There are none so blind as those who do not wish to see. Let us pray for the blind!
Fr P. E. Cardozo - Sep 2012

That's exactly right. Liberal Dreamer Bishop Fellay.

I've got to hand it to anyone who gets this the first time through. I have to say,
that anyone who's not familiar with the intrigue of the past few months would be
at a loss to make heads or tails of this letter. On the surface, it's somewhat
cryptic. To the uninitiated, it's nonsense. To most SSPX faithful, it would be a
kind of puzzle....  :confused1:

I suppose some of that is due to the language barrier for there may be something
lost in the translation, as they say. But that's not all. It presumes prior knowledge
of the situation, let's face it. And as such, it invites criticism from the Accordista
camp.

A division is growing, wherein the members of the one group are finding it more
and more difficult to carry on a conversation with members of the other group.
There is a fundamental change in the precepts of thought, such that certain words
spoken by one of group A will mean one thing to others in group A but something
else to others who are from group B. This, too, was something that happened
"under the influence" of the unclean spirit of Vat.II.

And it's happening all over again, today. Been there, done that.

"How do you know that Fr. Trejo is punishing Fr. Cardozo and the faithful who
assist at his Masses?" I actually had to answer this question. Fortunately, there was
another member, a first-hand witness, who provided her e-mail address to me so
that I could purchase my own credibility in the face of this incredulity of the
madding crowd. "Don't believe everything that you read on the Internet," they
would say, and I could reply, "Here: send Mrs. XXX an e-mail, and ask her to
tell you about how Fr. Cardozo was treated by Fr. Trejo. Maybe you'll be able to
understand the broken English of a native Mexican who lives this persecution
in person, rather than my second-hand description. Or, do you also deny the
reality of e-mail? You know, the local courthouse considers e-mail as acceptable
evidence in the prosecution of crime, now, are you aware of that?"

This seems to be working ..................

From TIA, posted in May 2012:






The Storm Grows inside the SSPX

Priest Rejects Fellay’s Authority &
Calls for General Disobedience

    TIA has received from American readers the request to translate from Portuguese to English the open letter of Fr. Ernesto J. Cardozo, a Brazilian priest writting from the State of Rio de Janeiro. We took the original docuмent from the Argentine blog Radio Cristiandad. What follows is the English translation of Fr. Cardozo’s whole text, including the footnotes.     The Editor


Tradition in Action



Open Letter to my Colleague Priests, Faithful & Friends


Nova Friburgo, May 13, 2012
95th anniversary of the 1st apparition of Our Lady in Fatima


After reading the letter of the three SSPX Bishops to the General House, and the answer given by Msgr. Fellay and his followers (which have more or less the same errors as those manifested in the past by Dom Gérard, Fr. Rifan and Fr. Muñoz), I have nothing more to say than to express:

1. My total adhesion to the SSPX and its Founder and, therefore, my absolute support of the three Bishops who remain faithful to the work of Msgr. Lefebvre, in whom I place my obedience.

2. My non-recognition of the authority of Msgr. Fellay, given his pertinacity and distancing from the principles of the Founder, and [my non-recognition of the authority] of all those who share his position of surrendering to Rome, independent of the office they occupy, and, therefore, my rejection of such position of this Bishop, based on his opinions and polices that are totally removed from the policy of yes-yes, no-no of the Gospel and the foundations given by Msgr. Lefebvre. (1)


Fr. Ernesto Cardozo

3. Our absolute rejection also to any accord with modernist Rome to which this Bishop, Msgr. Fellay, is shamefully dragging us in a suicidal operation, ignoring the counsels:

     Of the Founder;
     Of his three brothers in the Episcopate;
     Of diverse priests who, in the last years with due reasons, refuted his steps toward a communion with a Church self-defined as “post-conciliar” and not Catholic, which is enemy of Our Lord and His universal Kingship. (2) They ended by being expelled or resigning in order to not end in the lamentable situation we have reached today.

4. For these reasons, I call on the three faithful Bishops, who have an authority given to them by the Founder, to assume the command of the SSPX to avoid its dismantling and dispersion.

5. I call on the members and faithful who still maintain a minimum of loyalty, fidelity and obedience to the Founder to support in a clear and efficient way our three Bishops, and withdraw all support from those subservient followers of the one who permitted, by his consent, collaboration and silence, the present day state of affairs that is leading the SSPX to an irremediable division.

