Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Clint on June 20, 2012, 07:15:48 PM
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
-
I think the report card is more nuanced than that.
While there is definitely a pervasive hidey-hole mentality, I have had several SSPX help me and my family.
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
[/
There are precedents.
A mere 12 Apostles changed the whole world.
I would not agree that the SSPX has been as ineffectual as you portray it.
But what do I know......
-
The SSPX is just an organization dedicated to the true spirit of the Priesthood -- an organization that was founded to form solidly educated, traditional, and preferably holy priests according to the ancient wisdom of the Church.
Anything else we get from them is just a bonus.
-
A mere 12 Apostles changed the whole world.
I would not agree that the SSPX has been as ineffectual as you portray it.
It was Jesus Christ who changed the world.
If you are thinking that the SSPX is another "12 apostles", you are fooling yourself. The reality is that the SSPX has been ineffectual* outside of the few faithfull they serve. Go on say Freerepublic forum and see how how Catholics perceive the SSPX. Scarcely anyone outside of the SSPX faitful, know or care anything about the SSPX. They've had about as much influence as the indult mass communities, and the sedevacantes, and independents, a mass in one city here and there.
I look at my SSPX Chapel, a priory, with mass every day, surrounded by houses. Any converts, any neighbors start going to mass? Not one. And how many people go to mass after 6 years of existance of the chapel? Like 150 on Sunday, and like 15 during a weekday mass. If you only got that many in a Novus Ordo church in the area, they would close it down, and there are like who knows how many Novus Ordo churches in the area, 50-80? and Protestant churches? Maybe 500.
Don't fool yourself.
*re: The reality is that the SSPX has been ineffectual outside of the few faithfull they serve.
God sends the people to the SSPX, so the SSPX is not ineffectual to them, it is effectual in serving the few that God sends.
-
The SSPX is just an organization dedicated to the true spirit of the Priesthood -- an organization that was founded to form solidly educated, traditional, and preferably holy priests according to the ancient wisdom of the Church.
Anything else we get from them is just a bonus.
This is 100% correct.
-
A mere 12 Apostles changed the whole world.
I would not agree that the SSPX has been as ineffectual as you portray it.
It was Jesus Christ who changed the world.
If you are thinking that the SSPX is another "12 apostles", you are fooling yourself. The reality is that the SSPX has been ineffectual* outside of the few faithfull they serve. Go on say Freerepublic forum and see how how Catholics perceive the SSPX. Scarcely anyone outside of the SSPX faitful, know or care anything about the SSPX. They've had about as much influence as the indult mass communities, and the sedevacantes, and independents, a mass in one city here and there.
I look at my SSPX Chapel, a priory, with mass every day, surrounded by houses. Any converts, any neighbors start going to mass? Not one. And how many people go to mass after 6 years of existance of the chapel? Like 150 on Sunday, and like 15 during a weekday mass. If you only got that many in a Novus Ordo church in the area, they would close it down, and there are like who knows how many Novus Ordo churches in the area, 50-80? and Protestant churches? Maybe 500.
Don't fool yourself.
*re: The reality is that the SSPX has been ineffectual outside of the few faithfull they serve.
God sends the people to the SSPX, so the SSPX is not ineffectual to them, it is effectual in serving the few that God sends.
Disagree completely.
They preserved the true Mass.
They preserved true doctrine.
You don't think Rome would be even further down la la land had the SSPX not emerged as a counterweight?
You don't think 600 true priests and 1 million faithful worldwide is a significant contribution, because heretics still exist?
You don't think the fruits of those Masses are saving souls?
I think you are missing the forest for the trees.
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
I read somewhere just a couple days ago that the conciliar church has 52,000 bishops in the world. Maybe I read that wrong, maybe it was 5,200. I apologize for not being more accurate. Let's stick with the 5,200.
As great as the Four are, they will become "one of the 5,200"...
The effects on the conciliar church would be negligible. But, by remaining apart, they are continuing the Catholic traditions.
Guys, I hate the idea of a deal. :mad:
Pray for the SSPX and that it will remain strong and free from any "reconciliation" with NewRome. :pray:
-
The SSPX has been a holy protector of Catholic souls.
Each Catholic soul is a treasure. And that Catholic soul is cradled by the Traditional Catholic Church. Let us always offer praise to God for this blessing.
And the SSPX has been a guardian of the Catholic Tradition since it's inception.
It's the largest part of the remnant.
It has valid priests. Valid sacraments.
It has the Traditional Latin Mass - and safeguarded it through the spiritual storm that wreaked havoc on the Church following Vatican II.
It is aloof from the Novus Ordo.
If it makes a deal, it will be a betrayal but a portion of the SSPX will refuse to go along with this deal and that remaining portion of the SSPX will survive and thrive.
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
[/
There are precedents.
A mere 12 Apostles changed the whole world.
I would not agree that the SSPX has been as ineffectual as you portray it.
But what do I know......
Well, the only chance of them eventually helping the Church lies in their remaining apart an out of the grasp of the Judaized conciliar authorities.
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
[/
There are precedents.
A mere 12 Apostles changed the whole world.
I would not agree that the SSPX has been as ineffectual as you portray it.
But what do I know......
Well, the only chance of them eventually helping the Church lies in their remaining apart an out of the grasp of the Judaized conciliar authorities.
Agreed
-
I don't agree in saying the SSPX is "just" this or that.
IMO the SSPX is (was) great, a truly work of God.
The problem is that way too many people seem to love Catholicism only because of the SSPX instead of loving the SSPX only because of its Catholicism; therefore they'll love the Society regardless its Catholicism when they really should love it as long as it teaches/follows Catholicism.
But don't be fooled, the fruits of Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop De Castro Meyer has helped save hundreds of thousands of souls and it will continue to do so, even though it'll need a purification (i.e get rid of the liberals infiltraded in it).
