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

Author Topic: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference  (Read 2577 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15064
  • Reputation: +9980/-3161
  • Gender: Male
Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
« on: December 31, 2021, 03:35:33 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  •   


    Minute 0:00 - 11:00 = Relations with Rome:

    1:30 - 2:00 - The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    5:00 - 5:45 - In 2016, Rome did not require the SSPX to accept Vatican 2 carte blanche, but in 2017 Card. Muller imposed the entire council and post-conciliar reform uponthe SSPX, and this set back negotiations 30 years.

    6:00 - 6:30 - Canonical regularization has always been attached to a doctrinal declaration, which we could not sign, and can not sign 

    [Mental reservation: Bishop Fellay DID sign the April 15 Doctrinal Declaration, which was terrible.  But seeing the opposition and resistance this caused within the SSPX, with 3 of the 4 bishops and countless priests and faithful opposing him, BXVI made a counter-offer he knew Bishop Fellay must refuse, thereby allowing the SSPX to come back together to be captured en masse, and avoid the rise of another SSPX2B, and preserving the weak leadership of Bishop Fellay, whom Rome wanted to survive the forthcoming 2012 General Chapter...in which Fr. Pagliarani played a large part, by stifling Fr. Benoit de Jorna's initial movement to condemn Fellay's actions.]

    6:30 - 7:30 - In 2018, the SSPX tried to reopen negotiations, but Rome was not interested.

    7:30 - 8:00 - Fr. Pagliarani explains that Rome wanted to give a canonical recognition, but attached to it a doctrinal declaration, which Fr. Pagliarani saysis not acceptable.  

    [Note here a significant departure from the approach of Bishop Fellay (who famously wrote to BXVI after things fell apart, seemingly not understanding why the latter did not accept his signed AFD, and telling him that he thought they had an understanding to come to a canonical agreement, and discuss the doctrinal issues later).  

    Had Bishop Fellay taken that position in 2012, none of what transpired since would have been necessary!!!]

    8:00 - 8:35 - But it was Rome, not the SSPX, which since 2018, has decided not to discuss the doctrinal issues and end the negotiations.

    8:35 - 9:05 - Why did Rome do this?  Because, says Fr. Pagliarani, Rome realized that after all these years, they cannot convince the SSPX, and neither can the SSPX convince them.  

    [Partially true, and partially wrong: Some in the SSPX were in fact convinced, most importantly Bishop Fellay and those who brought about so many changes in furtherance of reaching an accord.  But on the side of Rome, this statement is mostly true: None have given outward acknowledgement of the SSPX's positions in general.

    But Fr. Pagliarani: Why do you not perceive that what you have just said above is the real reason the Romans stopped the discussions?  You differed from your predecessor, and because of that, Rome says there's no point in talking!

    Perhaps it will not be necessary for you to condemn Bishop Fellay openly, but can you at least start to repair the damage he caused?  I believe you can, and the beginning would be to worry about sitting down to talk to Bishop Williamson, not Pope Francis.  Then it would not be necessary for you to beg for bishops, house +Huonder, or kow-tow to a hostile Rome for your own survival.]


    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #1 on: December 31, 2021, 03:59:32 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 11:05 - 22:00 - Reasons for the Growth of the SSPX

    11:05 - 14:30 - The SSPX was ready for th ePlannedemic, and the zeal of the priests kept them from closing down like other places did.

    [This is certainly true of the United States.  Not so much in the UK, Ireland, and elsewhere, where the faithful were told by these same priests that they had no choice but to close in light of governmen declarations.]

    16:30 - 16:50 - If the SSPX stays faithful to the heritage of +Lefebvre, God will bless the SSPX and it will grow.

    [I agree.  But for the last 20 years, the SSPX has negotiated away the heritage of the SSPX, often using the exact opposite argument: "If we had a canonical agreement, we could grow the apostolate!"  It was the same argument +Lefebvre rejected at La Baroux, and the same argument the SSPX rejected when advanced by Campos.  But it was precisely the same argument advanced by the accordists, especially since 2012.

