mass), attending this or that SSPX Mass does not implicate the individual layman with an unconscionable compromise.
Of course, if the priest is not conditionally ordained, that's checkmate.
But if I had no other choice, and knew the priest was validly ordained, and nothing else at this particular chapel was contrary or dangerous to faith or morals, etc., I would still attend until I could find something better.
Others might see things differently, but you asked me, and that what I think.
PS: And I know plenty of sedes who attend SSPX Masses.
Rome? I wouldn’t trust them with anything they say unless it’s to welcome more debauchery
The ones staying are not children but now collaborating with the thieves.
Hello Mutans-
I think the enemy is laughing at the compromisers (and those who would have those still fighting go quiet).
I’m not sure I understand the relevance between my post and those being harmed in the larger church?