Bishops Williamson, Tissier, de Galarreta(?); Frs. Pffeifer, Chazal, Girouard, Hewko, plus a great number of somewhat silent priests within and without (independent and friends) the SSPX will carry their heroic work.
May Our Lady intervene and acquire the necessary graces we need to follow the foot steps of all these saintly heroes, that our love for her holy Son may increase even in these terrible times.
-
The problem is that way too many people seem to love Catholicism only because of the SSPX instead of loving the SSPX only because of its Catholicism; therefore they'll love the Society regardless its Catholicism when they really should love it as long as it teaches/follows Catholicism.
Very good point.
-
Clint, you're right. But the SSPX leaders don't want to hear the truth. They have some illusions of grandeur and really think they could save the Church and the world! But Pride will have a fall. And what happens now, the split and hence destruction of the SSPX, is some kind of punishment.
One wise SSPX bishop already in 2008 wrote to the world how small and humble the SSPX is, and that it should be thankful for the grace of God to be traditional catholic at all. Please let me quote this Bishop because his comment matches your observation well I think. He should have been (and should still be) general superior! But we don't deserved it... On the other side, only so the people all over the world can have the wonderful weekly Eleison Comments. Maybe that's more important.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 May 2008
Eleison Comments XLVII
Last Cartridge
A priestly colleague of the Society of St. Pius X has just written (or maybe adopted) a parable whereby the Society is the last cartridge of a hunter who must shoot to kill the monster of neo-modernism entrenched within the structures of the Catholic Church. Since it is the last cartridge, the hunter cannot afford to miss! Well, the „hunter“ may be burdened, but let me attempt to assure him that he is not burdened that much!
First and foremost, the Catholic Church belongs to Almighty God who has numerous possible ways of coming to its rescue that we men cannot even imagine. „Is my arm shortened because you men are wicked?“ asks the Lord God (Isaias 50:2). To imagine that the Lord God depends upon the SSPX to deal with the monster of neo-modernism is gravely to underestimate His powers!
Secondly, neo-modernism is surely far too entrenched in Catholics (or former Catholics) for a little Congregation of some 450 priests to be able to dislodge it! Just as the crime of abortion has become more and more normal and accepted over the last 40 years, so too has the heresy of neo-modernism more and more established itself over the same time-period in the hearts and minds of the mass of Catholics (or once Catholics). By the grace of God, the SSPX may still have the Truth, but what grip or leverage does truth still have on diabolically disoriented minds, starting with those of today’s leading churchmen?
Thirdly, what power does the SSPX have other than the – today – powerless Truth? Besides the Faith, the SSPX has neither great numbers nor great theologians nor great writers. It is holding its own all over the world, which is already a miracle, but it is fragile and in worldly terms it is advancing surely no more than one little step at a time, whereas the worldwide Revolution is advancing by leaps and bounds.
No, dear colleague. The humble mission of the SSPX is surely not to kill the storm dead (as only Our Lord could do), but to ride it out. Not to overwhelm the lies, but to sustain the Truth. Not to conquer, but to give witness. Not to be in a hurry, but to wait for God’s good time. It is His Church, and He is certainly looking after it by, amongst other things, sustaining thus far the SSPX. But He is never short of cartridges!
Bishop Richard Williamson
La Reja, Argentina
-
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words. Thanks for the posting, this is what a Catholic forum is for. Made my day!
Bishop Williamson: the SSPX has neither great numbers nor great theologians nor great writers.
I know few Catholic writers today that can communicate so well as the bishop. He always goes to the heart, explains it simply and succintly. A first class communicator.
I once commented to a relative that I had read a book and it went in one ear and out the other, that it was a difficult read. He told me that it was because the writer was not a good one. That a good writer makes the complicated, easy to comprehend. The bad writer can even make the easy to understand complicated.
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
We've had an SSPX chapel in the greater Indianapolis area for about a year. Prior to that time, there was no SSPX presence in central Indiana at all. The chapel, however, has been in existence since the Crisis began and a few families banded together and found a priest who would give them the sacraments. During that time, the chapel, which started out in the living rooms and garages of a few parishioners, bought a building, rennovated it, made it Catholic, had a number of different priests, and continued in an independent status until the last priest announced that he was simply too old to continue being the full time pastor. The legal entity that runs the chapel decided to invite the SSPX to the chapel to take ownership and to run the chapel as an SSPX chapel.
This is my understanding of how the SSPX expands its territory. It is my understanding that the SSPX does not evangelize. It does not enter mission territory (such as is most of the United States and the world), set up a Mass center, and begin to preach conversion to the traditional Catholic faith. They enter only those locations where the Catholic faith already exists; and even then, only when they are specifically invited in to care for the sacramental needs of Catholics.
If the SSPX is unwilling to evangelize the non-Catholics and the Conciliar catholics now, why on earth does anyone think that they will evangelize the non-Catholics and Conciliar catholics after signing on to a cononical agreement with Conciliar rome? Further, the evidence seems to indicate that Bishop Fellay was willing to agree that they would cease expansion even when invited by groups of Catholics if the Conciliar bishop refused permission.
Any practical agreement with Conciliar rome before a conversion of rome to the Catholic Church will have exactly one effect. It will make the SSPX just one more traditional brand of chapel in the traditional smorgasbord available within Conciliarism. Furthermore, as Conciliar rome begins the process of assimilation of the SSPX through the sacrament of orders, the SSPX will eventually become as weak-willed and lilly-livered as the FSSP--with questionable orders as well.
I'm afraid that Clint is correct in his assessment.
-
We've had an SSPX chapel in the greater Indianapolis area for about a year. Prior to that time, there was no SSPX presence in central Indiana at all. The chapel, however, has been in existence since the Crisis began and a few families banded together and found a priest who would give them the sacraments. During that time, the chapel, which started out in the living rooms and garages of a few parishioners, bought a building, rennovated it, made it Catholic, had a number of different priests, and continued in an independent status until the last priest announced that he was simply too old to continue being the full time pastor. The legal entity that runs the chapel decided to invite the SSPX to the chapel to take ownership and to run the chapel as an SSPX chapel.
