Smoke of Satan Entering SSPX????????????????????????????

Corruptio Optimi Pessima: Has The Smoke Of Satan Entered The SSPX?

 

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2016/09/07/smoke-of-satan-entering-sspx/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

11 comments on “Smoke of Satan Entering SSPX????????????????????????????

  1. I have written here before that Mundabor’s personal histrionics are to be evaluated with the greatest caution.

    I repeat that advice.

    Rorate Caeli is also expressing real concern over the “deal” by posing a poll question whether one would be sane or insane to accept one. Barring inviolable guarantees favorable to the Society’s freedom from ModRoman and local ordinaries’ control, it would be suicidal for the SSPX to accept such a “deal.”

    Nevertheless, the volcanic and gravely over-the-top “dramatics” Mundabor employs do not usefully serve anyone. If nothing else, Catholics may not defame the papacy itself, even if any reigning pontiff represents a tragic agenda.

    My one piece of advice to the Society and its followers is that of Bl. Pius IX who wrote a bishop who had asked what should be done were a pope ever to propose heresy: “Ignore him.”

    Both Benedict XVI and Francis have acknowledged that the Society is Catholic.

    And no informed Catholic can accept Vatican II as a council since it is filled with what the late Canon Hesse, STD, STL made plain were not only contradictions but blasphemies and grave heresies.

    Overtures from ModRome can be safely ignored without endangering souls.

    Engaging in vitriolic exaggerations may not be so easily ignored, however. Even Francis, in his worst choice of terms for traditionalists, has not quite sunk to Mundabor’s level.

  2. Tim, the post is based on a fundamental error. The bishop to be chosen will not be ‘from outside’ but from within the SSPX. An existing member.

    Again, the SSPX is part of the Church and yes, therefore in all things lawful subject to the Roman Pontiff. To claim anything to the contrary is not Catholic !

    The SSPX was approved by a Pope who himself was a modernist ! That Modernist gave us both the errors of Vatican II and the New Mass.

    The SSPX and it’s work doesn’t depend on Pope Francis but on the providence of God. That same providence has carried it along and continues to do so.

  3. Quote ” A bishop is appointed. This bishop will be picked by the Evil Clown among a terna chosen by the SSPX.”.

    Wow, even I haven’t gone as far as Mundabor and called Jorge Bergoglio an “evil clown”.
    Evil yes and clown yes but never have I used those words together.
    Seriously though, the SSPX (and Bishop Fellay in particular) would need their heads examined IMO if they accept any agreement with modernist Rome.
    This is a trap.
    I’ve always respected Bishop Fellay and the SSPX but if they fall for this trap then they weren’t as smart as I thought and it will hand the modernists total victory!
    And then we’re all in trouble.
    God help us

  4. I’m the odd man out. I don’t see a problem with going along as long as they get to consecrate four bishops for their future. Then they can abide with the arrangements as long as Rome doesn’t try to update them. Once Rome tries, there’s no reason whatsoever that the SSPX needs to go along. The SSPX needn’t change, as far as I can tell. But the agreement shows everyone that the SSPX is Catholic, and that will never change again.

    On the other hand, if the SSPX says no, and then goes on to consecrate bishops against the will of the pope, they’re done.

    I see only an upside.

  5. Cyprian,

    I agree with you.

    However, at this point what most readers don’t grasp is that most of this is actually all speculation. There are various options that Rome may present for looking at the way the SSPX will be governed and so while Bp. Fellay mentions one of them, this option has not been as such looked at in any detail as there are various other things still holding up any agreement, namely the question of the Council.

    The SSPX has continued to affirm that it will not accept the errors of the council and so the text that the SSPX will be asked to signed is not set as there isn’t any real clarity or agreement from the Roman authorities.

    Once a clear text is set forward that does not require any compromise, is agreed upon, then all the various other issues will still have to be discussed both by the SSPX superiors and also by the Roman authorities. And so, contrary to all the hype, there is still a long way to go before any resolve will come of this matter or any real decisions are taken.

  6. I trust Bsp. Fellay to make this decision. It’s way above my pay grade.

  7. A primary issue is, “In what sense may a valid Catholic hierarch or cleric refuse error, even if imposed by a pope or even an un-council – which is exactly what Vatican II was.”

    My answer: “Said hierarch or cleric has a duty to God to ALWAYS refuse error. He may NEVER endanger his solemn obligation to hand on in fidelity what the Church always and everywhere and by all held as Sacred Tradition.”

    And if you can find more than miniscule evidence that such has been the case these days, you can bet that said hierach or cleric has already or will eventually be banished to the hinterlands, even excommunicated.

    The liberal wackos are high on what the Japanese in WWII called “Victory Disease.”

    They see themselves as the “clerical” equals of Obama and Merkel and Tony Blair.

    Ain’t nuttin’ gonna stop ’em now.

    And, to a man, their insanities must be opposed, reversed and condemned, anathema sit.

  8. As an ousider, that is, not a member of the SSPX, may I be bold enough to add a very sincerely held thought.
    The Church today is in desparate straits. The liturgy, indeed Our Lord Himself, in the Blessed Sacrament, is being abused, degraded and trivalised, as at no time before in Church history.The homosexual lobby are gaining ground and exerting undreamed of power. Our Pope keeps making statements that are either heterodox or just nonsensical.

