Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: SeanJohnson on April 24, 2020, 12:00:30 AM
-
I recently warned the blinded SSPX that they would not be exempted from the recent Roman decrees incorporating new “saints” and Novus Ordo prefaces into the 1962 Missal (effectively making it a 2020 Missal) in two articles available here:
http://tradcatresist.blogspot.com/2020/03/two-excellent-articles-by-sean-johnson.html?m=1 (http://tradcatresist.blogspot.com/2020/03/two-excellent-articles-by-sean-johnson.html?m=1)
Some tried to argue that the new decrees were only optional.
Yet I rebutted that argument by noting the Roman modus operandi has remained the same since Vatican II:
Stress the optional nature to dissipate resistance, then later make the measures mandatory.
Now Rorate Coeli is reporting that Rome is sending a survey to all the bishops of the world, asking pointed questions about how Summorum Pontificuм has been implemented in their respective dioceses:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/04/breaking-important-summorum-under.html#more (https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/04/breaking-important-summorum-under.html#more)
With the PCED dissolved into the CDF (ie., the Commission being largely obsolete, with the SSPX already largely regularized), and the new hybrid missal just promulgated (optional for now, but not for long), it isn’t difficult to see where this is going:
Rome is laying the groundwork for abrogating SP, which, once the new 2020 hybrid Missal becomes mandatory, will be completely obsolete:
The 1962 Missal having disappeared, the raison d’etre for the motu proprio serves no purpose.
And just like that, the SSPX will have lost the 1962 Missal (which like their former PCED brothers, was pretty much the only thing they had been allowed to retain).
Some people never learn.
-
Good job Sean. Keep it up.
-
Introducing new "saints", especially if they were morally and spiritually dreck like JPII, is a way to ensure that people leave the SSPX permanently.
-
Introducing new "saints", especially if they were morally and spiritually dreck like JPII, is a way to ensure that people leave the SSPX permanently.
The people should have left SSPX when Bishop Williamson was expelled
or at least stopped giving money. But no. Bishop Williamson became
the target of lots of criticism. Then we started hearing that Bishop Fellay
has the "grace of state" and other baloney. The SSPXers believe in the
SSPX, rather than the Faith. Authority is above Faith for them. But do they
know the Faith? Do they know what Vatican II contains? They want to
be reconciled with Rome !!!
.
Don't hold your breath waiting for them to wake up.
.
-
Introducing new "saints", especially if they were morally and spiritually dreck like JPII, is a way to ensure that people leave the SSPX permanently.
What about people like Padre Pio?
-
What about people like Padre Pio?
Unfortunately, that is the dilemma that non-sedevacantists have to deal with. No one has the competence, except the pope himself, to determine who is a saint worthy to be venerated.
-
And what makes you think the SSPX would use this “hybrid Missal”?
Unfounded speculation is key to just about everything you say
-
And what makes you think the SSPX would use this “hybrid Missal”?
Unfounded speculation is key to just about everything you say
And the mere suggestion they would have doubtfully ordained conciliar priests perform marriages for their faithful in SSPX or Novus Ordo churches is equally preposterous!!
They are in total capitulation mode!
If Rome has announced nobody can refuse to say the NOM Mass and still be in Union with Rome, the SSPX will go quite a bit further than the hybrid Missal (a la Campos concelebrating the NOM). They just need to be patient so useful idiots like you can pretend there have been no changes!
You are a blatant lying troll, and I can’t believe you are tolerated here:
Divine Mercy pics st the altar is “unfounded speculation!”
Divine Mercy devotions popping into devotional books, websites, and Facebook pages is more “unfounded speculation.”
-
And what makes you think the SSPX would use this “hybrid Missal”?
Unfounded speculation is key to just about everything you say
Hardly unfounded speculation. I still hold out some hope that the SSPX will turn away from the direction they are heading. As for the “hybrid Missal”, you do know that the mass that most SSPX priests celebrate is a hybrid?
-
Here's what's retarded: New-rome keeps making changes to the 1962 missal/calendar, but keeps calling it the 62 missal. Liturgically speaking, they are really bending the rules for "updates" and having the date associated with the missal is almost becoming meaningless. +Benedict's 2007 motu missal is not the 1962 missal, because he added all sorts of saints, revised Holy Week, and used the 2nd/3rd revisions of the 62 missal as his base (which came out in 1963, i.e. removal of the 2nd Confiteor was not part of the original changes). In other words, properly speaking, the Summorum Pontificuм missal should be called the 2007 missal, with these new changes being the 2020 missal. The 1962 missal is from 1962. Any changes, gives it a new date. That's just logical and historical.