This is my understanding of how the SSPX expands its territory. It is my understanding that the SSPX does not evangelize. It does not enter mission territory (such as is most of the United States and the world), set up a Mass center, and begin to preach conversion to the traditional Catholic faith. They enter only those locations where the Catholic faith already exists; and even then, only when they are specifically invited in to care for the sacramental needs of Catholics.
If the SSPX is unwilling to evangelize the non-Catholics and the Conciliar catholics now, why on earth does anyone think that they will evangelize the non-Catholics and Conciliar catholics after signing on to a cononical agreement with Conciliar rome? Further, the evidence seems to indicate that Bishop Fellay was willing to agree that they would cease expansion even when invited by groups of Catholics if the Conciliar bishop refused permission.
Any practical agreement with Conciliar rome before a conversion of rome to the Catholic Church will have exactly one effect. It will make the SSPX just one more traditional brand of chapel in the traditional smorgasbord available within Conciliarism. Furthermore, as Conciliar rome begins the process of assimilation of the SSPX through the sacrament of orders, the SSPX will eventually become as weak-willed and lilly-livered as the FSSP--with questionable orders as well.
I never considered this observation, that is exactly how they expand. Thanks for the posting. We learn something every day.
-
The "strenght" of the SSPX was always a facade, just smoke and mirrors, except for a few mass centers like St. Mary's, and handfull of priests. The SSPX has Bishop Willamson, and Fr's Pfieffer's, and a few others, but outside of those few, SSPX is just a priestly association that does the Latin Mass. For 90% of the SSPX parishioners, they are lucky to just have the Latin Mass and sacraments, but to have a roaring lion, a brave priest, in their midst? Few do.
To even envision that the SSPX could have an effect on Rome is laughable. The SSPX exists as a Father does to his children, to watch over his own family, and that's it. The rest of the world just gets a good example from the family, and that is all. Anyone that thinks that the SSPX or they can change the world, is living a dream.
Clint,
Although I think this is harsh sounding, your analysis is correct.
I am a convert to NO Catholicism 17 years ago. All the years I spent active in my parish, I never once heard about SSPX or a Tridentine Mass. My best friend from High School, a cradle Catholic, asked me "What is SSPX?" when I told her I was a trad Catholic. Very few people know or care, for that matter.
I believe in my whole soul that Our Lord brought my family to SSPX. If the Society had not had a chapel near me, we might be home-aloners. I am grateful to the Society for having priests and Masses. Our lives have been blessed in so many ways.
But in the 2 years since I have been going regularly to my chapel, not a single new person or family has shown up more than once for Mass. Modern Catholics aren't interested and regularization of the Society will change NOTHING for them.
I am also blessed in that, since we have been attending this chapel, we have met many families along the way. One of those families has a family member who is an independent priest with a private chapel. A few quiet families assist at Mass in his chapel frequently.
When the Society becomes regularized, and I believe it will, all of us who love our Catholicism, who wish to remain Catholic, will have to find places to go and priests willing to offer Masses for us.
I believe, more so than ever, that the end times are drawing nearer. Soon there will be no visible church other than the sick, modernist Rome. It will engulf the Society, and this is perhaps the way the Lord wills it to be.
Those of us who can see the signs will be prepared. Others, not so.
My husband asked me yesterday if I thought regularization would bring us more people. I replied with an emphatic NO! The whole Church is corrupt and rotten to the core. Well meaning Catholics are fully immersed in Modernism and they don't even realize it.
In my opinion, our best course of action is to take deep breaths and wait and see. If regularization happens, find yourself a priest and a chapel where you can receive the Sacraments. Pray.
The Society is not God. We do not have to blindly follow them down this path.
My family suffered in so many ways while in NO. We struggled against everyone to find the True Mass. We had no clues, no help, no encouragement other than the strength and guidance from the Holy Ghost.
That is all we have now. May Our Lord's will be done....
-
We've had an SSPX chapel in the greater Indianapolis area for about a year. Prior to that time, there was no SSPX presence in central Indiana at all. The chapel, however, has been in existence since the Crisis began and a few families banded together and found a priest who would give them the sacraments.
Never forget Fr. Andrew Jeffers R.I.P.of Terre Haute, St Athanasius the Great Chapel.
:pray: :pray: :pray: :pray: :pray: He was there for a pretty long time.
-
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words. Thanks for the posting, this is what a Catholic forum is for. Made my day!
Bishop Williamson: the SSPX has neither great numbers nor great theologians nor great writers.
I know few Catholic writers today that can communicate so well as the bishop. He always goes to the heart, explains it simply and succintly. A first class communicator.
I once commented to a relative that I had read a book and it went in one ear and out the other, that it was a difficult read. He told me that it was because the writer was not a good one. That a good writer makes the complicated, easy to comprehend. The bad writer can even make the easy to understand complicated.
You hit the nail right on the head.
Many thanks also for your good description of Bishop Williamson.
Yes, Bishop Williamson is a master of the catholic word. He really knows how to apply the Faith in such a short but "action-packed" text like his Eleison Comments. That's why these are so great. Many priests and laymen read them with benefit, and Menzingen with teeth-gnashing.
(I sometimes quip: The worst part of the coming Chastisement with its total black-out will be our inability to access the Eleison Comments via Internet anymore... Hopefully there will be some brave Englishman who's prepared to spread it via letter in a bottle!)
P.S: You or somebody else could post that Eleison Comment into an own thread, so it doesn't sink in a long discussion.
-
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words. Thanks for the posting, this is what a Catholic forum is for. Made my day!
Bishop Williamson: the SSPX has neither great numbers nor great theologians nor great writers.
