Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)  (Read 1516 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Seek the Truth

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 63
  • Reputation: +83/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • BISHOPS DYING OUT ?


    Eleison Comments DCCCLXXIV (874)

    April 13, 2024


    Today, it seems, such points exaggerate?
    Tomorrow they might be looking out of date!

    Last autumn I received the following letter, only slightly shortened below, from a former colleague, still a priest of the SSPX (perhaps because he may be more of a threat to them from outside than he is from inside the Newsociety, so long as he continues to respect their authority). May God be with Bishop Huonder, who died before the lines below were published. One may think he was less cunning than the villains who instrumentalised him.

    The Priestly Society of St Pius X, from what it was for 21 years under Archbishop Lefebve (1970–1991) has become very liberal, and from the top downwards has in fact since 2012 abandoned the course that he set. To call it today the „Newsociety”is to bring the name in line with the reality. Alas. And I think all the problems of this „Newsociety”have for a moment come to a head with Bishop Huonder.

    1. He was ordained priest and bishop with the new rites of Ordination and Consecration respectively. This fact is no longer seen as a problem in the Newsociety. An appeal that he should let himself be conditionally reordained and reconsecrated unfortunately had no effect. The Newsociety has abandoned the Church’s classic principle of „tutiorism“, namely taking the certainly valid course whenever there is the least serious doubt as to the validity of sacraments being received, as there is with Newchurch bishops’ Consecrations, if not also priests’ Ordinations.

    2. Bishop Huonder does criticise – half-heartedly – Pope Francis, Vatican II and the New Mass. And this is enough for a large proportion of our Newsociety layfolk to be calling him „Our man, our bishop“. But in fact he has never clearly condemned either Vatican II (Revolution in the Catholic Church) or the New Mass (the Luther Mass). Bishop Huonder told one person that he celebrates the New Mass with dignity, that he sees it as an altogether worthy form of Mass. This shows clearly how he means to reconcile the old Mass with the Newchurch, wholly in the spirit of Pope Benedict XVI, but in absolute contrast to the late Archbishop Lefebvre.

    3. In his lectures Bishop Huonder openly admits that he still has the task of bringing the Newsociety under Rome. He is therefore an infiltrated agent of Pope Francis. Just as Pope Francis by legitimising Newsociety Confessions, then Marriages, then Ordinations, used salami tactics over three successive years (2015–2017) to draw the Newsociety into the Moloch Newchurch, so Bishop Huonder is setting himself exactly the same task. And just as the Newsociety Superiors at the official legitimising of their Confessions and Ordinations and Marriages cried out towards Rome, „Oh, Holy Father, we thank you!“, so too our Superiors are now being inspired by Bishop Huonder, and are rejoicing that a Newchurch bishop has found his way to the Newsociety, and by living in one of our houses is openly joining the Newsociety, like a submarine. How blind our Superiors have become.

    4. Bishop Huonder wrote his Doctoral thesis on a Jєωιѕн problem of the Middle Ages. Bishop Huonder introduced into the Swiss Church a Day for Jєωs. Not one member of the Newsociety seems to have asked if the bishop’s relationship to the Jєωs corresponds to the Catholic Church’s traditional view of them.

    5. A colleague wrote to me that if the new rite of bishops’ Consecration turned out to be invalid, it would have dire consequences. From the beginning of the 1970’s there would have been no more valid priests or bishops. That would mean that all Tradional-rite Congregations officially recognised within the Newchurch, like St Peter’s or Christ the King, would have no valid priests either. That would mean that only in the Newsociety would the Church of Christ still be existing. Neither Pope Benedict XVI nor Archbishop Vigano would have been valid bishops. These conclusions, of a certain logic, must be taken into account.

    The Newsociety Superior General, Fr. Pagliarani, raised this question at his Conference in Econe on September 8 last year, but if the Newsociety absolutely wants to be loved and recognised by freemasonic and modernist Rome, then such a question simply cannot be raised. Which is why he took a clear position – the new-rite Consecrations are valid. Could such an immensely serious conclusion possibly be true? We are constantly hearing that Bergoglio means to reform the New Mass, that in the reform of the reform there will be no more words of Consecration said over the bread or the wine, which would mean the complete extinction of the Mass. Moreover, in my opinion something like two out of every three New Masses are already invalid, because the priests no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ. But if the total extinction of the Mass is an eventual possibility, why not also the total extinction of bishops being truly Consecrated?

    Kyrie eleison.


