"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]

Thursday, April 3, 2014

False Resistance? Or Masked Pseudo Traditionalism?

A very theologically poor analysis written by the SSPX as an article to try and refute the Marian Corps for their true resistance against Bishop Fellays "wishy washy"  tendencies which truly is modernism/liberalism in action. I will highlight its fundamental errors. I will attach some of Archbishop Lefebvre's own quotes for support:

The common error I find amongst the Neo-SSPX is the fact they fail to realize that we have non catholics "holding" our buildings starting from the top. Yes, they are the legal and lawful owners of "Catholic" buildings but do they have the Faith? In the negative! And this the SSPX refuses to understand in its fullness(that they are destroyers). Simply reverting to an ill understood conception of what sedevacantism is leads them further into error. For, do true traditionalists see that we have a Pope? Yes! Do we think he has the Catholic Faith? No! It is not sedevacanist to realize we are dealing with a heretical/schismatic NewChurch with heretical/schismatic Popes, proof? Lets ask Archbishop Lefebvre himself.

"What could be clearer? We must [according to Rome] henceforth obey and be faithful to the Conciliar Church, no longer to the Catholic Church. Right there is our whole problem: we are suspended a divinis by the Conciliar Church, the Conciliar Church, to which we have no wish to belong! That Conciliar Church is a schismatic church because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship… The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever EXTENT Pope, Bishops, priests, or the faithful adhere to this new church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Reflections on his suspension a divinis, July 29, 1976)"

The supposed "false spirit" of resistance the SSPX claims in reality stems from a "watered down" pseudo traditionalist approach much like John Venari and the Remnant who try to seat themselves on both sides of the "Council" fence when we can have nothing to do with the other side which is indeed heretical and schismatic objectively speaking. I call it the Lefebvre "light" approach, that is, never getting the full "Budweiser" that Archbishop Lefebvre so truly stood for. So, much to the contrary to the new pacifist SSPX approach, the Marian Corps is engaged in Crusade like true resistors to those "aliens" who have occupied our buildings(see***). St Athanasius is not impressed with the current SSPX! We are dealing with far worse times than the Arian crisis and never once did He think those Arians were Catholics. Therefore, the same principle applies to the modernist heretics who occupy our buildings. I can attest having been in a SSPX chapel for over a year and not much is said from the pulpit against the modernists at all its quite sad, pathetic and disturbing. Being "spiritual" like many protestants attest to, does not get you into heaven, but rather holding the Faith whole and inviolate does! Better to enter into heaven swinging away at the enemies of the Church then to be sent to hell for refusing to fight on the Lord's side in the day of battle which truly does not lead one not into a "deepening of virtue" but in reality into complacency, indifferentism and stagnation of the soul occurs. I  find it "not spiritual" to see clergy without any fight. Which Saints do they(SSPX) refer to in this hour of fight and crisis? Did Jesus not love the Pharisees enough to give them the "whip" or did St. Pius X  not love the modernists enough to presents his "fists" to their face? Yea, we can lead a life of charity and fight with fists and the whip all the same as we watch these pseudo trads who have seemed to nearly given up altogether and who see us as being uncharitable when it is they who are not being real with themselves nor being charitable to those enemies of the Church by hiding behind "nice".

Two, is this false notion that something is still lacking in the SSPX in terms of a canonical recognition; the error to pursue, in my opinion, stems from both bad theology but also a falling down to human respect as to try to "fit in" with the Conciliar Church which has lost the Faith. Prudence? Or Self-Love? It is said the modernists who occupy the buildings cannot be said to be "destroyers of the" Faith but once again failure to understand objective vs subjective; on the objective level we need not know the interior nature of a man. Thus, indeed, we have modernist destroyers of the Faith who have occupied Catholic buildings for over 50 years EVEN if they ignorant. The Neo-SSPX does not want to call the modernists destroyers of the Faith yet Archbishop Lefebvre did so and called them much worse. He called them antichrists which they are? Once again the Neo-SSPX math does not add up! More Lefebvre "light" for you all. The Church remains in TRADITION, that is, those resisting Vatican II and yes I firmly believe these Conciliar Popes will be formally excommunicated/anathematized like Honorius for siding/teaching heresy! Oh gosh! What an un-catholic thought says the pseudo trad!