I know few Catholic writers today that can communicate so well as the bishop. He always goes to the heart, explains it simply and succintly. A first class communicator.
I once commented to a relative that I had read a book and it went in one ear and out the other, that it was a difficult read. He told me that it was because the writer was not a good one. That a good writer makes the complicated, easy to comprehend. The bad writer can even make the easy to understand complicated.
You hit the nail right on the head.
Many thanks also for your good description of Bishop Williamson.
Yes, Bishop Williamson is a master of the catholic word. He really knows how to apply the Faith in such a short but "action-packed" text like his Eleison Comments. That's why these are so great. Many priests and laymen read them with benefit, and Menzingen with teeth-gnashing.
(I sometimes quip: The worst part of the coming Chastisement with its total black-out will be our inability to access the Eleison Comments via Internet anymore... Hopefully there will be some brave Englishman who's prepared to spread it via letter in a bottle!)
P.S: You or somebody else could post that Eleison Comment into an own thread, so it doesn't sink in a long discussion.
One can address most subjects in one or two sentences or in an effusive essay.
However it is the former which will turn the head and ear towards the truth.
That must come first, that is the first step to conversion from the narrative of the world.
Bishop Williamson knows this, once you awaken the Catholic soul, it desires to be fed the Holy food of truth.
-
Certainly the dumbest thread in the history of Cathinfo.
A bunch of people rightly upset with Bishop Fellay, so they start tearing up Archbishop Lefebvre's work?
"Weak."
"Ineffective."
Derided on the basis of expansion by responding to requests for assistance by the faithful?
Would you be happier if Archbishop Lefebvre told you to go jump in a lake when you asked him to give you a priest, or confirm your children?
I find it comical that some ignorant people in this thread want to criticize the apostolate of the SSPX for its failure to accomplish something it was never designed to do (I.e., be a missionary order to bring the faith to unchristian lands)!
This is not why Archbishop Lefebvre founded his order.
His only intent was to preserve the true priesthood, and the true Mass.
Anything beyond this was pure charity on his part.
You can no more criticize the SSPX for failing to convert pagan lands than you can criticize it for failing to fly airplanes.
Otherwise, I should be perfectly able to criticize any independent priest for failing to go convert New Guinea!
Wa- wa- wa. The independent priests are ineffective! They only go where people already had the Faith.
Blah blah.
You should know what you are talking about before you write stupid posts and threads like this.
-
Yes, by all means, please "thumb-down" my defense of the SSPX of these ridiculous charges.
As evidence of weakness and ineffectiveness you should be able to appraise how well it has accomplished its mission of preserving a validly ordained priesthood, and through this, a valid Mass.
But since such an appraisal would render a pretty good report card, we will judge it according to some other random and incidental criteria.
Can you say straw man?
After all, simply giving a thumbs-down is much easier than arguing a point.
Especially a point you have no hope of winning.
What a bunch of whining women.
-
Matthew-
You going to stand for this?
-
If the SSPX were doing so well it wouldn't be in this mess.
St. Mary's Kansas, for example, is an economic basket-case.
Do you think many of the lay people whose mortgages are held by the SSPX are going to be standing up to a sellout?
Or are there going to be a bunch of loud-mouths, guys screaming like drill sergeants, fanatics like Caminus and conformists like Grasmeier telling people that the resisters are evil doers to be shunned?
-
If the SSPX were doing so well it wouldn't be in this mess.
St. Mary's Kansas, for example, is an economic basket-case.
Do you think many of the lay people whose mortgages are held by the SSPX are going to be standing up to a sellout?
Ah.
Another neat side-stepping attempt to discredit the SSPX according to other criteria.
Care to base your assessment on how well it has preserved a valid priesthood and sacraments?
-
Seraphim, who are you disagreeing with?
The SSPX is just an organization dedicated to the true spirit of the Priesthood -- an organization that was founded to form solidly educated, traditional, and preferably holy priests according to the ancient wisdom of the Church.
Anything else we get from them is just a bonus.
This is 100% correct.
-
Seraphim, who are you disagreeing with?
The SSPX is just an organization dedicated to the true spirit of the Priesthood -- an organization that was founded to form solidly educated, traditional, and preferably holy priests according to the ancient wisdom of the Church.
Anything else we get from them is just a bonus.
This is 100% correct.
Clint and TKGS
-
Clint and TKGS
What have they said that's contradicted what you've said about the SSPX and the priesthood?
What have they said that you disagree with, in particular?
What TKGS says is very enlightening. They just absorbed an Indianapolis chapel.
They didn't bring the faithful there, but now they have control over it.
The SSPX is being used as a weapon against Tradition. The persecution of Tradition has begun inside the SSPX.
-
Yes, by all means, please "thumb-down" my defense of the SSPX of these ridiculous charges.
As evidence of weakness and ineffectiveness you should be able to appraise how well it has accomplished its mission of preserving a validly ordained priesthood, and through this, a valid Mass.
But since such an appraisal would render a pretty good report card, we will judge it according to some other random and incidental criteria.
Can you say straw man?
After all, simply giving a thumbs-down is much easier than arguing a point.
Especially a point you have no hope of winning.
What a bunch of whining women.
It couldn't have been articulated :light-saber: finer than how you have done here. I give you a thumbs up and this encouraging statement. You are keeping up the good fight! :boxer: How is it said: "No truer words"?
-
Certainly the dumbest thread in the history of Cathinfo.
A bunch of people rightly upset with Bishop Fellay, so they start tearing up Archbishop Lefebvre's work?
"Weak."
"Ineffective."
Derided on the basis of expansion by responding to requests for assistance by the faithful?
Would you be happier if Archbishop Lefebvre told you to go jump in a lake when you asked him to give you a priest, or confirm your children?
I find it comical that some ignorant people in this thread want to criticize the apostolate of the SSPX for its failure to accomplish something it was never designed to do (I.e., be a missionary order to bring the faith to unchristian lands)!