-
With Francis and his likes in charge, this is expected. :incense:
-
And the mere suggestion they would have doubtfully ordained conciliar priests perform marriages for their faithful in SSPX or Novus Ordo churches is equally preposterous!!
They are in total capitulation mode!
If Rome has announced nobody can refuse to say the NOM Mass and still be in Union with Rome, the SSPX will go quite a bit further than the hybrid Missal (a la Campos concelebrating the NOM). They just need to be patient so useful idiots like you can pretend there have been no changes!
You are a blatant lying troll, and I can’t believe you are tolerated here:
Divine Mercy pics st the altar is “unfounded speculation!”
Divine Mercy devotions popping into devotional books, websites, and Facebook pages is more “unfounded speculation.”
So how can you say Francis( who was ordained in the New Rite) is the Pope but then doubt the ordinations of N. O priests in general?
-
And the mere suggestion they would have doubtfully ordained conciliar priests perform marriages for their faithful in SSPX or Novus Ordo churches is equally preposterous!!
They are in total capitulation mode!
If Rome has announced nobody can refuse to say the NOM Mass and still be in Union with Rome, the SSPX will go quite a bit further than the hybrid Missal (a la Campos concelebrating the NOM). They just need to be patient so useful idiots like you can pretend there have been no changes!
You are a blatant lying troll, and I can’t believe you are tolerated here:
Divine Mercy pics st the altar is “unfounded speculation!”
Divine Mercy devotions popping into devotional books, websites, and Facebook pages is more “unfounded speculation.”
Read this and shut up
https://stas.org/en/news-events/news/letter-superior-general-friends-and-benefactors-n-89-55521 (https://stas.org/en/news-events/news/letter-superior-general-friends-and-benefactors-n-89-55521)
-
Read this and shut up
https://stas.org/en/news-events/news/letter-superior-general-friends-and-benefactors-n-89-55521 (https://stas.org/en/news-events/news/letter-superior-general-friends-and-benefactors-n-89-55521)
Actions speak louder than words:
See #28 and 78, and shut up:
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/catalog-of-compromise-change-and-contradiction-in-the-sspx/75/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/catalog-of-compromise-change-and-contradiction-in-the-sspx/75/)
-
So how can you say Francis( who was ordained in the New Rite) is the Pope but then doubt the ordinations of N. O priests in general?
You should ask Archbishop Lefebvre, Bishop Tissier, Fr. Peter Scott, Fr. Calderon, or read SSPX articles from prior to the election of BXVI (all of whom/which cast doubts upon the validity of the new rites, and particularly the new rite of episcopal consecration).
They didn’t seem to draw the same implications as you do (but the SSPX hasn’t changed!).
Ps: Francis was ordained by Archbishop Castellano (who was himself consecrated according to the old Rite in 1946), so the concern regarding invalid ordination due to invalid episcopal consecration does not arise; the concern in validity of the new rite of priestly ordination due to defect in form is much weaker than that regarding defect of form in the new rite of episcopal consecration.
-
A blunt little missive from Bishop Tissier:
“Thank you for sending me a copy of Dr. Rama Coomarawamy’s pamphlet “Le Drame Anglican.”
After reading it quickly, I concluded there was a doubt about the validity of episcopal consecration conferred according to the rite of Paul VI.
The [phrase] “spiritum principalem” in the form introduced by Paul VI is not sufficiently clear in itself and the accessory rites do not specify its meaning in a Catholic sense.
As regards Mgr Lazo, it would be difficult for us to explain these things to him; the only solution is not to ask him to confirm or ordain.
Yours very truly in Our Lord Jesus Christ,
+Bernard Tissier de Mallerais
PS: Another thought: Mgr Lazo has already confirmed “quite a few” [people] with us. Obviously, this is valid because “the Church supplies” (canon 209), because a simple priest can confirm with jurisdiction. And it is difficult to see how to make our doubt known to Mgr Lazo. So silence and discretion about this, please!
http://www.fathercekada.com/2013/11/28/sspx-bishops-on-bishops-and-bishops/ (http://www.fathercekada.com/2013/11/28/sspx-bishops-on-bishops-and-bishops/)
-
Unfortunately, that is the dilemma that non-sedevacantists have to deal with. No one has the competence, except the pope himself, to determine who is a saint worthy to be venerated.
Do you think that Padre Pio is a saint worthy of being included in the liturgy?
-
Do you think that Padre Pio is a saint worthy of being included in the liturgy?