    If Fr. Pagliarani intends to reverse the squandering of its heritage for the sake of an accord, then I would certainly be supportive of any tangible changes he institutes toward that end.  Tangible, because actions speak louder than words, and are the measuring stick of both sincerity and resolve.]

    17:00 - 17:10 - The SSPX is also growing because there is a reaction in the Church against Francis.

    17:10 - 17:25 - BXVI represented the last attempt to instill the ILLUSION of continuity between the council and tradition.

    [Bravo!  The hermeneutic of continuity accepted by +Fellay in the 2012 AFD is in this sentence rejected]

    18:20 - 19:10 - Pope Francis does not feel this need to reconcile tradition with the Council.

    19:10 - 20:45 - Francis is now touching morals, and because morals affect the faithful more concretely and directly than the doctrinal corruptions of the council, the faithful have become more perceptive to the deviations from sound Catholic teaching, and the rupture with tradition.  This has them looking at Tradition and the Society.

    20:45 - 22:00 - Also Traditionis Custodes has caused some to take another look at the SSPX

    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline DustyActual

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 136
    • Reputation: +95/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #2 on: December 31, 2021, 04:12:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 11:05 - 22:00 - Reasons for the Growth of the SSPX

    11:05 - 14:30 - The SSPX was ready for th ePlannedemic, and the zeal of the priests kept them from closing down like other places did.

    [This is certainly true of the United States.  Not so much in the UK, Ireland, and elsewhere, where the faithful were told by these same priests that they had no choice but to close in light of governmen declarations.]

    16:30 - 16:50 - If the SSPX stays faithful to the heritage of +Lefebvre, God will bless the SSPX and it will grow.

    [I agree.  But for the last 20 years, the SSPX has negotiated away the heritage of the SSPX, often using the exact opposite argument: "If we had a canonical agreement, we could grow the apostolate!"  It was the same argument +Lefebvre rejected at La Baroux, and the same argument the SSPX rejected when advanced by Campos.  But it was precisely the same argument advanced by the accordists, especially since 2012.

    If Fr. Pagliarani intends to reverse the squandering of its heritage for the sake of an accord, then I would certainly be supportive of any tangible changes he institutes toward that end.  Tangible, because actions speak louder than words, and are the measuring stick of both sincerity and resolve.]

    17:00 - 17:10 - The SSPX is also growing because there is a reaction in the Church against Francis.

    17:10 - 17:25 - BXVI represented the last attempt to instill the ILLUSION of continuity between the council and tradition.

    [Bravo!  The hermeneutic of continuity accepted by +Fellay in the 2012 AFD is in this sentence rejected]

    18:20 - 19:10 - Pope Francis does not feel this need to reconcile tradition with the Council.

    19:10 - 20:45 - Francis is now touching morals, and because morals affect the faithful more concretely and directly than the doctrinal corruptions of the council, the faithful have become more perceptive to the deviations from sound Catholic teaching, and the rupture with tradition.  This has them looking at Tradition and the Society.

    20:45 - 22:00 - Also Traditionis Custodes has caused some to take another look at the SSPX
    Could it be that the American sspx priests have that typical distrust of government mentality? One of the complaints that Europeans make about Americans is that we are "anti authority".
    Go to Jesus through Our Lady.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10060
    • Reputation: +5256/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #3 on: December 31, 2021, 04:14:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    What does he mean by this?  Shouldn't he think they are better than the indult?  Does he see the SSPX and ICKSP and the FSSP all on the same footing?
    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 Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31202
    • Reputation: +27119/-495
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #4 on: December 31, 2021, 04:16:16 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    What does he mean by this?  Shouldn't he think they are better than the indult?  Does he see the SSPX and ICKSP and the FSSP all on the same footing?

    Bingo!
    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 Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #5 on: December 31, 2021, 04:37:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bingo!


    Didn't Bp. Fellay admit in 2021 that the SSPX was fully regularized with Rome?

    They did it a few years back (through a sleight of hand), via their agreement with the Argentine government legal initiative? 

    It was extended to the SSPX's global operations.

    While trads in the Indult, FSSP and ICK wait for Francis to ban the TLM, the SSPX priests are not too worried?