Third, a failure to understand that to boldly resist and not keep as "quiet little mouses" for fear of breaking external piety does no good when so many now are already absorbed into the pseudo trad position starting from Bishop Fellay on downward. All of heaven cries out in nature's revolt because His own sons wont speak up and yet I am to remain silent?  Not this Crusader nor the Army He has asked me to lead! Let us all be reminded it was a miracle of Our Lady that kept the SSPX from being thrown into heresy and schism a few years ago which only demonstrated the theological ineptitude of the SSPX leaders. The pseudo trad mask came off in April 2012! As a writer myself who will be covering the path to the "spiritual marriage" with our Lady and Lord I find it unbecoming that somehow I am now a false resister for calling out these pseudo trads.  So as not to have a "holy hatred" toward these men destroying the Faith. False resistance? Or theological ineptitude?... Or cowardice under the guise of "piety"? I do not believe much of the SSPX and its leaders can even say the word heresy let alone try to identify what is or what isnt. What it is(SSPX  style "resistance") in reality is a failure to understand the true nature of Love and of Love's defense for the Faith. A Faith which was nearly handed away by Bishop Fellay like St John the Baptists head in April 2012. Again, having been in a SSPX chapel had I not known it was SSPX I would have thought I was in a FSSP or some other pseudo trad group. At times nearly having to have to walk out of some of the timid sermons and poor theology presented. I spoke with some parishioners who were theologically just as bad as the priest. Unable to truly see the real difference between the Conciliar Church and Catholic Church they march under a false charity for not giving the truth; for Truth and Charity are One. They (SSPX) simply have very little fight, if any left, and are objectively speaking hiding behind the pretense of appearing spiritual when in reality the "silence" in this stage of the apostasy is treason and high treason! Even St Catherine banged on the doors of the Monasteries of her times and told the monks practicing the life of perfection to get of their duffs! But I suppose she was uncharitable too. Quit looking so impious Catherine!

Beware, do not fall for the pseudo trad guise of appearing to be pious when in reality it is a weak and impotent spirit to fight which is what our Lady and Lord desires. And in union with Heaven's Voice I tell you to carry on with the fight! Until the SSPX loses this pseudo trad mentality and theology I can give no other recourse but to tell you to  "beware" entering their buildings for it is a not a true spirit of resistance nor what Archbishop Lefebvre truly taught this is evident. Nay, but a position that "smells of" or borders "self love" encompassed by poor theology that Archbishop Lefebvre himself would detest. Yea, it is not at all prudent to hand yourselves over to men who neither have but also destroy the Catholic Faith(even in practical agreement). You say imitate the virtues? Why not thence try on the virtue of patience? And in Union with our Lady and Lord demonstrate this rather than read the latest theologically inept piece from the Remnant? Why thence does Bishop Fellay not practice humility and be willing to apologize for his theological blunders? Why not, if any of this is not possible, for Bishop Fellay to practice charity and resign altogether for he has already caused damage that only the Immaculate Heat of Our Lady can now fix.

From article:
That being said, can we really consider this authority as working for the destruction of the Faith?

*The SSPX does not understand that they are objectively speaking and always resorts to the tactic of calling true traditionalists,..sedevacanists, when they do not realize the "pseudo traditionalism" they profess and have fallen into much like John Venari or the Remnant. April 2012 speaks loudly!

To conclude the SSPX asks:
"On the pretext of the crisis in the Church, must we resign ourselves to no longer trying to imitate the saints?"

I would respond in return for the SSPX to read up on St. Nicholas or St Athanisius who boldly resisted and did not have to make excuse for the language and certainactions they undertook into describing and dealing with their peers and even superiors all the while remaining Saints all the same. Thus, in the end, it is the SSPX who falsely resists and whose superiors have led so many astray by their theological ineptitude and disastrous actions towards those who did not want to go along for the Neo- SSPX test drive under the new pseudo trad approach. A VERY sincere public apology ought be made publicly by Bishop Fellay towards all those he has caused so much strife and division toward all the while himself seemingly to have lost the faith. Dangerous times are present when average men(laity) fall for this tactic of "calm appearance" while losing the faith over one who keeps it and will raise his fists like Nicholas or St Pius X! Who, in return will not remain obedient to the one who has already objectively speaking crossed over unto the other side of the modernist/liberal fence. We can practice the way of perfection wilst having a holy hatred toward the new religion don't let any pseudo trad, Bishop Fellay included, tell you otherwise on the matter. Let us all pray for Peter II's arrival and an end to the Revolution! Deus Vult! In the end, I feel like I am going to the local "used car" lot and am greeted by the salesman every time I open up one of these SSPX articles in their weak attempt to try and explain a  "practical agreement" with Rome under the guise of "prudence". I come, like other individuals to Bishop Fellay's "lot", knowing that an overdressed man with a persuasive  personality is going to come out and try to "sell" and yet I know all I am going to here is a certain error in theology, delusion, and further nonsense in his sales pitch. A vain attempt to try and upgrade this futile position of the Neo-SSPX. In attempts to sell me this "used pinto" at the jaguar price sadly many are leaving the "lot" and being turned off and away from the Neo-SSPX and rightfully so. Avoid these pseudo traditionalists and their apologists. There is a reason I removed all of them off of my social media outlets and will continue in charity to call them out. Support your Marian Corps! TradCatKnight does....

On Selfless Love and the need to be "irate" or have holy hatred" toward the modernists who occupy our buildings:

One Sins by Not Becoming Duly Irate

The liberal myth spreads that a man should never become irate; he should always be mild-mannered and unruffled. This is not, however, the teaching of the Church. St. John Chrysostom and St. Thomas Aquinas explain that it is not only good, but also necessary to become irate for a due cause. Doing this, a man acts according to reason, not passion. If he fails to be irate before evil and punish it as it should be punished, then he sins.