This is not why Archbishop Lefebvre founded his order.
His only intent was to preserve the true priesthood, and the true Mass.
Anything beyond this was pure charity on his part.
You can no more criticize the SSPX for failing to convert pagan lands than you can criticize it for failing to fly airplanes.
Otherwise, I should be perfectly able to criticize any independent priest for failing to go convert New Guinea!
Wa- wa- wa. The independent priests are ineffective! They only go where people already had the Faith.
Blah blah.
You should know what you are talking about before you write stupid posts and threads like this.
:boxer: Fighting the good fight! :boxer:
-
Seraphim is responding out of anger and hurt, mostly hurt.
It hurts that the SSPX is even considering the deal.
Let's pray for the SSPX. :pray:
-
Clint and TKGS
What have they said that's contradicted what you've said about the SSPX and the priesthood?
What have they said that you disagree with, in particular?
What TKGS says is very enlightening. They just absorbed an Indianapolis chapel.
They didn't bring the faithful there, but now they have control over it.
The SSPX is being used as a weapon against Tradition. The persecution of Tradition has begun inside the SSPX.
What I am saying is that the criterion they are using to criticize the SSPX are not the criteria by which the failure or effectiveness of the SSPX should be measured.
The strength and/or effectiveness of the SSPX should be measured according to how well it has accomplished the goals it was founded to do, not criteria that are incidental or irrelevant to its mission.
So in this case, the effectiveness/ineffectiveness or strength/weakness
Should be measured by the number of traditional priests they have ordained, and the degree to which these have preserved the traditional sacraments.
But TKGS wants the criteria to be whether or not they have Catholicized pagan lands?
Should we also assess carpenters on their automobiles, or on the quality of their work?
PS: While TKGS may have some sour grapes because her chapel was turned over to the SSPX, I fail to see how the SSPX is to blame for the chapel board inviting them to come in and take ownership.
I guess people just see what they want to see.
-
What I am saying is that the criterion they are using to criticize the SSPX are not the criteria by which the failure or effectiveness of the SSPX should be measured.
The point of the thread was not to say the SSPX has been failing at its mission.
The point is to puncture the grandiose delusions about its potential for success, particularly among those who think that the incorporation of the SSPX into the conciliar fold will mean a reformation inside the Church.
-
Seraphim is responding out of anger and hurt, mostly hurt.
It hurts that the SSPX is even considering the deal.
Let's pray for the SSPX. :pray:
No.
I am responding to other people who are posting out of hurt and anger.
And are therefore tearing down an organization based on criteria irrelevant to its mission.
-
The worse that might happen is SSPX will have to rebuild. Some might take the easy way into the pit, but most will have fortitude and courage to know that time is short, and this is another sign of the times we live in. "Stay firm to the traditions you have learned from the beginning"
-
Dear Seraphim,
What Telephorus wrote below is exactly the point of my thread, and the reason that everyone who understood what I was saying, has posted positive comments:
What I am saying is that the criterion they are using to criticize the SSPX are not the criteria by which the failure or effectiveness of the SSPX should be measured.
The point of the thread was not to say the SSPX has been failing at its mission.
The point is to puncture the grandiose delusions about its potential for success, particularly among those who think that the incorporation of the SSPX into the conciliar fold will mean a reformation inside the Church.
-------------------------------------------
And here it is better said by Bishop Williamson (and which someone posted on this thread):
Eleison Comments XLVII
Last Cartridge
A priestly colleague of the Society of St. Pius X has just written (or maybe adopted) a parable whereby the Society is the last cartridge of a hunter who must shoot to kill the monster of neo-modernism entrenched within the structures of the Catholic Church. Since it is the last cartridge, the hunter cannot afford to miss! Well, the "hunter“ may be burdened, but let me attempt to assure him that he is not burdened that much!
First and foremost, the Catholic Church belongs to Almighty God who has numerous possible ways of coming to its rescue that we men cannot even imagine. "Is my arm shortened because you men are wicked?“ asks the Lord God (Isaias 50:2). To imagine that the Lord God depends upon the SSPX to deal with the monster of neo-modernism is gravely to underestimate His powers!
Secondly, neo-modernism is surely far too entrenched in Catholics (or former Catholics) for a little Congregation of some 450 priests to be able to dislodge it! Just as the crime of abortion has become more and more normal and accepted over the last 40 years, so too has the heresy of neo-modernism more and more established itself over the same time-period in the hearts and minds of the mass of Catholics (or once Catholics). By the grace of God, the SSPX may still have the Truth, but what grip or leverage does truth still have on diabolically disoriented minds, starting with those of today’s leading churchmen?
Thirdly, what power does the SSPX have other than the – today – powerless Truth? Besides the Faith, the SSPX has neither great numbers nor great theologians nor great writers. It is holding its own all over the world, which is already a miracle, but it is fragile and in worldly terms it is advancing surely no more than one little step at a time, whereas the worldwide Revolution is advancing by leaps and bounds.
No, dear colleague. The humble mission of the SSPX is surely not to kill the storm dead (as only Our Lord could do), but to ride it out. Not to overwhelm the lies, but to sustain the Truth. Not to conquer, but to give witness. Not to be in a hurry, but to wait for God’s good time. It is His Church, and He is certainly looking after it by, amongst other things, sustaining thus far the SSPX. But He is never short of cartridges!
Bishop Richard Williamson
La Reja, Argentina
-
You can no more criticize the SSPX for failing to convert pagan lands than you can criticize it for failing to fly airplanes.
Who is criticizing the SSPX? Apparently you haven't actually read the posts.
I don't condemn the SSPX for what they have not done. I condemn those who would suggest that the SSPX will do something that they have never done before if only they signed an agreement with Conciliar rome.
But TKGS wants the criteria to be whether or not they have Catholicized pagan lands?
