Number CCCXIV (314)   20 July 2013

LONG-RANGE FORECAST

Nearly 20 years ago, a certain bishop of the Society of St Pius X showed that it was possible to foresee the betrayal of Archbishop Lefebvre’s SSPX which nearly happened in 2009 and 2012, and which still risks happening. Disturbed by the self-admiration and lack of seriousness which he had observed at the SSPX’s recent elective General Chapter, here is a summary (with a few direct quotes) of what he said in the Society’s house in Le Brémien, France, on 17 July, 1994 (See on the Internet: Un évêque s’est levé le Brémien, and you should find the original text in French).

It would be nice to be able to say that in the SSPX we are opening houses everywhere, we are building, we are entering new countries, we have vocations, that everybody is nice and sweet and young and enthusiastic, that we have four bishops, and so on. “But why should the SSPX have any special protection against the forces unleashed today which have swept away thousands of excellent bishops and priests in the mainstream Church ? (...) What are the Society’s qualities, what are its guarantees?” Youth, oh yes, youth is nice, good-looking, physically strong, but what about age, experience and the wisdom of years? How can youth be expected to be wise?

In the 1950s and 1960s the Church appeared to be in good health, heroically resisting the onset of the post-war world. In England and the USA, there were huge numbers of conversions each year, so that the world could seem to be on the point of converting to the Catholic faith. But what happened? Exactly the opposite. With Vatican II, the truth stopped fighting and the Catholic Church surrendered to the modern world.

So let me give you a parallel scenario for the Society. In the 1990s this lovely little Society with all its marvelous little priests is heroically resisting the failings and betrayals of the official Church. There are conversions, and people are realizing that the new Church is false and non-functional, but just when the official Church seems to be on the point of surrendering, what might we see? I do not say we shall see it, but what might we see? The Society surrendering and going over to the official Church. If the Universal Church could collapse, why not all the more a tiny Society?

And here is another consideration. Before Vatican II every Catholic Order and Society had above it the Congregations of the Roman Curia so that “if something went wrong in a Society, not excluding a failure on the part of its leaders, something always humanly possible, then one could always appeal to Rome and Rome could intervene. In olden days it would generally intervene for the best, whereas today it generally intervenes for the worst, so now “it is better not to be under Rome, but watch out, there is a price to be paid, namely that there is nobody above us, and so our General Council, our little Superior-General, are the ceiling! Danger!” The Society is thrown back on its own resources. Now Archbishop Lefebvre was 65 years old when he founded the Society. But how many old men with long experience does the Society have in 1994?

In brief why should the Society be spared the problems of the Universal Church? I do not want the Society to break up, and please God, I shall do nothing to help it do so, but I can only say I would not be surprised if it did break up. God may preserve it, but He may also allow it to go the way of all flesh, to make us realize how little we are capable of by ourselves. We need wisdom, and special help from God.


Kyrie Eleison.

The French websites have a lot more color and splash, no?




Hommage à Mgr Williamson en l'honneur du jubilé de son sacre épiscopal il y a 25 ans!

God Bless Bishop Williamson.

In my heart I've left the SSPX...and I won't be back until:
1. the SSPX ( Bp Fellay-Max Krah owner-operator ) apologizes to Bp Williamson.
2. the SSPX welcomes back all the truth-telling expelled priests.
3. the SSPX stops wasting $$ on a new seminary which, the more they talk about it, soiunds like a new seminary for a new type ( or brand? ) of SSPX priest.

Now Archbishop Lefebvre was 65 years old when he founded the Society. But how many old men with long experience does the Society have in 1994?

This is a good question for today also, I'd never thought about the age of the priests.

In Phx all the priests are young.  When I was in Goldsboro, NC the rotating priests were mostly middle age.

I wonder how many priests there are w/over 25 years experience?

Marsha

.

Frances, it's no small wonder the Dutch re-branding team thought that
HEBF had a bad rep from the get-go.  His M.O. is, he's in a REALLY BIG
HURRY to update the Society before he runs out of time.  Therefore,
he's whacking out the 'old school' element and throwing in the new
blood ASAP to get his transformations into high gear before the fuel
runs out.  This is an INSANE RACE TO DESTRUCTION but HEBF doesn't
see it that way.  He's an amateur swimmer in the IronMan Triathlon®,
and he's trying to cheat his way to the finish line.

.
+Fellay wasn't qualified for SG when he was elected, either.