St. John Chrysostom

Only the person who becomes irate without reason, sins. Whoever becomes irate for a just reason is not guilty. Because, if ire were lacking, the science of God would not progress, judgments would not be sound, and crimes would not be repressed.

Further, the person who does not become irate when he has cause to be, sins. For an unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices: it fosters negligence, and stimulates not only the wicked, but above all the good, to do wrong.

(Homily XI super Matheum,   1c, nt.7)

St. Thomas Aquinas

Ire may be understood in two ways.

In one way, as a simple movement of the will that inflicts punishment not through passion, but by virtue of a judgment of the reason: and in this case, without a doubt, lack of ire is a sin. This is how Chrysostom understands ire when he says: ‘Ire, when it has a cause, is not ire but judgment. For properly speaking, ire is a movement of passion. And when a man is irate with just cause, his ire does not derive from passion. Rather, it is an act of judgment, not of ire.”

In another way, ire can be understood as a movement of the sensitive appetite agitated by passion with bodily excitation. This movement is a necessary sequel in man to the previous movement of his will, since the lower appetite naturally follows the movement of the higher appetite unless some obstacle prevents it. Hence the movement of ire in the sensitive appetite cannot be lacking altogether, unless the movement of the will is altogether lacking or weak. Consequently, the lack of the passion of ire is also a vice, as it is the lack of movement in the will to punish according to the judgment of reason.

(Summa Theologiae, II, II, q. 158, art. 8)

May Our Lady and Lord protect this Crusade as they are behind and it is growing fast, Ave Maria. Pray for the SSPX!

***Archbishop Lefebvre:
"We would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion. It is not the subjects that make the superiors, but the superiors who make the subjects… Amongst the whole Roman curia, amongst all the world’s bishops who are progressives, I would have been completely swamped. I would have been able to do nothing… [As for the Pope appointing conservative bishops] I don’t think it is a true return to Tradition. Just as in a fight when the troops are going a little too far ahead and one holds them back, so they are slightly putting the brakes on the impulse of Vatican II because the supporters of the council are going to far… the supposedly conservative bishops are wholly supportive of the council and of the liturgical reforms… No, all of that is tactics, which you have to use in any fight. You have to avoid excesses… [Asked about signs of benevolence to Tradition] There are plenty of signs showing us that what you are talking about is simply exceptional and temporary… So I do not think it is opportune to try contacting Rome, I think we must still wait. Wait, unfortunately, for the situation to get still worse on their side. But up till now, they do not want to recognize the fact… That is why what can look like a concession is in reality merely a maneuver to separate us from the largest number of faithful possible. This is the perspective in which they seem to be always giving a little more and even going very far. We must absolutely convince our faithful that it is no more than a maneuver, that it is dangerous to put oneself into the hands of the conciliar bishops and Modernist Rome. It is the greatest danger threatening our people. If we have struggled for twenty years to avoid the conciliar errors, it was not in order, now, to put ourselves into the hands of those professing these errors. (Archbishop Lefebvre, Interview, Fideliter, 1989)

For more hard hitting Archbishop Lefebvre quotes:


1 comment:

  1. Archbishop Lefebvre:

    "I refuse to contribute to the destruction of the Church, because now, they are destroying the Church. I refuse to go to my death, and before Jesus Christ the Judge, and hear that ‘you destroyed the Church.’ I refuse. I refuse to give a contribution to the destruction of the Church."
    "Some say the Council was good and has good, but only the reform is bad. But that is not true! Why? Because when Rome gave the reform, they always say the reforms they do, they do in the name of the Council. In the name of the Council! It is evident that all reform came from the Council, and if the reform is bad, it is impossible that the Council is good and all reforms are bad. Because that is the authentic interpretation of the Council by Rome!"
    "...The Holy See and the nuncios, they are against the Catholic State in the name of the Council! In the name of the Declaration of Religious Freedom! The first time I heard this, I was in Colombia. I read in the paper, when I was in Colombia, that there is a change in the constitution of the Republic of Colombia. They changed the first article, which said that only the Catholic religion is recognized by the Republic of Colombia. The Secretary of the Episocpal conference said, 'In the name of the declaration of religious freedom, we ask the President of Colombia to remove his supreme act (of removing the Catholic religion as supreme) for his Consitution.' And within two years, he says, 'We ask, in the name of the Holy See to the President of Colombia, to change his article in the declaration of the Constitution.' ...I don’t accept the Council! Because you are destroying the Catholic State in the name of the Council! It is sure! It is evident!"
    "This Council gives the same rights to error as to Truth! That is impossible."
    "This new faith, it is a new religion. It is a protestant religion. That is a fact! How is it possible that the Pope gives the authorization to this change? How is it possible that the Pope can sign this constitution [on liturgical change]? It is a deep mystery."
    "If I take the position of the Council, I am betraying my Mother Church."