The state of grave general spiritual necessity is present whenever:

1) Many souls

2) are threatened in spiritual goods

3) of grave importance for salvation (eg., faith or morals)

4) and are without hope of help from their legitimate pastors.

I’d defy anyone to deny such a state has existed in the Church (and is getting worse) since V2.

The state of grave general spiritual necessity is present whenever:

1) Many souls

2) are threatened in spiritual goods

3) of grave importance for salvation (eg., faith or morals)

4) and are without hope of help from their legitimate pastors.

I’d defy anyone to deny such a state has existed in the Church (and is getting worse) since V2.

In other words, necessity is not constrained or defined by the issue of sacramental validity (though that issue may or may not contribute to its existence or creation).  For example, in St. Athanasius’s time, the state of grave general spiritual had nothing to do with sacramental validity, but the orthodox preaching, teaching of the faith.  Nor were faithful prevented from attending his Masses or confessions (despite Athanasius having no jurisdiction) because some other priest with jurisdiction might have still been preaching the orthodox faith.

Once again: Jurisdiction is for souls, and not souls for jurisdiction.

Clearly not:

All the errors of Vatican II are held by them -via the hermeneutic of continuity- to be traditional, and consequently they would have me accept them.

This is the precondition for their approval.

I’m morally certain there are none on the planet, or they would lose their indult.

Recall their entire raison d’etre is to bring Lefebvrists back to the Council (conciliar church).  Consequently, to oppose Vatican II is to contradict their reason for existence.

All the errors of Vatican II are held by them -via the hermeneutic of continuity- to be traditional, and consequently they would have me accept them.

Sean,

Thanks for your time. I think I have resolved your position to my satisfaction.

I didn't get your response:


They would not force them down your throat, and indeed I do not think you would hear a sermon supporting any non-traditional or "modernist" teachings of V2, or any errors of the Conciliar popes.

The problem is not getting you to accept them - i.e., teaching them and seeking your assent - but not speaking out against errors, since they would be muzzled.

Errors and evils must be addressed and decried. I understand that position and think it reasonable, my agreement vel non irrelevant.

DR

Good Morning DR-

I respectfully disagree: The primary danger lies not in the inabilit yof the indult priests to condemn error, but in the fact that the Ecclesia Dei groups were created to get us to accept the doctrines of Vatican II (i.e., the indult priests do not believes the errors are errors).

Its their only purpose, notwithstanding any more honorable (but misguided) intentions by individual priests.

Consider the following:

1) Ganswein: BXVI promulgated Summorum Pontificuм to lure priests and faithful away from Lefebvre (and +Fellay helped him do a damn good job of it);

2) The FSSP was created within 90 days of the 1988 consecrations (fastest in Church history), and they stratgically placed their chapels in locales with preexisting SSPX chapels;

3) The 1984 indult (which the 1988 indult did not abrogate) which applies to all of these groups (and diocesan indults) states that all who take advantage of it accept the doctrinal uprightness of the Montinian Rite;

4) Fr. (later Cardinal) Cottier after his conquest of Campos: "What is important is that there no longer be rejection in their hearts...reconciliation carries within itself its own internal dynamism (i.e., psychological and doctrinal change; self-censorship; etc.)...we must be patient with this...gradually we must expect further steps, like concelebration."

5) The April 15, 2012 Doctrinal Declaration shows this process being imposed upon Bishop Fellay and the SSPX, who were willing to accept V2 and the post-V2 reforms "in the light of Tradition," via the hermeneutic of continuity (i.e., They wanted to bring the SSPX to a doctrinal parity with the ED groups, who accept V2 in principle).

Numbers 1-5 reveal the Vatican's intentions, and consequently, it follows that all these things have been accomplished in the indult communities.

The Ecclesia Dei groups are not merely victims, but weapons: Its not just that the SSPX can't condemn errors.  Its that the ED groups are re-education camps, and all who enter that camp are transformed from victims to zealots (Its impossible that a priest who believes docrinal errors does not teach doctrinal errors).

One need look no further than Mr. Salza to see the personification of this process (who admits he never quit attending indult Mass venues).

Fr. Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jєωιѕн Nation (1953),  p. 52 “The Jєωs, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that a member of the Jєωιѕн Nation, who rejects Our Lord, may have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul, and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not good. If a Jєω who rejects our Lord is good in the way God demands, it is in spite of the movement in which he and his nation is engaged.”

https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/fr-denis-fahey/

That is outrageous madness, and heretical. How many Jєωs, hearing that, do you think would convert and enter the Kingdom? You might as well tell them that "your covenant and faith is sufficient for your salvation."

1 John 2:22-23

Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son. [23] Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also.

2 John 7

For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an antichrist.