SARTO, SIRI ?
In the 1970’s Archbishop Lefebvre made personal visits to a number of the Church’s best cardinals and bishops in the hope of persuading a mere handful of them to offer public resistance to the Vatican II revolution. He used to say that just half a dozen bishops resisting together could have seriously obstructed the Conciliar devastation of the Church......
So how could the best of well-trained minds have been so darkened ? How could so few of the best churchmen at that time not have seen what the Archbishop was seeing,... How could he have been so relatively alone in not letting such a basic principle of common sense be smothered ... when the Church’s very survival was being placed in peril ... How can authority have so gained the upper hand on reality and truth ?
My own answer is that for seven centuries Christendom has been sliding into apostasy. For 700 years, with noble interruptions like the Counter-Reformation, the reality of Catholicism has been slowly eaten away by the cancerous fantasy of liberalism, which is the freeing of man from God by the freeing of nature from grace, of mind from objective truth and of will from objective right and wrong. For the longest time, 650 years, the Catholic churchmen clung to and defended reality, but finally enough of the engrossing fantasy of glamorous modernity worked its way into their bones for reality to lose its grip on their minds and wills. Lacking grace, as St Thomas More said of the English bishops in his time betraying the Catholic Church, the Conciliar bishops let men’s fantasy take over from God’s reality, and authority take over from truth. There are practical lessons for clergy and laity alike.
If I were to substitute Fr. Feeney (and his struggle to defend EENS as it was written) for Abp. Lefevbre in the quote above, it would perfectly describe what happened to him. The exact same thing quoted above happened to Fr. Feeney 20 years before. And they were both illegally excommunicated.
Correct. 700 years is a long time. There was serious corruption lurking under the
surface long before Vatican II. The problems in the Church did not suddenly start
overnight in 1960, or 1958. Remember, Pope St. Pius X was almost not elected.
And that was in 1903! Let's see: 59 years before Vatican II!!
Colleagues inside and outside the SSPX, to serve God, let us beware of reacting like Giuseppe Siri when we need to be reacting like Giuseppe Sarto, with his magnificent denunciations of the modern errors in Pascendi, Lamentabili and the Letter on the Sillon. And to obtain the grace we need in this most tremendous crisis of all Church history, we need tremendously to pray.
Rompolla, a Freemason, was elected first, and VALIDLY. If it had not been for the
VETO of one rare privilege (which had been largely forgotten!) we would have had
no
Pascendi, Lamentabili sane, nor Letter on the Sillon! So much for the
sedevacantist canard that a Freemason cannot be validly elected Pope. And was
that rare veto power a good thing? Well, perhaps it was - because it gave us a
saint for a pope, at a most critical moment in salvation history; but what was the
first official act of the new saint-pope? He abolished the rare veto power that had
given him the Papacy.
He climbed into a space capsule, closed the hatch, and permanently locked the
door. Then he was launched. And there is no turning back.
There were lots of problems before Vatican II. How in God's heaven could all
the cardinals at an ecuмenical council accept heretical docuмents if there were
no problems? Fr. Feeney was ordered to come to Rome on "disciplinary" issues,
but the officials who "ordered" him refused to divulge the reasons. They
deliberately neglected to state what the charges were against him. How was he
supposed to prepare a defense? Show me one lawyer anywhere in the world
who will agree to go to court for such a proceeding without having any clue as
to what the charges are against his client. That's not due process. That's not
Catholic. That's Communism. That is the Errors of Russia in practice! And that
was 13 years before Vatican II.
It happened to Fr. Feeney in 1949 and then it happened again to Fr. Gruner
decades later. Why?
Both priests were daring to say what the Vatican wanted
to cover up. Fr. Feeney was proclaiming the THRICE DEFINED DOGMA of the
Faith, EENS. They couldn't have that, because the Roman officials were getting
ready to have Vatican II, in which EENS would be "gently debunked," and they
needed to make a PUBLIC EXAMPLE of the one, brave priest in the entire
world who had "put his finger" on that dogma, identifying it as the crux of the
modern crisis. Why do you suppose EENS had to be defined THREE times instead
of just once? Because, during those "700 years," EENS was under attack by the
denizens of hell, that's why! Rome was quietly building up resistance to EENS and
spreading the foul contagion of liberalism among the cardinals, and with the
stupid, invalid "excommunication" of Fr. Feeney, they made a public example of
him. He was the scapegoat for their unholy agenda. "Any of you cardinals, bishops
or priests want to follow the path of Fr. Feeney? Just DARE to teach EENS in public
and see what will happen to you!" They wouldn't dare say it, that would be too
honest.
Years later, Fr. Feeney was "reinstated" all of a sudden, and the means by which
they did that was by having him and a small group of representatives from
Rome recite, in Latin, that outside the Church there is no salvation. Does that
make any sense? He was "excommunicated" because he was teaching EENS, and
then the "excommunication" was "lifted" by having him pronounce EENS?
In Fr. Gruner's case, if it had not been for the historical record of Fr. Feeney's
story, it might have been a lot more challenging. But Fr. Gruner and his council
were able to persuade Rome to divulge the nature of the charges against him,
so they could prepare a defense. And being prepared, they went to Rome and
were exonerated. Without Fr. Feeney's story to study, they might not have been
able to pull that off.
All these things tie together. The devil never sleeps and the attacks against the
Church will never end in this life. Now the big push is against +Williamson, but
the only "crime" he has committed is uttering the truth, or, perhaps giving voice
to his own inspired speculation. First, regarding the historical facts of the fate of
Jєωs during WWII, and now, whether Sarto would have behaved as Siri. How
dare he THINK!? Where does he get the idea he is allowed to THINK?! Doesn't
he know that Freemasons, Jєωs, Mohammedans and fαɢs are the only ones who
can THINK? In public, that is. But H.E. had better be careful. He might be
caught thinking in private, too, and that would be a "THOUGHT CRIME."
He might find himself thrown into jail
because of a "thought crime" that he MIGHT
commit one day in the future!!When that happens, we can be pretty sure the BEAST is here, and the END TIMES
have arrived. Let us pray (as he suggests) that Holy Mother Church might be
restored, and we can enjoy (at least for a while!) a "period of peace," as Our
Lady of Fatima promised.
... And to obtain the grace we need in this most tremendous crisis of all Church history, we need tremendously to pray.
... As for the surest protection against your minds and hearts being taken over by the fantasy, pray five, better fifteen, Mysteries a day of Our Lady’s Holy Rosary.
Some might dare accuse me of "hanging on every word of +Williamson." You know,
I really don't mind being so accused. I would wear that as a badge of honor. My
reply to that is
you are all most welcome to hang on every word of his too, because
there is hardly anyone else writing today whose words are worth hanging on as
are his.
And as for hanging, recall the words of another man, who wasn't even Catholic:
"We can all hang together, or we shall all hang separately."
SARTO, SIRI ?
If I were to substitute Fr. Feeney (and his struggle to defend EENS as it was written) for Abp. Lefevbre in the quote above, it would perfectly describe what happened to him. The exact same thing quoted above happened to Fr. Feeney 20 years before. And they were both illegally excommunicated.
Pius XII was a legitimate authority. The conciliar popes are not.
And you are now a legitimate authority? Who needs another council? We have all
our answers right here on an Internet forum by "Pius IX" who died what, over
120 years ago?
Huh??