Yes, most priests are just weak and going along for the ride. But that's what happened at Vatican II, remember? Most priests weren't Freemasons or "plants" pushing for the destruction of the Church. They were just weak men who went along with the changes, worried about their livelihood, health insurance, and pensions.

All members of the SSPX might not have changed, or embraced modernism yet. It might not have percolated down to every chapel.

But the FACT is that the official SSPX position has changed, in favor of Modernism.

The SSPX officially accepts the New Mass, not only its validity but also the legitimacy of its promulgation! That is ridiculous.

The Novus Ordo is a bastard (Latin: spure) rite that was made up from scratch. It was not organic. The Catholic Church doesn't create liturgies that way. Even Our Lord and the Apostles took elements from the Old Testament liturgy for the Last Supper, ancient Christian liturgies, etc.

And the Church violated Quo Primum when she completely did away with the Tridentine Mass in 1970. Legitimate promulgation? No way!

Quote from: For Greater Glory

Thank you Matthew,
     I now believe I can say this. Fr. Pfeiffer told me on the phone, two or three weeks ago to not go back to the chapel. He said the the teaching of the SSPX has changed and it's going to trickle down.

Bishop Williamson in one of his ECs some months ago said that attending a Society chapel is a "yellow light" situation--proceed with caution.  

When Fr. Pfeiffer visited Sanford, Florida in January he told the people that Sanford is a "red light"--they could NOT go back to the chapel because the situation is so bad there. -- See the thread about SSPX priests going to amusements parks to get an idea of some of the things that are happening there.  

Quote from: Cristera

Please, could anyone make a transcription? At least of the principal points...
To promote it on spanish.

Thanks my friends.

beginning at 58:23

What is interesting, and what is much more grave, is not that Bp Fellay is betraying Catholic Faith and Catholic Tradition by his actions, by his teachings.

Whether he personally believes these things, only God knows, but what he is doing is objectively treasonous and wicked. Therefore, it must be condemned because it is doing harm to souls. It is damaging the Faith of souls therefore, it must be condemned.

But what is more serious, much more serious, is the fact that if priests don’t stand up in horror at this grave error published before our very eyes – admitted by Fr Thouvenot and by Bp Fellay to be true and correct docuмents… truly handed out, by Bp Fellay and the superiors to Modernist Rome – then it means there is a grave crisis of Faith in the Society that is in the deepest bones and marrow of our Society and therefore the priests, by their silence, give consent. And the priests by their standing behind Bp Fellay, Fr Rostand, and the other superiors in this wickedness – I’m not talking about wickedness of action, wickedness of morals, we’re talking about wickedness of doctrine. By standing behind them in this wickedness, they are guilty. They are not innocent.

Fr ??, the 76-year-old priest told us in Brazil. We vsisited him, Fr Hewko and I, last month in Brazil. [He is the] head of a monastery in Brazil. They are guilty, and therefore, it is not correct for those who know the truth to continue to attend Society of St. Pius X mainstream Masses. By attending these Masses, it shows that we are in union, it’s called communicatio in sacris, we are in communion with their doctrine. We are in communion with their practice.

It is not the same as the Sacrament of Confession. The Sacrament of Confession is an individual Sacrament in which the individual priest operates as a minister of God to absolve the sins of an individual sinner. So, you can go to Confession to any valid priest.

But with regard to the communicatio in sacris it is a public act of worship. When you attend the Mass of someone whom you know does not promote the Catholic Faith, that is wrong. Remember that before Vatican II, the heretics said the same Latin Mass as the Catholics. It is only after Vatican II that heretics said a different Mass. Even Martin Luther, when he first became a Lutheran, started his false religion, said the Latin Mass. John Calvin? Latin Mass. Henry VIII attended the Latin Mass.

The Latin Mass was there in the beginning of all these heresies. Only later did they invent a new false worship to go along with their false belief. So, likewise, Fr Rostand – you should watch his interview, four parts, the music is beautiful, after that is goes downhill. But in his interview, he is asked about the hybrid Mass. And, remember, it is his man, Jim Vogel, interviewing himself, in an edited and controlled interview. This isn’t like a CNN reporter or a reporter from the Globe magazine or something … somebody trying the get the movie star off guard or something. This is a controlled interview and what is he saying?

[Q:] “Maybe people are saying that the Society will accept the new version or the hybrid Mass. What do you say about that?”

There are two appropriate answers, one is “yes” and the other is “no”. He gives neither answer. What does he say? He says, well, we insisted on rights that we preserve the 1962… that we have the right to say the 1962 liturgy. We want to say the 1962 liturgy, and we believe, with Archbishop Lefebvre, that that is the most prudential way.

The beautiful virtue of prudence. It’s the biggest virtue there is now. It used to be faith, hope, and charity and justice, temperance, and fortitude were other virtues. But, now those virtues taken together make up about 1/1000th of virtue and the other 999/1000th of virtue equals prudence. And what is prudence? Prudence is to do whatever the dictator commands in all things except for explicit heresy and explicit sin. That’s the new definition of prudence. It’s a matter of prudence. Go with whatever they decide.

There are some things that are a matter of prudence that are not according to whatever they decide. You can say it’s a matter of prudence whether you have steak or whether you have chicken or whether you have pork with your vegetables. It’s a matter of prudence, it doesn’t matter which one you choose. It’s also a matter of prudence whether or not you drive down the right side of the road or the left side of the road. It’s a matter of prudence. They’re both matters of prudence, but if you drive down the left side of the road – except when you’re in that idiotic place called England (laugh) – you are going to have a problem. And that act of prudence is going to get you in jail if you live and going to get you dead with a messed up car if you don’t. Your death might not be a big loss, but the car would be expensive (laugh). But it’s a matter of prudence.

And somehow they say if it’s a matter of prudence, then it’s really only whatever they decide. This is false. We’re dealing not with a matter of prudence, we’re dealing with a matter of faith. We’re not dealing with a matter of obedience or disobedience, we’re dealing with a matter of faith. And, the only way we’re dealing with obedience is we are obliged to obey God rather than men, obliged to obey the Faith rather than that which is against the Faith and when the Superior goes against the Faith or endangers the Faith, he must be disobeyed under the pain of sin. And, if you don’t disobey him and you know the truth, you are guilty. If you obey him and you do not know, then you are not guilty, but if you do know and you obey, you are guilty.

Many innocent souls go to the New Mass every day and they will go straight to heaven when they die. Many innocent souls go to the Fraternity of St. Peter and the Ecclesia Dei Masses because they see it as better than the others or it just happens to be the Mass they prefer to go to for whatever reason. And they don’t know and they will go to heaven when they die. And now, many innocent souls are following the wickedness of the new direction of Bp Fellay and the Society of St. Pius X’s new doctrinal direction away from the Catholic Faith. And this, what they do innocently, they will save their souls, but if they have a mind and they must study the truth and if they know the truth and they still follow, then they are in danger. And we must study the truth. We must know the truth. We must condemn the errors and we cannot follow the foolishness of the modern teaching.

In any case, we have to decide whether we’re standing for the truth or not. It is time to decide who is on the Lord’s side or not. God bless you all.

Bishop Williamson, Fr Ringrose, etc. say otherwise.

Another observation:

Fr Pfeiffer seems not to consider that there are those of us unwilling to turn the SSPX over to the accordistas, whereas he would have us run out the back door because accordistas are coming in the front.

How has a war ever been won by surrendering?

Just a couple thoughts.