Is anyone able to please answer the following question concerning the Argentine SSPX protest of Novus ordo clergy memorializing  Kristillnacht?

1. Who was the SSPX priest who was in the protest video?

2. Has Bp. Fellay commented on the incident ?

Since pope Francis condemned the protesters, it seemed logical the +F would need to come forth with a response.

Thanks!







Pope Francis condemnation:

http://www.jns.org/news-briefs/2013/11/19/pope-francis-i-condemns-catholic-splinter-groups-kristallnacht-memorial-protests



Pope Francis I has strongly condemned the actions of the ultra-traditionalist Catholic splinter during a Kristallnacht memorial service, saying that “aggression cannot be an act of faith.”

During a special memorial ceremony on Nov. 12 attended by Catholic, Jєωιѕн, and Protestant leaders in Buenos Aires to mark the 75th anniversary of Kristallnacht, a small group of protestors from the ultra-traditionalist Catholic group Society of St. Pius X disrupted the proceedings, shouting “followers of false gods must be kept out of the sacred temple.”

Pope Francis told a group of Latin American religious leaders visiting the Vatican that preaching intolerance “is a form of militancy that must be overcome.”

Claudio Epelman, executive director of Latin American Jєωιѕн Congress, praised Pope Francis’s comments.

“With this meeting, the Pope has once again shown his strong, personal commitment to building bridges between religions and to working together with all of us to secure peace,” Edelman said in a statement.  

 (1)  This doesn't surprise me.  The title of the article should be "Francis condemns 1900 year old Catholic Church teachings".

 (2)  Does anyone know for a fact whether the bolded is what these protesters actually said/wrote in their literature?  I would tend to think they would more likely to use the terms false worship/false religion as opposed to insinuating that the Jєωιѕн people pray to pagan gods.

.

Looks like the Yids are striking at the home turf of the Holy Father!  

Buenos Aires!!


.

.

Those who voiced their protest in Buenos Aries were not doing so because of their support for the Resistance.  It seems their actions may have been according to what the "old SSPX" might have done, but as we speak, they are no doubt finding out that their zeal has been misdirected according to the Newapproach of the XSPX.  Fr. Bouchacourt will set them straight.  By the time he's done with them, that 'nice' lady in the photo won't have any more cause to be upset about anything.

Fr. Bouchacourt's scandalous denial of any culpability of deicide in modern Jєωs is probably consequent to one of the conditions for what the XSPX must exhibit before Rome will give them another shot at making a 'deal' -- which is no doubt returning in the near future, a 'deal' with modernist Rome, or 'unconverted' Rome, whichever you would prefer.

Don't miss the fact that it was nearly the same day when +F's backtracking interview was put up on the XSPX website, where he comes out with his cowardly withdrawal of substance against the Modernism of Francis, therefore we are left to suppose these two conspicuously similar events are consequent to a common cause:  Rome most likely contacted someone with a message that +F has to back off from critical assessment of the pope and Fr. Bouchacourt has to reprimand his subjects in regards to their denouncement of the abuses in Buenos Aires at the Cathedral.  

Of course, the actual message might have been more general in nature, something like, "If you would like any future opportunity of returning to the negotiating table for a normalization, you had best show some signs of being less antagonistic in regards to your inconvenient criticism of the Holy Father, and to any of your inconvenient protests against our efforts to extend an olive branch to our elder brothers in faith." ---- "Something like that," as Fr. Schell might have said here.

And don't miss the eagerness of the reaction -- it is most evident that the Menzingen-denizens are eager to please the wiles of modernist Rome, for like any good tyrant, dissent among the ranks is never tolerated.  All the while, of course, they would preach 'tolerance' and demand the appearance thereof, at least on a superficial level, like 'political correctness' would demand.

It seems to me that there just might be one or two individuals in the group there who can still t-h-i-n-k, and if so, they might like to know their latent sesus catholicus is still appreciated in the Resistance, before, that is, it's too late for them.  Because the iron fist of Russia's errors is coming down fast and furious.

But probably the man in the red beret is not one of them.  Notice how he sits immediately behind the priest, so his voice will echo in the priest's mind, and so maybe then he will hear that voice in his dreams.  Think of it as subliminal conditioning.


.

So, based on this having happened there before, wouldn't the Cathedral need to be re-consecrated before it's a Christian temple again?  If so, why protest?