Again, I don't know what "criteria" you're talking about. The pagan lands I was talking about is every American city and county that has been robbed of the Catholic Church by Conciliarists. I don't condemn the SSPX but we shouldn't expect more from the SSPX than they have ever given us in the past.
PS: While TKGS may have some sour grapes because her [sic] chapel was turned over to the SSPX, I fail to see how the SSPX is to blame for the chapel board inviting them to come in and take ownership.
I guess people just see what they want to see.
You are right. You DO see what you want to see. Try re-reading the topic from the top in light of the fact that no one is condemning the SSPX but instead is just noting what is rather than what we wish were.
The point of the thread was not to say the SSPX has been failing at its mission.
The point is to puncture the grandiose delusions about its potential for success, particularly among those who think that the incorporation of the SSPX into the conciliar fold will mean a reformation inside the Church.
Someone is reading what has actually been written.
-
Seraphim, who are you disagreeing with?
The SSPX is just an organization dedicated to the true spirit of the Priesthood -- an organization that was founded to form solidly educated, traditional, and preferably holy priests according to the ancient wisdom of the Church.
Anything else we get from them is just a bonus.
This is 100% correct.
Clint and TKGS
What?
No thumbs down on this post?
There are three words?
Certainly that is sufficient material to disagree with so etching, isn't it?
-
I heard a Bishop Williamson sermon in 1997 where he said:
"We do not follow Abp. Lefebvre, we do not follow Bishop Willamson, we do not follow the SSPX, or any personality. We follow truth. Remember this always, for there may come a day when the SSPX goes away from truth, and when that happens, you are to follow the truth."
Since then I've heard many people repeat the same sermon from Bishop Willianson. And today, here we are at the intersection of truth and Neo-SSPXism.
-
I heard a Bishop Williamson sermon in 1997 where he said:
"We do not follow Abp. Lefebvre, we do not follow Bishop Willamson, we do not follow the SSPX, or any personality. We follow truth. Remember this always, for there may come a day when the SSPX goes away from truth, and when that happens, you are to follow the truth."
Since then I've heard many people repeat the same sermon from Bishop Willianson. And today, here we are at the intersection of truth and Neo-SSPXism.
What is the relevance of citing this sermon in this thread?
I don't think anyone is disputing this?
-
It has nothing to do with you, or anything you've written.
-
Come on Seraphim, don't be a sorehead.
Clint said this: If I had that article [Eleison Comments XLVII, Last Cartridge] I would have posted it instead of my words.
So just take Bishop Williamson's EC "Last Cartridge" for what this thread is all about. Because that Eleison Comment expresses perfectly what need be said.
Bishop Williamson writes:
A priestly colleague of the Society of St. Pius X has just written (or maybe adopted) a parable whereby the Society is the last cartridge of a hunter who must shoot to kill the monster of neo-modernism entrenched within the structures of the Catholic Church.
The thinking of "this priestly colleague" is exactly the conceited thinking of Bp. Fellay, Fr. Pfluger, Fr. Schmidberger and others. This erroneous thinking of them is the reason for their insane plan to join New-Rome! Which in fact is about to destroy the work of Archbishop Lefebvre. But such are the results of delusions of grandeur.
That's why the SSPX leadership didn't like this EC "Last Cardridge" (and all the others) back then in 2008, and we know this because their speaking-trumpet named Max Krah constantly said so on the Internet, and because Bp. Fellay always tried to shut-down the Eleison Comments (see Stephen Heiner's recent posts).
Actually Bishop Williamson's EC "Last Cartridge" and so Clint's thread is dead-on about what's going on within the SSPX.
Bishop Williamson knows this, once you awaken the Catholic soul, it desires to be fed the Holy food of truth.
Very well said, thank you. This is what I meant. The good Bishop is more clever than many imagine.
-
Come on Seraphim, don't be a sorehead.
Clint said this: If I had that article [Eleison Comments XLVII, Last Cartridge] I would have posted it instead of my words.
So just take Bishop Williamson's EC "Last Cartridge" for what this thread is all about. Because that Eleison Comment expresses perfectly what need be said.
Bishop Williamson writes:
A priestly colleague of the Society of St. Pius X has just written (or maybe adopted) a parable whereby the Society is the last cartridge of a hunter who must shoot to kill the monster of neo-modernism entrenched within the structures of the Catholic Church.
The thinking of "this priestly colleague" is exactly the conceited thinking of Bp. Fellay, Fr. Pfluger, Fr. Schmidberger and others. This erroneous thinking of them is the reason for their insane plan to join New-Rome! Which in fact is about to destroy the work of Archbishop Lefebvre. But such are the results of delusions of grandeur.
That's why the SSPX leadership didn't like this EC "Last Cardridge" (and all the others) back then in 2008, and we know this because their speaking-trumpet named Max Krah constantly said so on the Internet, and because Bp. Fellay always tried to shut-down the Eleison Comments (see Stephen Heiner's recent posts).
Actually Bishop Williamson's EC "Last Cartridge" and so Clint's thread is dead-on about what's going on within the SSPX.
Bishop Williamson knows this, once you awaken the Catholic soul, it desires to be fed the Holy food of truth.
Very well said, thank you. This is what I meant. The good Bishop is more clever than many imagine.
Let's see:
1) I just asked Clint what the relevence of this wonderful letter to this thread is;
2) He responds that it has nothing to do with anything I have written;
3) You then jump in and say it is exactly what this thread is about?
4) Perhaps you are both right, since everything I have written in this thread:
A) Was designed to rebut the preposterous charges of Clint and TKGS that the SSPX has been "weak" and "ineffective."
B) Since the only way to evaluate such a claim is to weigh their mission against history (i.e., Have they in fact ordained traditional certainly valid priests to preserve certainly valid sacraments, and to what degree).
5) Whether they go to hell in a handbag after the sellout (as they certainly will) is another matter.