He had NO EXPERIENCE as head of a priory, pastor of a
parish, professor in seminary or even as a lousy District
Superior.  All he had ever been was BURSAR.  So he was
keeping track of money.  Big deal.  Now we see how his
inexperience has become a DISASTER and we ALL can
just LIVE WITH IT.

... If the Universal Church could collapse, why not all the more a tiny Society?

And here is another consideration. Before Vatican II every Catholic Order and Society had above it the Congregations of the Roman Curia so that, “If something went wrong in a Society, not excluding a failure on the part of its leaders, something always humanly possible, then one could always appeal to Rome and Rome could intervene.” In olden days it would generally intervene for the best, whereas today it generally intervenes for the worst, so that now, “It is better not to be under Rome, but watch out, there is a price to be paid, namely that there is nobody above us, and so our General Council, our little Superior-General, are the ceiling! Danger!”

The Society is thrown back on its own resources. Now - Archbishop Lefebvre was 65 years old when he founded the Society. But how many old men with long experience does the Society have in 1994?

In brief:  Why should the Society be spared the problems of the Universal Church? I do not want the Society to break up, and please God, I shall do nothing to help it do so, but I can only say I would not be surprised if it did break up. God may preserve it, but He may also allow it to go the way of all flesh, to make us realize how little we are capable of by ourselves. We need wisdom, and special help from God.


Kyrie Eleison.

.

Post

Here is another short commentary from Fr Basilio Meramo touching upon the subject of this thread.

While Sunbeam specifically refers to a different thread, not surprisingly,
its subject is not dissimilar to the current one.

Allowance needs to be made for the facts, firstly that Fr Meramo writes in a satirical style using metaphors that invite reflection, and secondly that the French (at least as it appears to me) is a rather stilted translation from the original Portuguese.

LA DANSE MACABRE

On sait, à présent, pour quelle raison Monseigneur Fellay a dit et affirmé – sans que s’y arrêtent la plupart des clercs, y compris les trois autres évêques (qui ne s’opposent que médiocrement à lui), et des fidèles – qu’il acceptait le concile Vatican II à 95%, aussi inouï que cela puisse paraître. Si on le sait, c’est parce que Mgr Fellay le montre par son va-et-vient dialectique (ou sa danse macabre) en disant qu’on ne doit pas voir une super-hérésie dans le concile Vatican II, alors même que toute la révolution liturgique, morale et doctrinale repose sur ledit concile (cf. sa lettre aux trois évêques du 14 avril dernier).

Ainsi que le déclare en outre notre gourou éclairé par la lumière divine, celle-ci fait voir (révèle) à son âme mystique que l’on a exagéré en imputant à Vatican II les erreurs dues à l’interprétation et à l’application erronées du Concile, ce qu’ont toujours dit le cardinal moderniste Ratzinger et presque toute la mouvance mi-libérale, mi-conservatrice, mais qu’a toujours nié Monseigneur Lefebvre, car les erreurs en question sont dues non pas aux mauvaises interprétations du Concile, mais au Concile lui-même.

Ces deux années de conversations et de dialogues axées sur la recherche d’un accord montrent à présent leurs effets dans l’encéphale comprimé de Monseigneur Fellay, qui parvient aujourd’hui à voir et à comprendre ce qui était auparavant inaccessible aux neurones engourdis de sa masse cérébrale, mais qui – passée cette période de dialogue doctrinal – allume l’étincelle l’illuminant désormais, à savoir que ce que d’aucuns dénoncent comme étant les erreurs du Concile provient en réalité d’une incompréhension de celui-ci. EUREKA, s’est exclamé Archimède ! Encore heureux qu’il ait pensé à sortir de l’eau malgré l’extase où l’avait plongé sa découverte…

Et comme si cela ne suffisait pas, il avance une troisième raison qui le conforte un peu plus encore dans sa position suggérée par la grâce de Dieu : il y a des choses plus importantes que le très controversé Vatican II, cette pomme de discorde du Jardin d’Éden (à moins que ce ne soit son succédané suisse, la pomme de Guillaume Tell). En effet, l’Église a des problèmes encore plus graves à résoudre, et nous sommes avant tout les enfants de l’Église, non ceux de la Résistance au Concile.

