Ladislaus:

Indeed, the primary reasons for the rupture were, in the order/priority I understand them, 1) a priest who was not conditionally ordained (he had refused conditional ordination) being allowed to offer Mass at SSPX chapels, 2) acceptance of Novus Ordo marriage annulments, 3) imposition of the 1962 Missal (these priests merely opposed being forced to use the 1962 Missal), and 4) suppression of the freedom to question the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants.

...

With that said, I believe that some of the conduct of The Nine (and The Twelve) in the aftermath of their expulsion was somewhat scandalous and unbecoming, especially the legal machinations against +Lefebvre spearheaded by Father Cekada.

1. If they had issues with the SSPX, they should have simply LEFT. Rather than suing the Archbishop for the SSPX name, trying to take away as many properties/priests/faithful as possible, etc.

2. The conduct of the Nine post-expulsion is precisely what I have issue with. What they did was villainous and unfair to the Archbishop who only wanted to save Tradition and serve the Church.

And no, dying doesn't automatically make everything you did "good" or "Oh, it's ok, he's dead now, so it's all good." No, scandalous deeds still need to be criticized, for the sake of justice, and to right the wrongs that were committed! Some of these actions in the mid 80's had consequences which persist up to the present day.

So 4 of these Nine have passed before the judgment seat of God? So be it. God has judged them. But my place is to call out their publicly-known evils they participated in here on earth and fight against their legacy. I can only operate on the information I have regarding what is good and evil.

I don't care about their subjective guilt, because I'm not looking to judge them personally. I'm only in this for the truth and God's cause. And that cause was NOT served by Fr. Cekada & company's evil legal motions against the SSPX.

1. If they had issues with the SSPX, they should have simply LEFT. Rather than suing the Archbishop for the SSPX name, trying to take away as many properties/priests/faithful as possible, etc.

2. The conduct of the Nine post-expulsion is precisely what I have issue with. What they did was villainous and unfair to the Archbishop who only wanted to save Tradition and serve the Church.

And no, dying doesn't automatically make everything you did "good" or "Oh, it's ok, he's dead now, so it's all good." No, scandalous deeds still need to be criticized, for the sake of justice, and to right the wrongs that were committed! Some of these actions in the mid 80's had consequences which persist up to the present day.

So 4 of these Nine have passed before the judgment seat of God? So be it. God has judged them. But my place is to call out their publicly-known evils they participated in here on earth and fight against their legacy. I can only operate on the information I have regarding what is good and evil.

I don't care about their subjective guilt, because I'm not looking to judge them personally. I'm only in this for the truth and God's cause. And that cause was NOT served by Fr. Cekada & company's evil legal motions against the SSPX.

It’s been a long time since I delved into what actually happened with those lawsuits, but if I remember correctly there were two sides to the story. The nine were certainly not perfect either, but handled the situation how they thought best at the time. I know some of them regretted some of their actions and wished they had did some things differently.

I think possibly the reason why you see only one side of the story is because you were raised up in an environment where the people surrounding you were totally loyal to the SSPX. The word “evil” probably became synonymous with the name “nine” when you were growing up.


Please keep in mind that most of those chapels were paid for by the laity and many of those laity sided with the Nine.


If the Resistance could have retained some the more loyal chapels from the neo SSPX, would that have been somewhat desirable?

Letter of the Nine:

Docuмent2 (traditionalmass.org)

The Nine vs Lefebvre:

Nine-Proofed1007 (traditionalmass.org)

Since Bp. Williamson published the Society’s side of the story, I decided to set down my own reflections on the conflict that unfolded a quarter-century ago. These, I hope, will offer some balance to the account that has made the rounds in SSPX circles for so many years.

Here is Bishop Dolan, Bishop Sanborn, and Father Cekada talking about the disagreement:


https://truerestoration.org/season-2-clerical-conversations-episode-1-the-nine-30-years-on/

I think possibly the reason why you see only one side of the story is because you were raised up in an environment where the people surrounding you were totally loyal to the SSPX. The word “evil” probably became synonymous with the name “nine” when you were growing up.


Please keep in mind that most of those chapels were paid for by the laity and many of those laity sided with the Nine.


If the Resistance could have retained some the more loyal chapels from the neo SSPX, would that have been somewhat desirable?

I wasn't raised in the SSPX. I was raised at an independent chapel, with a priest who sounded Sedevacantist even if he denied it later. For all intents and purposes, our chapel might as well have been. We used a 1940's era Missal too. Nice try though.

The People can be manipulated by propaganda and error, as proven by what happened in the SSPX in 2012 and after. And keep in mind -- there was no Internet back then. No CathInfo to be the small weak voice uttering the truth amidst a thundering sea of error.

As for your question at the end: Of course. If the Resistance could have taken all, or most, of the chapels/priests/Faithful it would have been GOOD and so of course I would be rooting for that outcome. The neo-SSPX is basically the cause of the Conciliar Church, the New religion, the Novus Ordo. What, would you be rooting for the Modernists? 

The neo-SSPX has already been defanged and in a number of years will be indistinguishable from the FSSP -- a compromised, neutered group with no bishop of their own. It's a certainty because their method of forming priests has already changed (20 years ago) and priests don't live forever. So as the Old Guard priests die off, the SSPX will inevitably change *as a whole* becoming worse and worse, with less "bright spots" (good priests) that everyone enjoys right now.

So yeah, I'm not a hypocrite, speaking out of both sides of my mouth, etc. The very idea that +ABL was the "Bp. Fellay" of his time, or the SSPX was the "neo-SSPX of 1983" is COMPLETE BULLSHIT and not true at all. The idea is intellectually repugnant, far from "ringing true".

Here is Bishop Dolan, Bishop Sanborn, and Father Cekada talking about the disagreement:


https://truerestoration.org/season-2-clerical-conversations-episode-1-the-nine-30-years-on/

The ignorant member of this forum who keeps downvoting me and others apparently can’t refute the truth and has obviously been brainwashed by SSPX propaganda. “The Nine” were not without fault, but their actions have been vindicated and this is attested to (not solely) by the emergence of the “Resistance”.

NO ONE should ever comment on this subject without hearing both sides. Likewise, those who continue to promote the falsehood that the expulsion was based on sedevacantism, shouldn’t comment either.

"If they had issues with the SSPX, they should have simply LEFT. Rather than suing the Archbishop for the SSPX name, trying to take away as many properties/priests/faithful as possible, etc "

I wonder why it was that the sedevacantist nine wanted to take the SSPX name with them? How bizarre. It's not like the SSPX was ever a sedevacantist organization. 

In contrast, the Resistance never wanted to sue for the SSPX name that I know of, which is a good thing. 

Who says the Nine were vindicated? Because 20+ years later they were accidentally right, like a broken clock that is right twice a day?

That would be like me calling for a collapse/end of the world and eventually being right. Well yeah, eventually it's going to happen! But if you quit your job, call dates, etc. and are repeatedly wrong, sorry but you were just WRONG completely. Timing is part of a prediction.

The Nine said the SSPX *fell* past tense, and they were wrong. +ABL was still alive, for crying out loud! To use the "end of the world" analogy, they quit their jobs, maxed out their credit cards, etc. Would that be wise to do, 20 years before the event? You'd call such a person a fool. They'd end up on the street if they did that. Why should "resisting the SSPX" be any different? 

When the Nine "resisted" in 1983, there was NOTHING TO RESIST.