"And I beheld, and heard the voice of one eagle flying through the midst of heaven,
saying with a loud voice: Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth....
[Apocalypse (Revelation) 8:13]

Wednesday, February 21, 2018



What will happen in the General Chapter of the Society of Saint Pius X?

From July 11 to 21, the fourth General Chapter of the Society of St. Pius X will be celebrated.

Many Catholics are concerned about the evolution of the Vatican. The discussions around Amoris Lætitia or the attacks against priestly celibacy in the perspective of the announced Synod of the Amazon, perplex the faithful.

Cardinals against cardinals, bishops against bishops. Not a few Catholics of goodwill now recognize that Archbishop Lefebvre was right. That is why the eyes of many, even outside the ranks of the traditionalists, turn towards the general chapter.

The District Bulletin of Germany has interviewed the General Secretary of the Society of St. Pius X, Fr. Christian Thouvenot, who is in charge of the preparation of the chapter.

Mitteilungsblatt: We would like to inform the faithful of the 2018 General Chapter process. Could you start by introducing yourself and explaining your role in the general house?
Father Christian Thouvenot: I have been a priest since 2000 and I have been the general secretary since 2008. My job is to supervise the correspondence of the general house with seminars and districts, and also with the members, to keep the members' files up to date. priests, brothers, Oblates and seminarians. I am in charge of registering the deliberations of the General Council and transmitting its decisions to the interested superiors. I also take care of the archives and the communication of the Fraternity.

The statutes written by Bishop Marcel Lefebvre foresee that the Superior General must seek the papal recognition of the Fraternity of St. Pius X. Will the question of a personal Prelature be discussed?
In fact, our statutes provide for the Fraternity to carry out "the necessary procedures to become a pontifical right" . [ Canon 589 of the Code of Canon Law of 1983, which is the code used by Ménzingen in his negotiations with Rome: "An institute of consecrated life is called of pontifical right when it has been erected by the Apostolic See or approved by it by formal decree and of diocesan right, when, having been erected by a diocesan Bishop, he has not received the decree of approval from the Apostolic See. " ] This was, in addition, Bishop Lefebvre's concern against the unjust and illegal suppression of the Fraternity in 1975 and at the time of the canonical recognition proposals that he formulated in 1987. But this question of our legal status is a consequence of the abnormal situation of the Church and the bad process that was done to us. (...) To answer your question, it is likely that during the Chapter the question of the status of the personal Prelature will arise. But it is only the Superior General who directs the Fraternity and is responsible for the relations of the Tradition with the Holy See. [Note - in passing - that Father Thouvenot pretends, abusively and absurdly, that Bishop Fellay is the representative of all the traditionalists of the world (!)]

Well, let's see: the liberal leadership of the SSPX now maintains that the traitorous and suicidal agreement with apostate Rome is something governed by the statutes, something that must be done -then- in the name of the virtue of obedience and respect for the law. ..

It is, of course, a trick based on a false legalism.

Appointment of the statutes of the FSSPX:

1. The Fraternity, in its beginnings, will depend on the bishop of the place that erected it in "pia unión" and recognized its statutes, in accordance with the prescriptions of canon law.
2. Therefore, while the Fraternity is of diocesan status, the members who are destined to the priesthood, before their final commitment, must be incardinated in a diocese, unless a special pardon granted by the Sacred Congregation of the religious authorize to be incardinated in the Fraternity. When the Fraternity has houses in different dioceses, it will make the necessary procedures to be of pontifical right.

Do the accordists now conveniently forget that, in 1975, the abolition of the SSPX was decreed? In spite of that, does Ménzingen claim that these statutory norms maintain their validity? In a while they will say that the priests of the Fraternity should be incardinated in the dioceses because that is what the statutes mandate (in the same point 2 cited)? Or that in order to be incardinated in the Fraternity, the pardon of the Congregation of the religious (idem) is needed?

Will Ménzingen claim that this other paragraph of the statutes is also in force ?:

The parish ministry, the preaching of parish missions, without local limits, are also works to which the Fraternity is dedicated. These ministries will be the object of contracts with local Ordinaries, to allow the Fraternity to exercise its apostolate according to its particular grace. (Chapter III, n ° 5)

Let us now confront the words of Fr. Thouvenot with the words of Mons. Faure in the preface to the statutes of the SAJM :

The statutes of the SAJM intend to preserve intact the spirit of the statutes given by Monsignor Lefebvre to the FSSPX. They also intend to keep the letter of these statutes to the extent possible and taking into account the present circumstances. Thus, certain parts of the statutes of the SSPX have had to be suppressed because they are anachronistic, such as those related to certain coordinations with the diocesan clergy (Chapter III, No. 5, Chapter IV, No. 1 and No. 2).

Let the readers notice that Mons. Faure suppressed the same paragraph that the accordists now use for their purposes, and he also suppressed the other paragraphs reproduced in this entry .

And remember also that the Superior General of the SAJM added to the statutes this very important anti-liberal, antimodernist, antiacuedist norm:

From the Second Vatican Council, the holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Catholic doctrine and the whole life of the Church are attacked by the liberal and modernist Hierarchy. Because the Catholic priesthood has the essential duty to combat liberalism and modernism in defense of violated divine rights, the Society rules out any possibility of canonical regularization through bilateral agreement, unilateral recognition, or whatever it may be, as long as Catholic hierarchy does not return to the Tradition of the Church. (Cap II, n ° 5)