.
But........... who is Fr. Altamira?
Recommended Reading!
Available (
here) is an English translation of Fr. Altamira's final letter to Fr. Bouchacourt, refusing a false "obedience" to the neo-SSPX which would have compromised his doctrinal integrity and with it the welfare of the souls in his care.
.
Also now available (
here) is the text of Fr. Altamira's sermon of 22nd December, 2013, in which he condemns the infamous second intention of the latest bogus Rosary crusade. Amongst other things, Father says:
"In 'the World of Tradition' we now have a new Rosary "crusade". The second intention of this “crusade” is wrong or at least ambiguous (as always: ambiguous language), and as such, it is not acceptable. Which is this point number two or the second intention? We should pray:
“Pour le retour de la Tradition dans l’Eglise”: “for the return of Tradition within the Church.”
(A) If we understand the word "Tradition" in the strict, theological sense: "Tradition" is the set of Truths that God reveals in oral form, it forms THE DEPOSIT OF THE FAITH. We cannot ask for “the return to Tradition within the Church.”
[The Districts of Great Britain, USA, and (English version) Asia have had "...
to Tradition..."]
The Catholic Church can never lose Tradition, because Tradition cannot ever be outside of her. To be truly “The Catholic Church”, she must have, as she always has had, the written DEPOSIT (written Revelation: Sacred Scripture) and oral DEPOSIT (oral Revelation: Tradition). It cannot be asked, “the return to Tradition within the Church.”
Once again: it is wrong then to ask for the return
of Tradition within the Church: Tradition has never gone; Tradition can never leave the Catholic Church.
B) If, in the second intention of the Rosary Crusade, the word “Tradition” means us, the SSPX, then we cannot ask for the “return to Tradition within the Church” because WE HAVE NEVER LEFT THE CHURCH, because we have never changed one iota of Catholic Doctrine, of the Faith of always, of the Popes’ Teaching prior to Vatican II. This council did change the Faith, did change our Catholic religion, and created a false church "THE CONCILIAR CHURCH” as Archbishop Lefebvre called it.
This expression, with AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE, implies our return to “The conciliar church of Francis” to “the church of Vatican II.” Also implied is -perhaps- making an agreement with the conciliar Rome, once again ...
And all this instead of asking for: The return of ROME (Modernist Rome) to Tradition, her return to the true Catholic Church, which neo-Rome has really has left, thanks to the Vatican II and the things that followed it. It is necessary to speak clearly, we must speak out.
All this instead of asking for: The return of the Roman authorities, Francis, to the Catholic Faith, the True Catholic Church."
Read the full sermon
here.
Both docuмents, and many others, can be found on our Reference Materials page.
.
.
.
[Remember: this is Colombia, where the
District of South America officially listed the Second Intention as
"Por el retorno de Roma a la Tradición católica” (
“For the return of Rome to Catholic Tradition”).]
.