CathInfo.com

Well, yeah.  If Matthew is right, (and I think he is), and the sspx has fallen, then it is no longer a viable traditional Catholic alternative.  It is lost to us, and we to it.  So to describe sspx as still the largest, remaining traditional Catholic priestly organization in the world is kind of a moot point.  It really doesn't matter.
It's like having a big luxury car sitting in the driveway.  It looks good.  It looks like it should run, but it doesn't, and it can't be fixed.  Better to call a tow truck and have it hauled off to the dump--unless, of course, you're the  good bishop, holding out some glimmer of hope that it might be repaired some day and put back on the road.  I have no such hope.

That's a poor analogy.

More like an EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse) weapon has been fired at the USA, and now in every driveway there's a car that USED to run but doesn't run anymore. Now there are just a small % of older cars from the 1970's and earlier that run -- so it's an order of magnitude harder to find a running vehicle now. Some people are lucky -- they happen to live next to an antique car lot, and those spoils were quickly divided up. Here and there, you have people with 3 and 4 cars to choose from.

But most people are on foot now. And horses are going to get a lot more popular. So looking back at "what we used to have" is not a moot point at all. By looking at what we had vs. what we have now, we can clearly define the challenges that face us now.  How is that a waste of time?

From "Mikael" of the French Resistance forum: http://resistance.vraiforum.com/t918-Nouvelle-politique-de-la-FSSPX-sur-les-engagements-perpetuel.htm#p3241


Indeed, Sean, there seems to be a noticeable change in commitments (which, let us remember, are not vows).

This is not at all innocent in the current context of the Society's rallying to the "conciliar" Church. It is even very problematic for young people who often have legitimate concerns about the future of the work.

Not to mention that this is not a normal practice within a pious union such as the FSSPX: to commit oneself definitively to a priestly work after only four years is certainly not enough.

There are several reasons for this:

1° the FSSPX is not a religious order (like blessings or Capuchins...), that is why Bishop Lefebvre gave a lot of time to the members to make a definitive commitment,
2° Even in religious orders with vows, final vows can be pronounced after major orders. The essential thing to receive orders is to be incardinated in a work by commitments (even temporary) or temporary vows,
3° Young people of the current generations do not have the maturity of their elders: Bishop Lefebvre had felt it well, and did not want to put a burden on souls that were not strong enough.

For its part, the neo-FSSPX gives the following reasons:

https://stas.org/en/news-events/news/first-and-final-engagements-sspx-new-p...

Quote:

"Entering one of these families places the soul in closer contact with the life force of the Mystical Body, realizing its dependence and directing it with the soul of the Church. It is for this reason that the Fraternity of Saint Pius X requires that each soul it gives to the priesthood be subjected to authority,[NB : they therefore admit that a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X was not subjected to authority before this policy, if so, then why expel a priest for having disapproved of a change in principles and policies about the new orientations of the year 2012], attached for life to his family and, in turn, linked to the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church[NB: thus, any member not definitely committed was not until then in connection with the Church !!! ]. Stability and integrity will be the fruits of this commitment, if necessary today. Indeed, it is only through submission to authority in the order of God that we participate in his charity, which is the true bond of perfection."

Under "wise" theological and mystical motivations, this text actually manifests the intentions of the Superiors of the neo-FSSPX: to anchor the members in obedience to what they call "the Church", but what, in reality and in the long term, will prove to be an obedience to the "conciliar" Church.

This subtly "harmless" change, if confirmed, will lock up pious and good seminarians in cruel cases of conscience. Quite a few of them are currently perceiving (at least suspecting...) this general orientation of the FSSPX towards a "smooth rally", but there is the power of attraction of a traditionalist seminary which, on the surface, "holds its ground" against modernist Rome.

Once they have made a definitive commitment, it will be very difficult for them to go back and join other truly traditional priestly works.

Every day that passes, the General House reveals more clearly its unfaithful intentions to the Founder's line!"

[Once again, the attack and the praxis/process, is psychological. -SJ]