    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10072
    • Reputation: +5261/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #1 on: April 19, 2024, 07:21:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "The Newsociety Superior General, Fr. Pagliarani, raised this question at his Conference in Econe on September 8 last year, but if the Newsociety absolutely wants to be loved and recognised by freemasonic and modernist Rome, then such a question simply cannot be raised. Which is why he took a clear position – the new-rite Consecrations are valid. "

    Hasn't this been their position since 2005 (when Benedict XVI, consecrated in the Paul VI Rite, was elected)?
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)


    Offline CathSarto

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 96
    • Reputation: +90/-12
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #2 on: April 19, 2024, 08:49:21 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's just another example of their betrayal of Archbishop Lefebvre.  It makes the consecrations of '88 look meaningless and unjustified. 

    Offline Giovanni Berto

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 651
    • Reputation: +464/-28
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #3 on: April 19, 2024, 10:00:09 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • There probably will be no more SSPX bishops. 

    The ordinations and confirmations will be carried out by people like the late Bp. Huonder and Bp. Schneider. Just like the indult communities.

    That seems to be the plan.

    Online Yeti

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3497
    • Reputation: +2013/-447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #4 on: April 19, 2024, 10:21:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That would be a pretty extreme scenario. I kind of doubt they will go that route. Lots of people would leave and form other societies.


    Offline rosarytrad

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +158/-19
    • Gender: Male
    • St. Anthony of Padua, pray for us.
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #5 on: April 19, 2024, 10:29:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Huonder wrote his Doctoral thesis on a Jєωιѕн problem of the Middle Ages. Bishop Huonder introduced into the Swiss Church a Day for Jєωs. Not one member of the Newsociety seems to have asked if the bishop’s relationship to the Jєωs corresponds to the Catholic Church’s traditional view of them.

    The Newsociety absolutely wants to be loved and recognised by freemasonic and modernist Rome... We are constantly hearing that Bergoglio means to reform the New Mass, that in the reform of the reform there will be no more words of Consecration said over the bread or the wine, which would mean the complete extinction of the Mass.

    Perfidious pests.

    Tear the mask off and show it as it is, Jorge!
    The mercies of the Lord I will sing for ever. - Ps. 88:2a

    Offline Giovanni Berto

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 651
    • Reputation: +464/-28
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #6 on: April 19, 2024, 11:40:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That would be a pretty extreme scenario. I kind of doubt they will go that route. Lots of people would leave and form other societies.

    It only depends on how long it will take.

    Maybe it is not possible in five or ten years, but in fifteen or twenty.

    The revolutionaries devote their lives and sometimes generations of revolutionaries are needed to carry out a revolution.

    It is possible that there will be three more compromised SSPX bishops before they are completely extinct.

    Offline Michelle

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 102
    • Reputation: +87/-25
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #7 on: April 19, 2024, 12:18:39 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • That would be a pretty extreme scenario. I kind of doubt they will go that route. Lots of people would leave and form other societies.
    I actually could see the majority of our SSPX attendees going along with a conservative, latin Mass bishop.  Our pews are filled with refugees from the indult.  My personal opinion is that is the plan.  A melting together of all the clans.


    Offline CathSarto

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 96
    • Reputation: +90/-12
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #8 on: April 19, 2024, 02:05:23 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree with Michelle. I could count on one hand people I know at our chapel who would have a problem with it. And it does seem like the plan was to bring the Latin Massers in to replace the hard liners who will leave when a) they bring in a N.O. bishop or b) get regularized by Modernist Rome.
    Plus, consider the big effort through the podcasts to emphasize and clarify the new position that the new rite of consecration is valid.  This is now the party line, so any priest disagreeing with it has probably already left. 

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31226
    • Reputation: +27142/-495
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #9 on: April 19, 2024, 04:00:26 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • That would be a pretty extreme scenario. I kind of doubt they will go that route. Lots of people would leave and form other societies.

    If this were true, and a great number of SSPX-ers understood what +ABL and the SSPX were about, the Resistance would be HUGE right now. Because the neo-SSPX has done some serious things, some real red flags, that would upset +ABL if he were still on earth. 

    Unfortunately, the facts of recent history seem to disagree with your assumption here.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Aleah

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 793
    • Reputation: +372/-135
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #10 on: April 29, 2024, 07:38:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I actually could see the majority of our SSPX attendees going along with a conservative, latin Mass bishop.  Our pews are filled with refugees from the indult.  My personal opinion is that is the plan.  A melting together of all the clans.
    Agreed
    I am He who is- you are she who is not.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41969
    • Reputation: +24007/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #11 on: April 29, 2024, 10:10:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Eleison Comments DCCCLXXIV (874)

    The Newsociety Superior General, Fr. Pagliarani, raised this question at his Conference in Econe on September 8 last year, but if the Newsociety absolutely wants to be loved and recognised by freemasonic and modernist Rome, then such a question simply cannot be raised. Which is why he took a clear position – the new-rite Consecrations are valid. 

