Regarding promoting "the vaccine": I think TGK might mean by this that they gave permission for the faithful to take it.
That is clearly not promoting it, and the Benedictines and most of the Resistance clergy took the same position on the morality of receiving the jab if you needed to keep your job or if you were convinced that it was for the good of your health etc.
There were a few conservative churchmen who considered it gravely immoral, and I clearly recall Bishop Williamson said in one of his sermons "and I think they're right, I think they're right", however he didn't say it in a definitive dogmatic fashion, there was uncertainty even with him and I don't know what advice he gave to individuals who approached him.
It is false to say the Dominicans "promoted" the jab, and a private email is not promoting something... you would certainly lose your job as a promotion company if that were your approach. No doubt that private email contains a permission rather than a promotion.

Yes, consider the source. People said the same thing about Bp Williamson and the New Mass, and we all know the truth about that.

Giving private permission in one specific case does NOT constitute "promotion" or "open permission for all" to do the same.

Priests who do their job, who take morality seriously, who distinguish between dogma and non-dogma, are penalized in the court of public opinion, because their actions and words aren't "black and white" enough.
Priests who are careful to stay within the lines of truth are easier to lie about on Social Media, because you can use HALF TRUTHS, DISTORTIONS, and EXAGGERATIONS in addition to good-old LIES in your campaigns against them.

If one's position and actions must be reduced to CAVEMAN SPEECH in order for you to be happy, then

TOO BAD

Grow some more brain cells. The handful you have are getting pretty lonely.

Incidentally -- regarding the two accusations, one of them is probably a nothingburger anyway.

The "attending SSPX Masses" is a red herring. There is nothing to be ashamed of for holding the "yellow light" position.

We're not Hewko cultists, nor Pfeifferites. We don't promote the Red Light position around here. That is a convenient position for priests who want jurisdiction and control over more territory than they can possibly serve. So they have to come up with doctrine(s) to keep their "Faithful" in the wings, waiting on these priests to show up once or twice a year, NOT moving on to other chapels or priests in the meantime.

We have to be rational and reasonable about the SSPX. They have valid priests. They are not all part of a Borg-style hive mind collective. Yes, the ship has sprung a leak, YES, your local chapel with that conservative priest could be gone at any time, replaced with a "new style" SSPX priest. So you need to be starting your Resistance chapels NOW if you hope to have Mass in 5 or 10 years. But is it sinful to attend most SSPX Masses? Of course not.

But validity isn't everything. Or else think of all the 100% valid priests who pushed Vatican II and the New Mass on their faithful!
The SSPX has similarly fallen. They are full of Modernism now. You can be validly ordained, even say the Tridentine Mass, and be HORRIBLY formed and with errors and even Modernism in your brain.

For those unfamiliar, there are various positions on the SSPX:

Red Light: 100% of SSPX chapels are evil, as of TODAY, they are sinful to attend, and must be avoided.

Yellow Light: The SSPX has fallen as an organization. The formation has changed; younger priests aren't even Traditionally formed; there are mostly valid priests, but the organization is no longer fighting Vatican II, etc. In short, the lifeboat has sprung a leak and we must work to find replacements IMMEDIATELY. We can no longer count on the SSPX to be a lifeboat to preserve us through the Crisis, even if there are some intact lifeboats here or there at the moment. It is already a bad idea to attend many of the SSPX chapels. Others are fine FOR NOW, but that could change AT ANY TIME. Do not count on the SSPX as you did 15 years ago.

Green Light: There is nothing wrong with the SSPX. They are great. Full speed ahead! No need to come up with alternative chapels/options for Mass, etc. No need for any Resistance movement, no need to support the Resistance.

As much as I reject the Red Light, I equally reject the Green Light position. There is clearly a problem with the SSPX. The ship has certainly sprung a leak. The remaining "good priests" are on borrowed time. Not only will they not live forever, they also have bosses who can censure them, control them, and move them. And even before DEATH, there are things like disability, retirement, transfer, etc. The younger you are, the more you should be concerned. Actually -- the younger THE YOUNGEST MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY IS, the more you should be concerned. If you have children, they have a LONG WAY TO GO. They will outlive ALL of your favorite "classic" or "old school" SSPX priests. The SSPX isn't forming priests like that anymore. PERIOD. You need to plan for your future. Be the ant, not the grasshopper.

Yeah this is worry to me, the SSPX is the only chapel available to me, there is literally 0 other options for me bar a greek+Ukrainian catholic church, both my priests are old and 1 is already in bad health. So I do wonder what will happen when 1 of them finally dies and get replaced.

Thanks for clarifying this Plenus.

As for the red light position, I did ask Plenus in another thread, what would be the caveats to this. Time limits? If everything subjective then? I never got answers to this.


Take a step back for a minute:

I guess another way of looking at this issue is this: Whats the point in going?

Why do people feel the need?

What is the reason we attend Mass?