6) My only intent is to rebut the claim in 4A above.
-
1) I just asked Clint what the relevence of this wonderful letter to this thread is;
2) He responds that it has nothing to do with anything I have written;
Qoute what you asked and what I responded again, and post them as a quote, and you'll see your error.
-
I heard a Bishop Williamson sermon in 1997 where he said:
"We do not follow Abp. Lefebvre, we do not follow Bishop Willamson, we do not follow the SSPX, or any personality. We follow truth. Remember this always, for there may come a day when the SSPX goes away from truth, and when that happens, you are to follow the truth."
Since then I've heard many people repeat the same sermon from Bishop Willianson. And today, here we are at the intersection of truth and Neo-SSPXism.
What is the relevance of citing this sermon in this thread?
I don't think anyone is disputing this?
Followed by my reponse:
It has nothing to do with you, or anything you've written.
In other words, I don't post for Seraphim, unless I direct myself to Seraphim.
If you want to know the answer to a question you made to me, just go to where I responded directly to you.
-
Let's see:
1) I just asked Clint what the relevence of this wonderful letter to this thread is;
No. There's the misunderstaning: Yesterday you asked Client what the relevance of Bishop Williamson's sermon from 1997 to this thread is, which Client quoted an excerpt from, directly before your post.
Before that we however talked about Bishop Williamson's Eleison Comment "Last Cardrige" from 2008, which I posted here in this thread, and only about this Clint said yesterday:
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words.
That's why I asked for somebody to put that excellent Eleison Comment into an own thread, and the good Nigel did so (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/E-C-XLVII-Last-Cartridge-May-2008).
3) You then jump in and say it is exactly what this thread is about?
No, I was always talking about the Eleison Comment "Last Cardrige", and the fact this Eleison Comment is exactly what Clint's thread is about. Of course the Bishop put it perfectly, as Clint pointed out. I never even mentioned a sermon. But it's a good one, too!
Did I manage to avoid your misunderstanding?
-
1) I just asked Clint what the relevence of this wonderful letter to this thread is;
2) He responds that it has nothing to do with anything I have written;
Qoute what you asked and what I responded again, and post them as a quote, and you'll see your error.
Huh???
-
I heard a Bishop Williamson sermon in 1997 where he said:
"We do not follow Abp. Lefebvre, we do not follow Bishop Willamson, we do not follow the SSPX, or any personality. We follow truth. Remember this always, for there may come a day when the SSPX goes away from truth, and when that happens, you are to follow the truth."
Since then I've heard many people repeat the same sermon from Bishop Willianson. And today, here we are at the intersection of truth and Neo-SSPXism.
What is the relevance of citing this sermon in this thread?
I don't think anyone is disputing this?
Followed by my reponse:
It has nothing to do with you, or anything you've written.
In other words, I don't post for Seraphim, unless I direct myself to Seraphim.
If you want to know the answer to a question you made to me, just go to where I responded directly to you.
What???
Are you just typing random words for the sake of responding?
-
Let's see:
1) I just asked Clint what the relevence of this wonderful letter to this thread is;
No. There's the misunderstaning: Yesterday you asked Client what the relevance of Bishop Williamson's sermon from 1997 to this thread is, which Client quoted an excerpt from, directly before your post.
Before that we however talked about Bishop Williamson's Eleison Comment "Last Cardrige" from 2008, which I posted here in this thread, and only about this Clint said yesterday:
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words.
That's why I asked for somebody to put that excellent Eleison Comment into an own thread, and the good Nigel did so (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/E-C-XLVII-Last-Cartridge-May-2008).
3) You then jump in and say it is exactly what this thread is about?
No, I was always talking about the Eleison Comment "Last Cardrige", and the fact this Eleison Comment is exactly what Clint's thread is about. Of course the Bishop put it perfectly, as Clint pointed out. I never even mentioned a sermon. But it's a good one, too!
Did I manage to avoid your misunderstanding?
Im lost.
Great letter, but what does it have to do with anything i have written?
According to Clinton, the answer is nothing.
So............
-
Dear Seraphim, maybe you would like to take a look at the thread in one piece without page turning (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=19344&min=0&num=100) ?
(It helps me always.)
Very abstract outline :
- Clint's main point in his 1st post is that the SSPX is very small and weak and can't change the world. Clint's comparison of the SSPX like being a catholic father for his family, was pretty good I think.
- You dispute that, by indirectly comparing the SSPX to the 12 apostles of Jesus Christus who managed to change the world
- Clint says no, only Our Lord can change the world.
- Then I post the Eleison Comment "Last Cardrige", where the Bishop too says that the SSPX can't save the Church and World, but that it should be happy to survive the storm with God's help at all, and that only God can kill the monster named neo-modernism, and that he doesn't depend on the SSPX to do that -- aka the SSPX is not God's "Last Cartridge". That's the reason for the great title of this EC.
Did I get it correctly? If not, please don't blame Clint but me and my Greek English (aka It's all Greek to me)... :-)
In contrast to what the Eleison Comment and Clint's post in his words say (i.e. that the SSPX is small and weak and can be happy to survive the storm), Bp. Fellay, Fr. Pfluger and Fr. Schmidberger propagate how strong and wonderful the SSPX is and that the "good conservative Holy Father" desperately needs us in order to save the Church and World. Which is nonsense a) caused by them suffering delusions of grandeur (the judgment of very excellent SSPX clerics -- plural -- by the way), and b) propagated by them to justify their Betrayal.
-
Ethelred
Your summary is accurate.
But also highlights they wr are talking about two different things.
You and he are now talking about how it will not be the Sspx, but god, who saves the church.
But the thread started off with a disparaging comment about the alleged weakness and effectiveness of the Sspx, which others like tkgs added to.
It is that rediculous comment that i have been rebutting.