Yes, but not because he was "canonized."
-
How would SSPX react to Rome revoking SP? Revoking it would show hostility to tradition (even if Benedict XVI's actions of "preserving tradition" through SP were feigned).
-
I recently warned the blinded SSPX that they would not be exempted from the recent Roman decrees incorporating new “saints” and Novus Ordo prefaces into the 1962 Missal (effectively making it a 2020 Missal) in two articles available here:
http://tradcatresist.blogspot.com/2020/03/two-excellent-articles-by-sean-johnson.html?m=1 (http://tradcatresist.blogspot.com/2020/03/two-excellent-articles-by-sean-johnson.html?m=1)
Some tried to argue that the new decrees were only optional.
Yet I rebutted that argument by noting the Roman modus operandi has remained the same since Vatican II:
Stress the optional nature to dissipate resistance, then later make the measures mandatory.
Now Rorate Coeli is reporting that Rome is sending a survey to all the bishops of the world, asking pointed questions about how Summorum Pontificuм has been implemented in their respective dioceses:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/04/breaking-important-summorum-under.html#more (https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/04/breaking-important-summorum-under.html#more)
With the PCED dissolved into the CDF (ie., the Commission being largely obsolete, with the SSPX already largely regularized), and the new hybrid missal just promulgated (optional for now, but not for long), it isn’t difficult to see where this is going:
Rome is laying the groundwork for abrogating SP, which, once the new 2020 hybrid Missal becomes mandatory, will be completely obsolete:
The 1962 Missal having disappeared, the raison d’etre for the motu proprio serves no purpose.
And just like that, the SSPX will have lost the 1962 Missal (which like their former PCED brothers, was pretty much the only thing they had been allowed to retain).
Some people never learn.
I think you are mistaken. The 1962 missal has not been abrogated. The new additions are completely optional. The new developments with respect to Summorum Pontificem are disconcerting but what happens remains to be seen.
-
Do you think that Padre Pio is a saint worthy of being included in the liturgy?
Do you think that Roncalli, Montini, and Wojtyla are saints worthy of being included in the liturgy?
-
I think you are mistaken. The 1962 missal has not been abrogated. The new additions are completely optional. The new developments with respect to Summorum Pontificem are disconcerting but what happens remains to be seen.
Please see OP regarding the allegedly “optional” nature of the decrees.
-
Do you think that Roncalli, Montini, and Wojtyla are saints worthy of being included in the liturgy?
What about the miracles that took place that certified the will of God that their holiness should be recognized?
-
Divine Mercy stuff has been promoted by some SSPX priests for year2, this is nothing new.
-
What about the miracles that took place that certified the will of God that their holiness should be recognized?
There are more holes in their cases of canonization than a 15 pound wheel of Swiss cheese. Please!
-
If Rome revokes SP, The SSPX will have to either go in with Rome or stay out and be Excommunicated again along with probably all the independent priests. This is what Bishop Fellay gets when he fraternizes with the devil. I will stick with going to the Resistance. This Corona virus shutdown by SSPX opened my eyes very wide. Their cries of all of us " Fighting for The Right's of Christ The King " were evidently so much hot air !!! They had the opportunity and blew it tragically .
-
You should ask Archbishop Lefebvre, Bishop Tissier, Fr. Peter Scott, Fr. Calderon, or read SSPX articles from prior to the election of BXVI (all of whom/which cast doubts upon the validity of the new rites, and particularly the new rite of episcopal consecration).
They didn’t seem to draw the same implications as you do (but the SSPX hasn’t changed!).
Ps: Francis was ordained by Archbishop Castellano (who was himself consecrated according to the old Rite in 1946), so the concern regarding invalid ordination due to invalid episcopal consecration does not arise; the concern in validity of the new rite of priestly ordination due to defect in form is much weaker than that regarding defect of form in the new rite of episcopal consecration.
That kind of makes sense to me... I can easily see how you could have sedeplensim while having invalid new rite episcopal consecrations pre 2005, but it doesn't make nearly as much intuitive sense post 2005 if you have a Pope who isn't even a bishop.
I find it surprising that there aren't Sedes who think the See was vacant since only 2005, for this reason.
-
only two popes, Pius V and Pius X, were canonized as saints within the past 500 years before the Vatican II revolution. Since the Conciliar religion began in 1965, three of the anti-popes, John XXIII, Paul VI, JPII have been "canonized" in order to validate the counterfeit church masquerading as "Catholic". The Conciliar church is a "saint" gumball machine.