    I think Fr. Pagliarani's talk is propaganda just to feign that the SSPX is part of the "trad TLM persecution" under Francis.   

    Pag knows the SSPX has nothing to worry about since they've done a back-door deal with the Jєω-pope.
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #6 on: December 31, 2021, 04:45:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 22:00 - 45:20 - Traditionis Custodes and the PCED Communities

    22:00 - 24:40 - It does affect the Ecclesia Dei communities.  On a personal basis, Fr. Pagliarani has nothing against these people.  But, he has to acknowledge that when there is an error with their position, sooner or later, that error will bear consequences.  They are today -in TC- bearing the consequences of an error rooted in their inception.  We do not judge their intentions, but objectively, they made a mistake. 

    24:40 - 25:02 - The paradox is that the pope himself who is supposed to protect them, seems as though he cannot stand them, and has determined not to bear with them anymore.

    25:05 - 26:45 - PCED was supposed to be a commission to protect the Latin Mass communities who did not want to go the way of the SSPX.  3 years ago, it was suppressed.  Why?  Because the idea of the Commission was to reintegrate these communities into the mainstream of the Church, and 30 years later, they were reintegrated enough.  Therefore a commission is no longer needed.  This is the official explanation.

    26:45 28:40 - The Motu Proprio shows that some of them were not reintegrated enough.  The Pope was still not happy with them.. Why?  Francis says he cannot stand any longer using the old missal as an expression of a spirituality and priesthood, or an idea of the Church, which contradicts the one of Vatican II.  He then reiterates that here these communities have been bitten again by the doctrinal problems they chose to overlook for the sake of a canonical solution which didnot address them.

    [What is this but an implicit readmission of the existence of a conciliar church?  It is also a rejection of the 2012 SSPX position of +Fellay, like it or not.]

    29:10 - 30:00 - Fr. Pagliarani reads the quotes from TC in which the pope says there are some who think the council contradicted tradition, and therefore they haven't been integrated enough.  Fr. Pagliarani then says, "This is what WE think.  Maybe, we hope, some of them were thinking the same way.  Hopefully"

    32:15 - 32:33 - "The Latin Mass as an expression of the lex orandi of the Church is no longer permitted," says Fr. Pagliarani (quoting Francis).  He appears to take great exception to this edict.

    32:35 - 34:00 - Why did Rome finally make this decission?  Because they fely like something went wrong.  They realized that the TLM generates another conception of the Church, Mass, priestly life, etc.  And they do not want that conception competing with the conciliar one!  Theerefore, they withdrew the permission they had given.  They want to remove the possibility of using the old Mass as a banner of Tradition. 

    34:00 - 34:30 - But the TLM is intrincically traditional; if a priest enters into the meanings of this rite, sooner or later he will question himself, and the council, etc.  This is why it had to be stamped out.

    34:30 - 37:53 - So its clear that all the concessoins, indults, during these last 50 years, they've all been made to people who wanted to stick to Tradition, at least the liturgy, but they just give a little bit in order to "heal" their illness of Traditionalism.  He quotes Archbishop Roach (CDW) saying that these concessions were only there to encourage unity with the Church (i.e., acceptance of the council and the reforms), not to promote pre-conciliar Tradition.  Reintegration was the only reason, and it failed. So now the experiment is over, and we go back to the requirements of Vatican II.

    38:35 - 39:10 - For Rome, all these indults were just a drug administeredin order to drag people into the mainstream Church, and for PCED people, it was an illusion to make them believe they could keep Tradition without being persecuted.  But it was not true.

    40:03 - 41:00 The old Mass IS the banner of Tradition, but the Roman's tactics and use of the Missal is not worthy of the Church; it is not worthy of the Church to play with liturgical books as they have been doing.

    41:00 - 43:25 - We want this Mass for the entire Church.  We have NOT lost the sense of the Church.  Whatever we build, it is for the Church.  This Mass that we keep is for the Church.  Sooner or later, this Mass will again become the only Mass of the Church.  Because there is only one redemption.  So July 16 was the sad end of a long experiment. 