So then i point out that they have preserved the priesthood and mass, as designed, and have therefore been remarkably effective in accomplishing what they set out to do.
Then a letter from bishop Williamson pops up which, if it is to ne a relevant rebuttal to me, is apparently supposed to demonstrate the weakness and effectiveness of the Sspx (otherwise why post something off topic)?
On response to this, i have posted a quote from bishop tissier on the thread you just started showing the critical role the Sspx plays in the fight for the faith, even though this is not the point being debated.
-
I guess Neil started it.
-
Btw....
It will be god who saves his Church, certainly.
But God uses instruments to accomplish His will.
Up until now, it has been largely the Sspx which has kept His religion alive.
So God's will has been done through them, just as it was done through other religious orders at other times, as a response to other crisis.
The hole point of the letter posted was a cautionary warning that the Sspx was not immune from falling from the straight path, not to demonstrate how ineffective and irrelevant it is.
He knew Bishop Fella wanted a deal way back in 2001, and it was this knowledge that prompted him to issue warnings of this type.
I heard many of them in person while in the seminary.
.
And if Bishop fella should sign a deal, then God's providence will simply pass to whatever organization emerges from the wreckege .
-
The worse that might happen is SSPX will have to rebuild. Some might take the easy way into the pit, but most will have fortitude and courage to know that time is short, and this is another sign of the times we live in. "Stay firm to the traditions you have learned from the beginning"
:applause:
-
Who started this? :argue:
I guess Neil started it.
I started it???
So now I'm the instigator???
-
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words. Thanks for the posting, this is what a Catholic forum is for. Made my day!
Bishop Williamson: the SSPX has neither great numbers nor great theologians nor great writers.
I know few Catholic writers today that can communicate so well as the bishop. He always goes to the heart, explains it simply and succintly. A first class communicator.
I once commented to a relative that I had read a book and it went in one ear and out the other, that it was a difficult read. He told me that it was because the writer was not a good one. That a good writer makes the complicated, easy to comprehend. The bad writer can even make the easy to understand complicated.
*JP2 must have been the worst writer in the world then.
-
Some kooky hippy type collects hierloom seeds. Pours his energy into it and goes to live on a remote island. People think he is a nutter and that the progress of science makes his activity irrelevant. A new disease come along and crops wither.
From the SSPX we have the seeds to restore Catholicism after Divine intervention.
-
Let's see:
1) I just asked Clint what the [relevance] of this wonderful letter to this thread is;
No. There's the misunderstaning: Yesterday you asked Client what the relevance of Bishop Williamson's sermon from 1997 to this thread is, which Client quoted an excerpt from, directly before your post.
Before that we however talked about Bishop Williamson's Eleison Comment "Last [Cartridge]" from 2008, which I posted here in this thread, and only about this Clint said yesterday:
Bishop Williamson there again, above, says it all in a few words. If I had that article I would have posted it instead of my words.
That's why I asked for somebody to put that excellent Eleison Comment into [its] own thread, and the good Nigel did so (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/E-C-XLVII-Last-Cartridge-May-2008).
Nigel? :confused1:
3) You then jump in and say it is exactly what this thread is about?
No, I was always talking about the Eleison Comment "Last [Cartridge]", and the fact this Eleison Comment is exactly what Clint's thread is about. Of course the Bishop put it perfectly, as Clint pointed out. I never even mentioned a sermon. But it's a good one, too!
Did I manage to avoid your misunderstanding?
Nigel? :confused1:
If it was so inspiring why are there no more posts there??
Oh, wait -- Mater D. chimed in and deleted two video links. :heretic:
-
[..]That's why I asked for somebody to put that excellent Eleison Comment into [its] own thread, and the good Nigel did so (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/E-C-XLVII-Last-Cartridge-May-2008).
Nigel? :confused1:
I should have written "Neil" of course, sorry!
P.S. There's some democrat who down-votes us. :-)
-
I'm trying to sort this out. :confused1: ggreg, I agree. The modernists write badly, but intentionally. They write that way in hopes that the man in the pew will think that they are brilliant; therefore, won't bother to decipher what they are actually saying. :read-paper: It's oftentimes heresy, of course. Unfortunately, what they don't realize is that the average Catholic has been so dumbed down that they don't recognize heresy when they read it, and probably wouldn't care if they do. :sleep: Also, thank goodness for the "eleison comments," because that is clearly stated and pure truth. The expulsions, whether they be Fathers Hewko, Pfeiffer, Cardozo, or even +Tissier are because they do speak clearly with the truth, :incense: which threatens the neo-sspx/opus fellay "truth." The original SSPX spoke the truth fearlessly, but now it's not just new Rome that they have to watch out for, but their own leaders. :heretic: All this silly bickering :argue: about what this thread is about--the effectiveness of the SSPX-- is irrelevant because the old SSPX is basically kaput. They need to rebuild. Which brings one back to ggreg's wonderful example about seeds. Pray God that they will have the courage and strength to do it. :pray:
-
Make that "wouldn't care if they did." :smile:
-
The hole point of the letter posted was a cautionary warning that the Sspx was not immune from falling from the straight path, not to demonstrate how ineffective and irrelevant it is.
But no one said the SSPX was ineffective and irrelevent. You created a strawman, and wasted everyone's time in their trying to explain it to you.
If you believe as I believe, that the new rite of consecration of bishops is invalid, and that the new rite of ordibnation of priests, in the vernacular, can be invalid, then, you would believe as I do, that the SSPX is the ONLY for sure order that has been ordaining priests, and contains, four of the last few valid Roman Rite bishops left in this world. That IS what makes the SSPX important, much more than the few faithful that they attend to, compared to the 1 billion "Catholics" in the world today.
Outside of those priests ordained by the SSPX who left to join Rome, and those in the Fraternity of St. Peter who were ordained by Cardinal Stickler, if any were, there are no valid priests who offer the traditional mass in union with Rome.