Satan and his ѕуηαgσgυє (I include the Novus Ordo neo-Pharisees) are, if nothing, patient and relentless. Two steps forward in their plan, then one step back has served Lucifer effectively. I have no doubt that subversion and eradication of the Church, the authentic Church, will remain Lucifer's goal.

Many have heard of Fr. Maeßsen and the rebuff of the still-secret Preamble at Albano.

I am curious to hear what all of you are hearing in your parishes.  I am curious where all of you anticipate events will lead in the next year or two.

It may simply be an artifact of sample selection, but I am only hearing parishioners resistant to accommodation with apostate Rome.  In view of that, I cannot imagine that the Faithful will embrace (fund) any agreement that canonizes Vatican 2 or enshrines "Jєωιѕн fables" as Catholic dogma.

Are you hearing differently in your parishes? What about you all?  What do you hear? What do you think?

John Grace posted this just under your thread, which is the official response, if your interested.

http://www.sspx.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=390:district-superiors-letter-november-2011&catid=114:district-superiors-letter&Itemid=86

And....


This is in response to  Guimarães statements:

I mostly agree with him, except on a few points. I do not think he should lump the "three Bishops" together as some type of axis against Bishop Williamson. I disagree that it is politics that the majority of the SSPX seek with the Vatican. He also makes a contradiction when he states," Therefore, as the army’s companies break, sleep or betray, the eyes of the faithful turn to the SSPX, which remains the sole large organization in the battlefield.", then he states, "They(SSPX lay people) will continue to resist these points and, after a time, will find a leadership(insinuating Bishop Williamson) that will cause as much problem to Progressivism as today’s SSPX."

To try and lump the other "three Bishops" together as if they are in the Popes pocket borders calumny. The only reports of any negative words toward Bishop Williamson was from his Superior Bishop Fellay. Unless you have any proof of them acting collectively, then you are speculating, which can lead to sin.

Then you try and act as if the lay people of the Society are just follow along sheep. I have you remember sir, it was the lay people who got Archbishop Levebvre to act. I want, what the SSPX wants, to restore all things in Christ. Once the Vatican makes unmistakeable signs of conversion then can politics of Christ the King be discussed, until then we fight to Restore His Kingship in His Vicar on earth. We are not some lukewarm type of people that keep getting colder over the years. As if, oh one day they will forget and we will snatch them all at the same time, gimme a break. We know very well the game of compromise and what it did to our church. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

The circuмstances that lead to the creation of the SSPX cannot be repeated in this day. If something were to happen to the Society then the faithful would have no one else to turn their eyes too. I mean you said yourself," Therefore, as the army’s companies break, sleep or betray, the eyes of the faithful turn to the SSPX, which remains the sole large organization in the battlefield.", this would be why they need to stay united. But you then go on to say(emphasis mine), "They(SSPX lay people) will continue to resist these points and, after a time, will find a leadership(insinuating Bishop Williamson) that will cause as much problem to Progressivism as today’s SSPX.", which means what? Are you saying they they are the only voice left or not? Their current structure is the means for restoring the church, without it you start from scratch. Fight to keep this structure intact instead of trying to speculate about the four Bishops.

Diego:

Having heard Bp. Tissier de Mallerais, I cannot believe he is at odds with Bp. Williamson.

Believe me, he's not!