    43:25 - End: How could +Lefebvre make the right decision in 1988?  He had a supernatural capacity to be moved by the Holy Ghost.  Even alone, against everybody, and isolated, he had a sensitivity to the will of God, and it is an infallible sign of holiness which becomes more and more evident over time.


    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Marion

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1867
    • Reputation: +759/-1134
    • Gender: Male
    • sedem ablata
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #7 on: December 31, 2021, 04:47:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    What does he mean by this?  Shouldn't he think they are better than the indult?  Does he see the SSPX and ICKSP and the FSSP all on the same footing?

    He would love to see the SSPX being preferred because of Lefebvre/SSPX, and not because of a lack of alternatives.
    That meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church. (Dei Filius)


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #8 on: December 31, 2021, 04:48:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    What does he mean by this?  Shouldn't he think they are better than the indult?  Does he see the SSPX and ICKSP and the FSSP all on the same footing?

    He implicitly addresses this in the next section (which I was noting while you had already posted), which is all about how they made a big mistake by leaving aside the doctrinal considerations in favor of a canonical accord; that Rome was playing them all along to reintegrate them into conciliarism.  He clearly does not see them on the same footing, therefore. 

    If you note my minute markers in the 3rd/final section on TC and the PCED, he notes that Francis's condemnation describes the SSPX, not the indult communities.  Then he expresses hope that maybe there are a few doctrinal trads in the PCED crowd after all..."We hope" he says (after a pregnant pause).  

    See at 29:10...
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline hollingsworth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2790
    • Reputation: +2894/-513
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #9 on: January 01, 2022, 02:06:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Didn't Bp. Fellay admit in 2021 that the SSPX was fully regularized with Rome?
    I thought so.  SG Pagliarani must, I think, address the grave problems within his own apostolate.  He must repudiate the "monstrous little man," Pope Francis- just as lay folks like Michael Matt have done.  He must go hat in hand to Bp Williamson and beg forgiveness for the mistreatment of the good bishop by the Society.  He must confront the sɛҳuąƖ predations of some SSPX priests, a matter which has never been seriously adjudicated by the Society. He must sever all connections with Zionists.  In short, he must do a lot of in-house cleansing.  

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #10 on: January 01, 2022, 06:47:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I thought so.  SG Pagliarani must, I think, address the grave problems within his own apostolate.  He must repudiate the "monstrous little man," Pope Francis- just as lay folks like Michael Matt have done.  He must go hat in hand to Bp Williamson and beg forgiveness for the mistreatment of the good bishop by the Society.  He must confront the sɛҳuąƖ predations of some SSPX priests, a matter which has never been seriously adjudicated by the Society. He must sever all connections with Zionists.  In short, he must do a lot of in-house cleansing. 

    What an exciting scenario you have painted Holly. 

    Fr. Pagliarani making amends and turning the ship around to lead trads back to the true resistance battle.

    In reality, if the Superior General were to try this, his wings would be clipped.

    I can see Fr. Schmidberger picking-up the phone and Max Krah answering the call.  The next thing you know, the SG would be reported as suffering unexpected heart attack.

    It would be in the Jєωs best interest of course.

    Besides, Fr. Pagliarani is culturally handicapped to take over the SSPX.  

    You need a German with imagination and daring.

    It would have to be done like a Valkyrie plot, as Col. Clause von Stauffenberg did when he tried to depose Hitler and take over the nαzι gov’t.

    As passionate Catholics as the Italians are, I don’t think they’d have the courage or capability to do it.

    I suppose only with St. Michael’s help could it be done anyway.
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi


    Offline Prayerful

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1002
    • Reputation: +354/-59
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #11 on: January 01, 2022, 07:46:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 11:05 - 22:00 - Reasons for the Growth of the SSPX

    11:05 - 14:30 - The SSPX was ready for th ePlannedemic, and the zeal of the priests kept them from closing down like other places did.

    [This is certainly true of the United States.  Not so much in the UK, Ireland, and elsewhere, where the faithful were told by these same priests that they had no choice but to close in light of governmen declarations.]

    16:30 - 16:50 - If the SSPX stays faithful to the heritage of +Lefebvre, God will bless the SSPX and it will grow.