    THIS^^^

    Online Godefroy

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 11
    • Reputation: +6/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #12 on: April 30, 2024, 04:49:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have trouble understanding the statement:

    "Moreover, in my opinion something like two out of every three New Masses are already invalid, because the priests no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ"

    Does the priest have to believe in the real presence? I recall the story of a miracle where because the priest doubted in the real presence at the consecration, a miracle demonstrated to the priest and the faithful, that the consecrated host was in fact the body of Christ. So the consecration was valid, regardless of what the priest believed.

    Could the same logic be applied to novos-ordo ordinations and consecrations. As long as the minister, matter and form is valid, why would it matter if the bishop doesn't  believe in what his is doing? We only have the external aspects of valid minister, matter and form to make a judgement. It's impossible to know what people are thinking.

    This is why I never understood the logic behind the SSPX 'investigating'  the validity or not of the ordinations of their novos-ordo priestly recruits. Either the minister, matter and form of their ordination was valid or it wasn't.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10072
    • Reputation: +5261/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #13 on: April 30, 2024, 06:38:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have trouble understanding the statement:

    "Moreover, in my opinion something like two out of every three New Masses are already invalid, because the priests no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ"

    Does the priest have to believe in the real presence? I recall the story of a miracle where because the priest doubted in the real presence at the consecration, a miracle demonstrated to the priest and the faithful, that the consecrated host was in fact the body of Christ. So the consecration was valid, regardless of what the priest believed.

    Could the same logic be applied to novos-ordo ordinations and consecrations. As long as the minister, matter and form is valid, why would it matter if the bishop doesn't  believe in what his is doing? We only have the external aspects of valid minister, matter and form to make a judgement. It's impossible to know what people are thinking.

    This is why I never understood the logic behind the SSPX 'investigating'  the validity or not of the ordinations of their novos-ordo priestly recruits. Either the minister, matter and form of their ordination was valid or it wasn't.
    Excellent post.
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41969
    • Reputation: +24007/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Eleison Comments - BISHOPS DYING OUT ? - Issue DCCCLXXIV (874)
    « Reply #14 on: April 30, 2024, 07:31:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have trouble understanding the statement:

    "Moreover, in my opinion something like two out of every three New Masses are already invalid, because the priests no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ"

    Does the priest have to believe in the real presence?

    Yes, you are correct, and I've long objected to this spin on the NOM validity question.

    Indeed, the priest only has to have the intention to do what the Church does, not to intend what the Church intends.

    I guess the argument goes like this, though it's never been properly articulated.  In the Tridentine Rite, the intention for the Holy Sacrifice is clear, and so in that case a priest who intends to do what the Church does thereby, via some transitive connection, implicitly intends the Holy Sacrifice.  Meanwhile, in the NOM, the intention of the Rite itself is ambiguous, so it somehow has to be "supplied" by the active intention of the priest to intend the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.  So the principle here appears to be that with the NOM, the priest's must intend to do what the Church has Traditionally intended by the Mass in order to supply the absence of this intention of the Rite.  This is extremely novel, and IMO a bunch of nonsense.  If you read Pope Leo XIII on the Anglican Orders, there's no indication there whatsoever that the defective intention of the Rite could be somehow supplied for by the intention of the priest.  He declared them simply invalid.  Period.  He did not equivocate about, well, if the minister intended to do what the Church intends by Holy Orders, it could be valid.  He just declared them invalid due to the defective intention of the Rite.  He did not say that each individual case must be investigated, to determine what the minister intended when performing the Ordination.

    So you are correct that this approach to the validity of the NOM is completely novel and contrary to Traditional Catholic sacramental theology.

    Nor does it take into account the problem with the validity of the Orders of the priest offering them.  If there's positive doubt about the validity of the Holy Orders, which there has to be if Bishop Williamson conditionally consecrated +Vigano (who was "consecrated" originally by Wojtyla the Great himself), then all NOMs must be presumed invalid in the practical order and therefore no one an licitly approach to receive Holy Communion at the NOM (contrary to his infamous advice to the one lady that created an uproar).  Either there is a positive doubt or there isn't.  If there is, the NOM "Sacraments" must be avoided (teaching of the Church).  If there isn't, it's not licit to conditionally ordain or consecrate.  It's really that simple.  But even Bishop Williamson and the pre- +Fellay SSPX have long muddied the waters.

    Of course, how can anyone "investigate" whether the priest had the right "internal intention" anyway, since that's knowable only in the internal forum?

    SSPX approach to the validity of the NOM "Sacraments" has long been a hot mess.  While Bishop Williamson rightly points out that SSPX have refused to consider the possibility they might be invalid for political reasons, it's also true that the SSPX have engaged historically in the same refusal to consider them objectively in positive doubt due to also to the political reason of constantly having to fend off the evil specter that is sedevacantism.