"Formally adhered" to the "Schism" Yet?: Well, What are we Waiting for!
The quotation attributed to Archbishop Lefebvre above was ACTUALLY
signed by ALL OF THE SSPX superiors lead by Father Schmidberger after
the Consecrations of 1988. There is no doubt, of course, that Archbishop
Lefebvre "approved the message."
'Matters have come to this pass: the people
have left their houses of prayer and assembled in the deserts, — a pitiable
sight; women and children, old men, and men otherwise infirm, wretchedly faring
in the open air, amid most profuse rains and snow-storms and winds and frosts
of winter; and again in summer under a scorching sun. To this they submit
because they will have no part of the wicked Arian leaven'.
– St. Basil the Great; Epistulae 242, 376
AD.
"Ecclesia Dei Adflicta" this is at the foundation of the
Fraternity of St. Peter. "the Church of God" is "afflicted." Why is "the
Church of God" afflicted? Because [Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre]
"frustrated all the efforts made during the previous years to ensure the
full communion with the Church of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius
X." During these efforts, "the Apostolic See" "has shown comprehension"
to the "limits of the possible." ---- In other words, the Vatican has no
clue, from a Catholic perspective, about the destruction of Catholic
doctrine and of the Catholic faith of hundreds of millions.
This "affliction" is not too traumatic since "the number of persons
directly involved in these events might be few" --- minimizing the
opposition to the Modernist take over of the institutional organization
of the Church. These fated few who have broken with the "unity" of the
Church have not been faithful to Christ and his Church.
This act of "disobedience" "implies in practice the rejection of the
Roman primacy and constitutes a SCHISMATIC ACT." In other words, the
Fraternity of St. Peter is based upon the agreed proposition that
Archbishop Lefebvre was a schismatic whose defense of Tradition [but in
the "wrong way" of course] put him OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
How would a prelate who was out to defend Tradition end up "outside"
the Catholic Church? Well, because he did not have the correct notion of
Tradition. He thought it had something to do with its root in the Latin
word tradere which means "to transmit, to hand over, to give for
safekeeping" --- originally, the term was used in Roman Law to refer to
the concept of legal transfers and inheritance. But, he was very very
wrong. As the founding document of the "traditionalist" Order of St.
Peter's says, "The root [emphasis theirs --- meaning the Vatican
website] of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and
contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take
sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition [I
was under the impression that it had to do with the handing down of the
Deposit of Faith sealed up some 1,900 years ago, but --- wrong again!],
which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught [at least he admits
that it all stems from Vatican II], 'comes from the Apostles and
PROGRESSES in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is
GROWTH in INSIGHT [notice purely human "insight" here] into the
realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in
various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers
who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate
sense of spiritual realities which they EXPERIENCE. And it comes from
the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of
succession in the episcopate [right to do what, we may ask], the sure
charism of truth." ---- in other words, if you object to our new
magisterium --- based on the "developing ideas" of the faithful and the
bishops and popes, you do not have the truth.
Friends, the above is a TOTALLY MODERNIST RENDITION OF REVELATION AND
TRADITION. It is in fact such a classically modernist rendition of
revelation and tradition that it seems hard to believe that someone like
Fr. Bisig would agree to base his new order "in the Church" on it.
When has the Fraternity of St. Peter EVER renounced the explicitly
modernist language of this motu proprio? When have they indicated their
regret that their religious order was BASED DIRECTLY ON THE
EXCOMMUNICATION OF ARCHBISHOP MARCEL LEFEBVRE --- WHICH HAS STILL NOT
BEEN LIFTED!
The modernist nature of this document is emphasized further by John
Paul II when he writes ---- and let us not forget that he wrote it or at
least authorized its wording --- "Indeed, the extent and depth of the
teaching of the Second Vatican Council call for a renewed commitment to
deeper study in order to reveal clearly the Council's continuity with
Tradition [So this is --- legally speaking --- the "tradition" that the
FSSP is standing up for and propagating, a "tradition" that is in accord
with Vatican II heresies. In other words, a "tradition" which is not
traditional or even orthodox.], especially in points of doctrine [So
---- FSSP adherent Chris Ferrara, Vatican II DOES INVOLVE DOCTRINE WHICH
THE "MAGISTERIUM" DEMANDS CATHOLICS ADHERE TO] which, PERHAPS BECAUSE
THEY ARE NEW [So they admit it!], have not yet been well understood by
some sections of the Church [probably some Idaho gun-toting missal
thumper!].
So what does John Paul II --- oh, I am sorry Michael Matt --- St.
John Paul II [still have to find the video of when he calls John Paul
II and Mother Teresa "saints" -- let me know if you know which one it is
so that I can put it up] say should happen with and what is the status
of those deplorables who continue to follow Archbishop Lefebvre ? Here
we go, "all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the
movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of
remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic
Church AND OF CEASING THEIR SUPPORT IN ANY WAY FOR THAT MOVEMENT.
EVERYONE SHOULD BE AWARE THAT FORMAL ADHERENCE TO THE SCHISM [I think
that going to an SSPX church for 24 years should do it!] is a grave
offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed
by the Church's law."
To my knowledge the "excommunication" of the faithful and priests
and, perhaps, readers of the Angelus magazine, has never been lifted.
According to the man who allowed for the placing of a statue of
Buddha on the tabernacle of St. Peter's Church in Assisi in 1986---
which I visited last year to, in fear and trembling, see the scene of
this act of apostasy and unprecedented scandal, he wants to accommodate
those "who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary
forms of the Latin tradition," who deserve "respect" for their "rightful
aspirations," "feelings," and "attachments" to "Latin liturgical
tradition" --- in other words, for the FSSP, Michael Matt, Chris
Ferrara, and perhaps even the bishop of Kazakhstan.
If the FSSP is founded on a completely modernist understanding of Tradition, why should we not call them....well, Modernists?
Wonder what Cardinal Burke and the Vatican would say about Michael
Matt's equation of the SSPX with the Fraternity of St. Peter. I wonder
what Archbishop Lefebvre would say? Can we just stop getting
along please? Because, "getting along" is going to destroy our faith in
the purity and the unchangeableness of the Catholic Faith.
Also, from the "With friends like this who needs enemies " file,
Cardinal Burke shows his true allegiances. Hint, he will bow low before
the Modernist Revolution (as he and his kind have done since the 1960s).
Why do these kind of men get a "get out of heresy free" card when they
come out against adultery? As my son says, "Ok, Mr. Dah!" Louie
Verrecchio should be congratulated for opening the closet door on
this Modernist, by getting hold of the following video. Notice Cardinal
Burke says that the SSPX "is in schism" and to confirm this statement
--- said that Fr. Saguto, District Superior of the Fraternity of St.
Peter in North America, would confirm this -- the District Superior must
obviously be in the room listing to the lecture.