    [I agree.  But for the last 20 years, the SSPX has negotiated away the heritage of the SSPX, often using the exact opposite argument: "If we had a canonical agreement, we could grow the apostolate!"  It was the same argument +Lefebvre rejected at La Baroux, and the same argument the SSPX rejected when advanced by Campos.  But it was precisely the same argument advanced by the accordists, especially since 2012.

    If Fr. Pagliarani intends to reverse the squandering of its heritage for the sake of an accord, then I would certainly be supportive of any tangible changes he institutes toward that end.  Tangible, because actions speak louder than words, and are the measuring stick of both sincerity and resolve.]

    17:00 - 17:10 - The SSPX is also growing because there is a reaction in the Church against Francis.

    17:10 - 17:25 - BXVI represented the last attempt to instill the ILLUSION of continuity between the council and tradition.

    [Bravo!  The hermeneutic of continuity accepted by +Fellay in the 2012 AFD is in this sentence rejected]

    18:20 - 19:10 - Pope Francis does not feel this need to reconcile tradition with the Council.

    19:10 - 20:45 - Francis is now touching morals, and because morals affect the faithful more concretely and directly than the doctrinal corruptions of the council, the faithful have become more perceptive to the deviations from sound Catholic teaching, and the rupture with tradition.  This has them looking at Tradition and the Society.

    20:45 - 22:00 - Also Traditionis Custodes has caused some to take another look at the SSPX
    That's not correct. I don't know about the Cork and northern Ireland chapels, but Athlone, as far as was possible offered Masses in some manner I won't detail. This was in spite of aggressive and definite police harassment from one of the worst stations in the country. For example one man who filmed and made comments on the police presence in the Athlone Corpus Christi chapel saw them take a close interest in a custody dispute. His children were passed to the estranged mother. Dun Laoghaire did also try with Masses, but avoided closing as much as possible, offering Exposition and Communion outside Mass (this old custom should be revived as it survived until the 60s), even with a Garda station close enough to them. The diocesan cowards wouldn't offer Exposition in at least Dublin. It should be said in fairness that at least three or more diocesan priests just refused to close or cease offering public (New Order) Mass, and they are far more exposed than any SSPX priest. One diocesan Cavan priest was fined, and he did not pay. 

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #12 on: January 01, 2022, 08:00:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That's not correct. I don't know about the Cork and northern Ireland chapels, but Athlone, as far as was possible offered Masses in some manner I won't detail. This was in spite of aggressive and definite police harassment from one of the worst stations in the country. For example one man who filmed and made comments on the police presence in the Athlone Corpus Christi chapel saw them take a close interest in a custody dispute. His children were passed to the estranged mother. Dun Laoghaire did also try with Masses, but avoided closing as much as possible, offering Exposition and Communion outside Mass (this old custom should be revived as it survived until the 60s), even with a Garda station close enough to them. The diocesan cowards wouldn't offer Exposition in at least Dublin. It should be said in fairness that at least three or more diocesan priests just refused to close or cease offering public (New Order) Mass, and they are far more exposed than any SSPX priest. One diocesan Cavan priest was fined, and he did not pay.

    https://fsspx.ie/en/news-events/news/apostolate-gb-ireland-under-lockdown-1420-56505 
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #13 on: January 02, 2022, 03:50:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    What does he mean by this?  Shouldn't he think they are better than the indult?  Does he see the SSPX and ICKSP and the FSSP all on the same footing?
    Ambivalent use of words allowing for either of two interpretations: 1) we are better than the indult communities, or 2) we are not better than the indult communities.

    Offline Jr1991

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 630
    • Reputation: +289/-84
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Fr. Pagliarani at the Angelus Conference
    « Reply #14 on: January 02, 2022, 07:42:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • The SSPX has become more of a focal point because of Traditionis Custodes, but not because we are better than the indult communities.

    What does he mean by this?  Shouldn't he think they are better than the indult?  Does he see the SSPX and ICKSP and the FSSP all on the same footing?

    This statement says it all, and it's why the SSPX has become just another indult mass.