    I truly believe that getting the SSPX back into full membership of the Church, a status that even the most liberal of bishops could not argue against, could be exactly what is needed at this time. I think the time has come for the SSPX to “come in from the cold” and join the rest of us in the battle within the Church for the survival of the Faith. The SSPX might be able to do a lot more from within than they have been able to do from without.
    Sure, the Pope and others, may have ulterior motives for accepting them back. So what? I’ve got to the stage where I suspect almost all of the current regime’s motives as being ulterior. Let them plot. Let them scheme. Our Lord has the victory, and as long as we are on His side we are on the winning side.
    I think the SSPX can do us more good by coming back.

  9. Here are some thoughts, a few of which I don’t see anyone talking about, but which strike me as being of maximum importance.

    A case can be made that, even if it is obvious that Francis could only be wanting to make a deal in order to destroy us, his plan could backfire, just as Satan’s plan to destroy Christ did. Still, we, unlike Christ, are not allowed to go willingly to death, and even Christ would not have been allowed to go to *spiritual* death, which is the one planned for us. We must use all natural and supernatural prudence.

    Personally, I think that the Vatican plan will NOT backfire on them. There are a few very foundational facts that must be kept in mind.

    1) Bishop Fellay has already shown, and is still showing, evidence of a most distressing naiveté. He’s not at all streetwise. What is worse, he THINKS he IS. Apparently his first and second assistants are similar in this respect. Such men are the easiest targets for deceivers.

    2) For some time, the SSPX seminaries have been producing a more lax and liberal type of priest. The purge of some of the hardcore in 2012 and following augmented the power of these liberals.

    3) If a deal is made, among the rank and file, more of the hardliners/oldtimers — who have already been decimated by Menzingen’s stupidities of 2012 and later — will join the Resistance. They will be replaced by newcomers, who as a whole will be relatively quite liberal and uneducated. Some of these will certainly be conscious infiltrators. BTW, those who are NOT will be MORE, not less, effective at weakening the SSPX.

    4) A principle must be respected: Rejecting a *legitimate and lawful* order of a legitimate superior has no legitimate excuse. On the one hand, if the SSPX is offered “canonical recognition”, and truly with no strings attached which require us to sin in any way, this would constitute a legitimate and lawful order of a legitimate superior. Hence, *all other things being equal*, to reject it would be grave disobedience. On the other hand, it would still not necessarily include a rejection of the authority per se, and hence would not necessarily be schismatic. Further, all other things are NOT equal, because…

    5) Another principle must be respected: Inferiors do not form superiors; it’s the other way around (Arb. Lefebvre). To put it another way, a subject cannot in good conscience accept *in practice* to be under the rule of someone else *when they disagree in fundamental life principles*. In such case, there MUST eventually be conflicts, where the superior commands or requests something that violates the conscience of the subject. No kind of prior deal-on-paper can prevent this, for paper deals can always be abrograted by the superior — if he truly is accepted *in practice* as the superior. (If he is accepted in theory, but not in practice, it would be OK to make a deal — except there would then be no point in making that deal, and worse, it would objectively be a fraud to do so.) Even if a paper deal could be perpetually binding under the present pope, which it can’t, it would not hold a future pope. And even if a paper deal could be binding on those things treated within it, it could not cover all things that could possibly be sources of conflict. Therefore, it cannot be said that a “canonical recognition”, of ANY kind, under the present circumstances, has no strings attached. Only one of two things can happen with ANY kind of “canonical recognition”: a) The strain of trying to square a circle; to resist authorities who want us to compromise the Faith, while still pretending that we are obedient, will eventually lead us to actually compromise, and thus sin. b) Before this happens, the authorities will genuinely convert to a Catholic mindset. We are allowed to hope and pray that b) will occur, but we are NOT allowed to PRESUME that it will. ALL indications are that it won’t, at least not under this pontificate. But if we cannot presume that b) will occur, we must presume that a) will occur.

    Again, these are facts; they are not speculations, or possibilities, or what-ifs.

    I conclude: The Archbishop was right. NO DEAL CAN BE MADE WITH ROME UNTIL ROME RETURNS TO THE FAITH. To make a deal without that condition is objectively to enter into a near occasion of sin against the Faith. This is a matter of objective facts. There are no ifs, ands, or buts that can outweigh them.

    Of course, the ifs, ands and buts WILL be made anyway. Here are a few:

    1) But we are falling into a schismatic mentality!
    Answer: Who is this “we”? Maybe YOU are, but I’m not. This ‘schismatic mentality’ is a chained wolf. Not to say that it is not, indeed, a grave danger that must be avoided, but it is quite easy to avoid it. We just keep teaching the true Catholic principles of true obedience, what constitutes true schism, etc.
    2) We could do so much more good if the stigma of irregularity were removed. Conservative people would flock to the SSPX, and we would become so much stronger!
    Answer: This is extremely foolish. Conservative people would NOT flock to the SSPX. Rather, NEO-Conservatives (read: less liberal liberals) would come to us. And, as said above, more of the hardcore/oldtimers would leave in disgust. All this would greatly weaken the SSPX, and make its fall nearly inevitable.
    3) But those “hardcore/oldtimers” are actually closet sedevacantists. We don’t want them anyway!
    Answer: No they aren’t. Almost all the sedes are already gone from among us. Those few that remain are generally known to us, and have little or no influence. If you think the real hardcore/oldtimers are closet sedevacantists, rather than simply REAL Traditionalists, you don’t know what a real Traditionalist is — and thus you are with the ignorant and/or liberals, and thus prove my point that we are already being weakened.

Leave a Reply