Like something out of a comic book or video game (RPG), it seems that for many SSPX parishioners, their "true form is revealed".

First, consider this quote:

donations are down and they can't figure out why. We have some of our oldest, foundational members who have fled to the FSSP. And then they send Fr. Wegner to browbeat us for money.

It is a fact that some SSPX parishioners have left for the Indult, and others have left for Sedevacantist chapels. And of course some, who truly understood the Archbishop's work all along, naturally went to support the Resistance which is the most natural and logical choice.

What are we to think about "old, foundational members" of SSPX chapels going to join the Indult -- what, because of the new orientation in the SSPX? Isn't that like jumping from the frying pan into the fire? So for these members, the SSPX was just a large and successful "Latin Mass" group, which can be ditched for another.

As for those who start going to Sedevacantist chapels -- that's not what the Archbishop was about either. He was about keeping a love and respect for Rome even as we were forced to disobey them for a while. +ABL had the right balance.

Obviously the REAL SSPX supporters, who truly understood what the SSPX was about and what the Archbishop stood for, will support the Resistance.

That's funny - leaving the SSPX for the indult.   :rolleyes:

That will really make them happy.  

What do they expect to find there?  And if they went in that direction, what were they even doing in an SSPX chapel to begin with?

Love and respect for Rome may have been purely imaginary. Trads seem to live quite happily without the bricks and mortar version; for them she can take her place among the biblical fables and elevations and complete the mythology! Have not humans succeeded in turning the place into stables for horses and fun palaces where men in costume act out their pleasures?  Maybe Bp. Fellay wants in on it and Bp. W is a shade envious! For simple folk, not much to love there if there ever was.

Understanding the archbishop took some doing. He certainly was a man of balance; his empire tottered on conflicting ideas and clashes of personality. He knew the virtues of divide and rule. The question now is which group is his true successor. I do not think there is one; he was many groups in one. I think we have to accept that Lefebvrism was the shock to the system post-V2 that found relief in many directions. Hence the arrivals and departures like Grand Union Station. The R & R theory that was the archbishop's home-made logic was one of being in transit but going nowhere. Who would want to continue this debilitating journey without end? Men have been born and died in its stupefying embrace!  

Much truth there. Don't forget one of our popular modern maxims, It's all about the journey.

My question is this:  If a person believes in the SSPX in its pure intention, has established him/herself within the SSPX chapel, supported it, and now this chapel is divided with the Resistance laity and the others who want to or just are willing to go along with the majority might that be following into the new church.

What are they expected to do?

Join the Resistance, of course.

Quote from: MyrnaM

My question is this:  If a person believes in the SSPX in its pure intention, has established him/herself within the SSPX chapel, supported it, and now this chapel is divided with the Resistance laity and the others who want to or just are willing to go along with the majority might that be following into the new church.

What are they expected to do?

Join the Resistance, of course.

I guess I don't fully understand, is the Resistance in different chapels than the more liberal SSPX laity?

I myself came to the SSPX to find a new home among charitable Catholics.  What I found was
gossipers, know-it-alls, pride, and other non-Catholic things.  I have become an outcast without
any real friends here.  I meet others who feel the same way that I do.  If I go to another
Latin Mass offered by the Society of St Peter, it is because I'm looking for Catholics, not
Pharisees.  Of course, I prefer the Resistance, but that is not available very often.

That is just fallen human nature.  I found it much more when I went to an FSSP site, although Catholics in general seem to suffer from it to a great extent regardless of what "flavor" they are.  It may just be the luck of the draw when it comes to the people around you, or it could be God's way of having you learn a lesson from "poor" examples.  Sounds like you are very observant and will not fall into the same traps as the others.

The bottom line is that we must have VALID sacraments, regardless of the un/worthiness of those in the pews.  FSSP are "ordained" by NO "bishops" so the validity is suspect.

The SSPX might be heading downhill, but honestly it will be a while before they hit the low point of being EQUIVALENT TO THE INDULT.

Just for starters, Indult locations usually don't offer the Tridentine Mass exclusively. In other words, the various Latin Mass communities sanctioned by the local Bishop usually aren't given their own church. Austin, TX is typical in this regard: they offer weekly Latin Masses in the Cathedral. You know that Cathedral isn't just for the Latin Mass devotees...

But here is the reason why you must RED LIGHT all Indult Masses that take place in a shared facility:

Do you think the Novus Ordo Mass is valid, or invalid?

If you think it's valid, you're in trouble because you probably stepped on Our Lord countless times as you walked around the church. Your local Novus Ordo does practice "communion in the hand", right? I think that's a valid assumption. Trampling on the Blessed Sacrament is NOT acceptable, not even for the sake of attending Sunday Mass!

If you think it's invalid, you're in trouble if your Indult priest ever distributed "communion" consecrated during a Novus Ordo service. Worshiping bread is not acceptable, not even for the sake of attending Sunday Mass!

And whether the Novus Ordo is valid or not, your Tridentine Mass is valid, right?  Does your Indult priest leave any consecrated Hosts in the main (shared) tabernacle? If so, then Our Lord is going to be distributed to the Novus Ordo "faithful" (most of whom are NOT faithful, but I digress) including many more unworthy communicants per-capita than a normal "Trad" venue, due to lack of proper catechesis, infrequent use of Confession, and priestly sermons/example. But most important of all, Our Lord will be distributed into the HANDS of the faithful, so many Sacred Particles will most certainly end up on the floor (contrast this with the Novus Ordo, which might be causing particles of MERE BREAD to end up on the floor, at least in those cases where the "mass" is invalid)

That is why it's especially bad to go to an Indult with a shared facility.

I agree that Indult isn't 100% red light for all persons in all places, but I am much harder on (to the point of RED-LIGHTING) those Indults that use a shared facility, because of the conundrum I described above.

Also, there is the major issue of priestly validity for those priests ordained in the new Rite, by bishops consecrated in the new Rite. That is not a small issue either. A simulated "mass" is worse than no Mass at all!

But, IMO, if you have no other option to get the Sacrament, then you go. You are not responsible for worrying about what abuses the faithful or priest might be doing at the N.O. Mass.

I didn't say you have to worry about the Novus Ordo Mass and its parishioners. How does that affect you and your assistance at a valid Mass?

I'm talking about YOU stepping on Our Lord or YOU worshiping mere bread because the priest (intentionally or un-intentionally) mixed the hosts from a previous Novus Ordo Mass, which very well might have been invalid.

If the Novus Ordo Mass is valid, then you have the problem with Sacred Particles on the floor, due to the universal abuse of "Communion in the Hand".

Did you even read what I wrote?


It comes back to a question I've asked before -- how many accidental evils can/should a Catholic put up with, in pursuit of his Sunday Mass and sacramental Communion?

Risk stepping on Sacred Particles? Put up with a literal cult? Risk the purity/innocence of his children (because the priest has a "past")? Put up with sermons filled with error?  Be severely tempted to righteous indignation on a near-weekly basis? Endure endless propaganda from your priest and the group he works for? Etc.

I think it's a valid question.