Given that we have been confirmed, i.e., that we are soldiers of Christ the King by the anti-modernist oath we made at our ordination, in order not to end in perjury and apostasy, I call on all to clearly take the position of Tradition and support with all their efforts the defense of the SSPX, the secure boat in which we have reached so many goals and through which we survived the apostasy of our times, while we wait for the complete conversion of the Pope and Rome to the Eternal Rome.

Trusting in the consecration of our religious family made in the past to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, let us combat with her and for her until the end. Amen.

Fr. Ernesto J.J. Cardozo

    1. In a letter dated August 18, 1988, Msgr. Lefebvre, referring to the agreement made by Dom Gerard, wrote to Dom Thomas, prior of the Monastery of the Holy Cross: “to maintain his liberty and reject any bond with modernist Rome.”

    2. In a statement made this Friday [May 11, 2012] to Catholic News Service, speaking from the General House in Menzingen, Switzerland, the Superior of the SSPX, Bernard Fellay, admitted discrepancies in the Society regarding an accord with the Holy See: “I cannot exclude that there might be a split,” he affirmed.

    Msgr. Fellay told CNS that in his opinion “the move of the Holy Father - because it really comes from him - is genuine.” “It doesn’t seem to be any trap …(sic!) So we have to look into it very closely and if possible move ahead.”

    Referring to the initiative of Benedict XVI, Fellay was quite clear: “Personally, I would have waited for some more time to see things clearer, but once again it really appears that the Holy Father wants it to happen now.”, “But we are not alone in working to defend the faith. It’s the Pope himself who does it … (sic!)”


Posted May 23, 2012

It is noteworthy to me, that this letter of Fr. Cardozo stands as a fact of history,
and perhaps of interest to some right now, but in the main, since +Fellay has
backed off his agenda of regularization (for now!) there isn't much more to say
about it. "It's a settled issue." Or so it would seem.

Anyone familiar with Communist tactics knows about the "Two steps forward,
one step back" technique. This "change of course" from Menzingen is merely a
"One Step Back" turn of events. Tell me I'm wrong, or say it isn't so, but the
onus is on +Fellay to stay the course, now.

If NOTHING ELSE, he's "on notice" for sticking to the straight and narrow.

But for those who look at it from a traditional perspective, he has shown that
he is capable of being a turncoat, and so, he has lost his credibility. Why?
Because he has made a potentially devastating blunder, and he has apparently
admitted as much (with oh-so-much restriction on the report of same!) but he
has absolutely, without question, FAILED to make any PUBLIC APOLOGY for this
potentially devastating blunder.

He has not repented of his ERROR IN JUDGMENT,  nor will he, because ... why?
For the good of the Society? No,
For the good of the Church? No,
For the good of the Faith of Catholics? No,
For a nice topic of conversation before, during or after Dinner? No,

He has not repented of his error because doing so would not promote his career.

Therefore, this letter of Fr. Cardozo is an important fact of history. We can refer
back to this, and we can know how the fact of its existence in this time and place
has been important for the other events that took place after it, and when we
want to ask, let's say in November when the New 1962 Missal is about to be
implemented as of December 2nd, "Didn't Fr. Cardozo have something to say
about ... "

3. Our absolute rejection also to any accord with modernist Rome to which this Bishop, Msgr. Fellay, is shamefully dragging us in a suicidal operation, ignoring the counsels:

    Of the Founder;
    Of his three brothers in the Episcopate;
    Of diverse priests who, in the last years with due reasons, refuted his steps toward a communion with a Church self-defined as “post-conciliar” and not Catholic, which is enemy of Our Lord and His universal Kingship. (2) They ended by being expelled or resigning in order to not end in the lamentable situation we have reached today.


But "the accord is a dead letter!" they will cry out from the peanut gallery. How
can "the accord" be a "dead letter" when the SSPX is being manipulated like a
puppet on a string to accommodate insane changes to the Mass even when it
was an ostensibly "no strings accord" that was to be effected????

HOW COULD IT HAVE BEEN A "NO-STRINGS RECOGNITION" IN THE WORKS,
WHEN "THE ACCORD IS A DEAD LETTER" BUT THE SSPX IS STILL ATTACHED TO
THE ostensibly non-existent "STRINGS" THAT WOULD NOT HAVE EXISTED EVEN
IF THERE HAD BEEN AN ACCORD????

At that point, the cat would be out of the bag.
Then it would be PROVABLE that a so-called No-Strings Recognition would be
impossible.

Of course, to those of us with grey matter between our ears AND a willingness
to USE IT, we don't need any such proof.



And yes, Tele, I look forward to your response................    :wink: