If the below email is true, then it proves that +ABL, much like +W, did NOT have a strong, principled position on V2/new mass.

The widow of Hamish Fraser relayed a question to Archbishop Lefebvre, through Fr Michael Crowdy, asking whether she could attend the New Mass because she was unable to get to the traditional Mass. The Archbishop replied to her that she could do so. This would have been in the late 1980's.

 

But, really, +ABL's views are irrelevant at this point.  What matters is NOW.  What matters is that +Fellay and his heretical henchmen have infiltrated the neo-sspx and marginalized the principles of +ABL.  

Fortunately, +W has stood up to most of +Fellay's tricks, but he still is theologically "on the fence" regarding the new mass.  One week, he says the new mass is the poisoned part of an apple; the next week, it is good because of a eucharistic miracle.  Theologially, the new 'mass' is contrary to the infallible Trent, therefore it's anathema.  But, even after 50 years of it's 'fruits', many still wish to make excuses for it.  It's baffling.

if you say the Holy Rosary devoutly every day until death for the purpose of knowing the truth

The truth matters.  One has to be open to it.  A non-practicing catholic can't just say the rosary and hope for heaven.  This applies to a V2 catholic too.  You have to seek the truth, which many don't, because as Al Gore told us, the errors of new-rome are "an inconvenient truth".

Josepha:

Quote

There are a lot of other people who pray the Rosary that are not Resistance or Sedes .Maybe there is a possibility of God operating in their arenas despite the error ( in order to get them out? )

If you believe St. Louis de Montfort, there is more than a "possibility."  In fact, a person, of whatever Catholic stripe, who says the Rosary devoutly might even fare better than a person, who, though in faithful attendance at "Resistance" Masses, and who strictly adheres to the Old Rite, either neglects the Rosary, or abandons it altogether.

Here's what Montfort writes in his tract, The Secret of the Rosary:

"If you say the Rosary faithfully until death, I do assure you that, in spite of the gravity of your sins "you shall receive a never fading crown of glory."  Even if you are on the brink of damnation, even if you have one foot in hell, even if you have sold your soul to the devil as sorcerers do who practice black magic, and even if you are a heretic as obstinate as a devil, sooner or later you will be converted and will amend your life and save your soul, if- and mark well what I say- if you say the Holy Rosary devoutly every day until death for the purpose of knowing the truth and obtaining contrition and pardon for your sins.."

So I conclude tentatively that the person who faithfully recites the Rosary every day may be much better positioned than a person who agonizes over of validity vs. liceity, who trembles at the thought of attending an NO Mass celebration, and who dots every juridical 'i' and crosses every liturgical 't.'

Spot on!   :applause:

Forgive me for speaking plainly, but from what I have seen in almost thirty years of being around traditionals, I have witnessed nothing exceptional about them.   In fact, I've been more impressed with not a few novus ordo Catholics.

Pax:

Quote

Fortunately, +W has stood up to most of +Fellay's tricks, but he still is theologically "on the fence" regarding the new mass.  One week, he says the new mass is the poisoned part of an apple; the next week, it is good because of a eucharistic miracle.  Theologially, the new 'mass' is contrary to the infallible Trent, therefore it's anathema.  But, even after 50 years of it's 'fruits', many still wish to make excuses for it.  It's baffling.

Careful! I don't think the bishop is on the fence at all about the New Mass.  He does not condone it "theologically."  He does not say it is "good."  He merely acknowledges phenomena in connection with Hosts consecrated at new rite masses.  They can not be explained away easily.  Bloody tissue was found in several consecrated Hosts, as proven under forensic analysis.  

I sure thought that the Bishop spoke in very clear english in his last tour of the USA... I don't know what else can be said to those who really believe that the Bishop thinks that the New Mass is good. I guess the deceptions, like Fr Pfeiffer spreads, is like some sort of mental AIDS.

Why would God choose to perform a miracle precisely in a rite that is displeasing to Him?. That is almost (or same) as if He did so in a Heretic or Schismatic service. It does not make any sense. And if the NOM is not displeasing to Him after all, then what has been the entire point of the SSPX (and the vast majority of the Traditionalist movement) all these decades?

This ambivalence serves no purpose.

Why would God choose to perform a miracle precisely in a rite that is displeasing to Him?. That is almost (or same) as if He did so in a Heretic or Schismatic service. It does not make any sense. And if the NOM is not displeasing to Him after all, then what has been the entire point of the SSPX (and the vast majority of the Traditionalist movement) all these decades?

This ambivalence serves no purpose.

Have you ever stepped on the tail of a cat? It howls... right? Well, just maybe Our Lord is truly present, and he wants those who know not, that He IS present.