On perçoit aujourd’hui la dialectique de constant va-et-vient (le double langage) qu’emploie Monseigneur Fellay, cette marionnette mue par des fils invisibles au bout desquels elle se livre à sa danse macabre. Et il menace ou fait décapiter quiconque ne suit pas le rythme de sa mélodieuse musique, car comme le joueur de flûte de Hamelin, il entraîne des rats dans la rivière, où ils se noient.

Ainsi le voit-on exclure des ordinations et du Chapitre Général un évêque, Monseigneur Williamson, et décider au dernier moment de ne pas ordonner des moines d’Avrillé et de Morgon tant qu’ils n’auront pas témoigné de leur loyauté envers lui. J’espère que tout cela n’est qu’un symptôme de ce qu’on appelle dans les Alpes le mal des montagnes (à bon entendeur, salut), surtout si le grand chef est un gourou alpin doté d’une mitre et d’un pouvoir et s’il est soutenu de manière occulte par la Rome apostate et antéchristique, ce qui réalise les prophéties de La Salette devant nos yeux incrédules.

Abbé Basilio Méramo

Bogotá, 5 juillet 2012

http://wordpress.catholicapedia.net/

DANCE MACABRE

We know, now, for what reason Bishop Fellay said and asserted -- without stopping himself there -- to most of the clerics, including the three other bishops (who are only moderately opposed to him), and to the faithful -- that (as incredible as it may appear) he accepts 95% of the Second Vatican Council. If we know it, it is because Bishop Fellay shows it by his back-and-forth dialectic (or his dance of death) saying that we should not see a super-heresy in Vatican II, even though the entire liturgical, moral and doctrinal revolution, is based upon the said council (see his letter to the three bishops of last April 14).

As further declared by our guru, illumined by the divine light, it is shown (revealed) to his mystical soul that they have gone too far by imputing to Vatican II errors that are due to the interpretation and the misapplication of the Council, as the modernist Cardinal Ratzinger and nearly all of the half-liberal half-conservative movement have always said; but which has always been denied by Archbishop Lefebvre, because the errors in question are due not to misinterpretation of the Council, but to the Council itself.

These two years of conversations and dialogues, focused on reaching an agreement, now show their effects in the constricted brain of Bishop Fellay, who now manages to see and understand what was previously inaccessible to the benumbed neurons of his brain matter, but which -- after this period of doctrinal dialogue -- lights the spark now illuminating it, to know that what some denounce as the errors of the Council, actually comes from a misunderstanding of it. EUREKA, exclaimed Archimedes! Still happy, despite the ecstasy, that he has thought to get out of the water wherein he had plunged to make his discovery ...

And as if that were not enough, he advances a third reason which confirms him a little more in his position suggested by the grace of God: that there are things more important than the very controversial Vatican II, this bone of contention from the Garden of Eden (unless it is a Swiss substitute for William Tell's apple). Indeed, the Church has bigger problems to solve, and we are primarily children of the Church, not those of the Resistance to the Council.

We perceive, today, the dialectic of constant back-and-forth (the double-talk) employed by Bishop Fellay, the puppet moved by invisible strands after which it surrenders itself to its dance of death. And he threatens or beheads anyone not keeping pace with his melodious music, because, like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, he drags rats into the river where they drown.

Thus we see a bishop, Monsignor Williamson, excluded from the ordinations and from the General Chapter [and later so-called expelled from the Society], and the decision at the last moment not to ordain some monks from Avrillé and from Morgon until they have demonstrated their loyalty to him. I hope that all this is only a symptom of what is called in the Alps, “mountain sickness” (a word to the wise, Hello), especially if the great chief is an Alpine guru endowed with a mitre and a power and if he is adequately supported by the occult and apostate anti-christian Rome, which makes real, before our incredulous eyes, the prophecies of La Salette.

Father Basilio Méramo
Bogotá, 5 July 2012

HEBF:

~ the entire liturgical, moral and doctrinal revolution is based upon the Council
~ even so, he now accepts 95% of the same Second Vatican Council
~ his two years of dialogue toward 'agreement' show their effects in his
    constricted mind, where erstwhile Council errors are now 'misinterpretations'
~ he employs a dialectic of constant back-and-forth, double-talk
~ like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, he drags rats into the river where they drown
~ he threatens or beheads anyone not keeping pace with his melodious music
~ an Alpine guru, endowed with a mitre and a power
~ adequately supported by the occult, apostate, anti-Christian Rome
~ makes real, before our incredulous eyes, the prophesies of La Salette