I don't agree with "How to help the cause revisited" (p8). I became a Catholic in 1984 under the instruction of Fr. Edward Black and have been a SSPX supporter ever since. But I've never seen anything wrong in attending indult masses and see nothing wrong now in attending SSPX masses. It's all very well bleating on about the moral danger of human respect but there is such a thing as common sense. Common sense tells me that Frs Morgan and Lindstrom do not accept all or any of the false notions that your paragraph 2 says they must have accepted; common sense tells me they are neither half-wits nor moral cowards. It is frustrating that Fr. Morgan is keeping his lips buttoned from responding in any detail to the accusations made against the Society, and i do accept that if nothing changes in this regard over the next 3 to 4 years then the SSPX GB District will almost certainly be finished as a fighting force. But it's not all so cut-and-dried as you claim. I'm for giving our priests another 18 months to sort themselves out.
Fr. Lindstrom made some intersting remarks after mass in Herne recently. How can he justify trespassing on the territory of the local diocesan bishop to offer mass without permission? It is not on the rival authority of the Superior of his Order, Bishop Fellay, but simply as a priest of the Church responding to what he perceives, whether rightly or wrongly to be the needs of the faithful in the extraordinary circuмstances of the true mass not being available otherwise. The Whiting family (husband and wife) are part of that faithful. They are not an especially devout family: if they cannot continue to attend the true mass at their normal place of worship, they are in dander of lapsing from the practice of the faith.
We should heed Fr. Chazal's warning that the one thing we must avoid like the plague is to turn into the"Holier than thou" brigade. I also, perversely take heart from Fr Pfeiffer's cheerful assertion that we are all in a sense "unjust stewards". These are confusing times. I am confused; maybe Fr Morgan and Fr Lindstrom are confused - perhaps even Bp Williamson is a little bit confused? We cannot all be stampeded into adopting a uniform stance.  DENNIS WHITING

Hello Dennis!

Criticise away, please do! And I hope you don't mind if I criticise your criticisms in turn.

I don't agree with "How to help the cause revisited" (p8). I became a Catholic in 1984 under the instruction of Fr. Edward Black and have been a SSPX supporter ever since. But I've never seen anything wrong in attending indult masses [...]

Then you are at odds with Fr. Morgan and Fr. Lindstrom, who do. And (as it happens, with Archbishop Lefebvre, who saw the indult Mass as a trap and who said of indult priests "They are betraying us!"



 

It's all very well bleating on about the moral danger of human respect

Is it? Good. In that case, we'll continue to bleat about it!  

but there is such a thing as common sense. Common sense tells me that Frs Morgan and Lindstrom do not accept all or any of the false notions that your paragraph 2 says they must have accepted; common sense tells me they are neither half-wits nor moral cowards.

Deciding what a priest might be thinking and not saying is a tricky business. In the end, all we have to go on is what he publicly says and does. But let that be. The main point here is that, by making your argument with reference to the character/personality of Frs. Morgan and co. you are making the issue a personal one. You are deciding based on your assessment of the character of various priests. But I hope you notice that I'm not arguing from personalities but from principles. That, I think, is where you and I differ.

 

It is frustrating that Fr. Morgan is keeping his lips buttoned from responding in any detail to the accusations made against the Society, and i do accept that if nothing changes in this regard over the next 3 to 4 years then the SSPX GB District will almost certainly be finished as a fighting force. But it's not all so cut-and-dried as you claim. I'm for giving our priests another 18 months to sort themselves out.

Another 18 months? And how is that not an arbitrary figure, decided by yourself, and on the basis of...what?
And do you have the faculty of granting yourself another 18 month extension in the event that when the first 18 months runs out you are still not happy with the idea of leaving?

Fr. Lindstrom made some intersting remarks after mass in Herne recently. How can he justify trespassing on the territory of the local diocesan bishop to offer mass without permission? It is not on the rival authority of the Superior of his Order, Bishop Fellay, but simply as a priest of the Church responding to what he perceives, whether rightly or wrongly to be the needs of the faithful in the extraordinary circuмstances of the true mass not being available otherwise. The Whiting family (husband and wife) are part of that faithful. They are not an especially devout family: if they cannot continue to attend the true mass at their normal place of worship, they are in dander of lapsing from the practice of the faith.

And yet, as I am sure you realise, it is perfectly possible to fall away and/or live a life displeasing to Almighty God whilst still attending Sunday Mass. Just as there are Saints who had to forswear any attendance at Mass since doing so would have involved compromise with the enemy. It all rather depends on why you are there, and other things besides...

We should heed Fr. Chazal's warning that the one thing we must avoid like the plague is to turn into the"Holier than thou" brigade. I also, perversely take heart from Fr Pfeiffer's cheerful assertion that we are all in a sense "unjust stewards". These are confusing times. I am confused; maybe Fr Morgan and Fr Lindstrom are confused - perhaps even Bp Williamson is a little bit confused?

This is where we agree entirely.

We cannot all be stampeded into adopting a uniform stance.  DENNIS WHITING

Perhaps I don't know how to recognise a good stampede when I see one, but I hardly think that is the right term. You ought, on the other hand, very much to allow yourself to be persuaded into adopting a stance if it is the right one to take. And we are convinced that it is.

Best wishes to yourself and your good lady wife. God bless,

Ed.

I don't understand why anyone would flee the SSPX and take refuge in the Indult.

Isn't that like jumping from the frying pan into the fire?

However low the SSPX has sunk, I assure you that the Indult is always going to be lower. The Indult is pretty much where the SSPX is headed, but they're not there yet.

I don't understand why anyone would flee the SSPX and take refuge in the Indult.

I don't understand it either, but two people from my chapel who were important people, did just that and went to the indult.

I am not at all clear of what the position of the SSPX is in relation to the Indult. I started to wonder as I never recall SSPX priests in Ireland having a word with those promoting 'Catholic Voice' outside of chapels. I suppose newspapers advertising the Indult Mass and articles written by Institute of Christ the King priests are ok.

Fr Morgan, who stated Catholics shouldn't attend the Indult needs to be clearer. What is the position of the SSPX in relation to Motu Proprio Masses?

I have encountered plenty of SSPX laity in Ireland, who stated to go to the Indult if unable to attend the SSPX.

Those who attend the Indult are not one of us. They are not Traditionalist Catholics.

Many or indeed most of the softline SSPX folk are more suited to the Indult.

The Recusant

adopting a stance if it is the right one to take. And we are convinced that it is.

The only stance I am adopting is supporting the resistance. I am convinced it is the right stance to take.

There are few really in Ireland, who are SSPX 100%

That may have to do with the fact that SSPX is not 100% SSPX any longer.  If you have a superior general who admits that 95% of V2 can pass muster, (and did so now more than a decade ago), and if, furthermore, he states that the New Mass was "legitimately promulgated," how could one expect that the Fellay-flavored sspx might be 100% Lefebvrian SSPX.  Add to that our knowledge that as early as 1997, Bp. Fellay was actively conspiring with others to find a way of being practically reunited with Rome.  Is it any wonder that the faithful are all over the lot on this one?  It's been years since SSPX priests and leaders have not blown a clear trumpet blast from the pulpit.