Going only to a resistance Mass is not "home alonerism". There are young men becoming priests all the time in our ranks and there are priests joining us. Added to this, there are priests in the resistance who are willing to create new chapels.
'''


Now look at it this way : If you are telling people they can go to the SSPX, think about how demoralizing that is to the other faithful who do not go. How demoralizing that is to priests who do take a principled stand on this. You see, once you go down this road, there is no limit to it. Everything becomes subjective.And men of principle are undermined.

Sorry if I missed some question on another thread, Tommy, I'm a little preoccupied with other things at the moment.

Is everything subjective? Certainly not! Yet when you are dealing with souls, there is certainly a subjective element, and it is not always the same advice for all... what is good and prudent for one, may not be so for another. Everyone has his own circuмstances to consider.

There are no time limits to attending the SSPX, why should there be an expiry date? The caveats are the same as for attending Mass anywhere...Educate yourself about the crisis, don't expose yourself to dangers to Faith or morals, be sure you have validly ordained priests.

What's the point in going? The same as the point in going to Mass and receiving the sacraments anywhere...I'll refer you to the catechism for that one!

Going to the Resistance is not "home alonerism", but refusing to go to a local SSPX Mass when the Resistance is not in your neck of the woods may well be.

No good priest should be demoralised seeing zealous faithful nourishing their souls by daily Mass and frequenting the sacraments - to the contrary - especially when they know that those souls give their unwavering support to priests and works of the Resistance who faithfully continue the work of Archbishop Lefebvre. 

It can be demoralising for the Resistance faithful, however, when they see independent-minded priests who no longer consider themselves to be the most faithful members of the SSPX, unjustly excluded, but independent priests who make their own decisions, no longer feeling the need to be faithful to the line of Archbishop Lefebvre.

It is not a Catholic principle to require faithful to attend your Mass and abstain from attending other Catholic Masses. Quite the contrary! This is not politics!

Sorry if I missed some question on another thread, Tommy, I'm a little preoccupied with other things at the moment.

Is everything subjective? Certainly not! Yet when you are dealing with souls, there is certainly a subjective element, and it is not always the same advice for all... what is good and prudent for one, may not be so for another. Everyone has his own circuмstances to consider.

There are no time limits to attending the SSPX, why should there be an expiry date? The caveats are the same as for attending Mass anywhere...Educate yourself about the crisis, don't expose yourself to dangers to Faith or morals, be sure you have validly ordained priests.

What's the point in going? The same as the point in going to Mass and receiving the sacraments anywhere...I'll refer you to the catechism for that one!

Going to the Resistance is not "home alonerism", but refusing to go to a local SSPX Mass when the Resistance is not in your neck of the woods may well be.

No good priest should be demoralised seeing zealous faithful nourishing their souls by daily Mass and frequenting the sacraments - to the contrary - especially when they know that those souls give their unwavering support to priests and works of the Resistance who faithfully continue the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.

It can be demoralising for the Resistance faithful, however, when they see independent-minded priests who no longer consider themselves to be the most faithful members of the SSPX, unjustly excluded, but independent priests who make their own decisions, no longer feeling the need to be faithful to the line of Archbishop Lefebvre.

It is not a Catholic principle to require faithful to attend your Mass and abstain from attending other Catholic Masses. Quite the contrary! This is not politics!

Dear Plenus,

The Mass does not belong to the priest. It belongs to Jesus Christ. It is not "his" Mass. It is the Church's. 

To say there are no time limits on SSPX Mass attendance is to deny the sliding of said organization, and to make it completely morally equivalent to the resistance. 

If you deny this accusation then you say there is some kind of hierarchy. A 1st class Mass and a 2nd class Mass.

So take your pick. Which is it? Either they are morally equivalent, in which case resistance priests and faithful should just go back to the SSPX, or there is a "Business class" Catholicism, and a "coach class" Catholicism. I know it sounds silly but this is what you are saying.

We don't go to Mass to get warm and fuzzy feelings and to play dress up. Our presence there indicates a profession before God and man of what we believe. As well as the consolation we get from prayer. We can't divorce piety from hard cold profession of faith. If you do that you may as well go to the Novus Ordo. 

The only distinction I will admit between the interdiction of attending orthodox Masses, and this situation is that it is not canonically forbidden to go to the SSPX, indult etc. But the principle is the same. It is because of this distinction I am compassionate on Novus Ordo/SSPX people and do not say that they are absolutely not Catholic. But for those of us in the know, we should not approve of this. People look up to us and history will judge us on our principles, not the comforts of human respect we chose.

Yes, if you want to slander a group of Traditional priests you're going to have to bring forth some evidence.

So if he has reasonably-solid evidence (which is not equal to mere speculation or hearsay), then it's not slander.  May be detraction, depending, though probably not since they're public figures ... but if he had actual evidence it would not be slander (which is a colloquial equivalent of calumny).