22 June 2013 HORRIBLE FALL II
“Horror” may seem too strong a word for the change of direction within the Society of St Pius X that at last became clear one year ago. However, if Hell is horrible; if one cannot avoid it without the faith; if the Faith came into grave danger in a Church disabled by Vatican II, but a fortress of the true Faith was miraculously established within that disabled Church; and finally if that fortress is now also being disabled, then “horror” may not be too strong a word. The SSPX has not yet fallen completely, but it has fallen a long way and it may fall all the way. The leadership that has skilfully promoted that fall over the last 15 years is still in power.
“Horror” may seem too strong a word for the change of direction within the Society of St Pius X that at last became clear one year ago. However, if Hell is horrible; if one cannot avoid it without the faith; if the Faith came into grave danger in a Church disabled by Vatican II, but a fortress of the true Faith was miraculously established within that disabled Church; and finally if that fortress is now also being disabled, then “horror” may not be too strong a word. The SSPX has not yet fallen completely, but it has fallen a long way and it may fall all the way. The leadership that has skilfully promoted that fall over the last 15 years is still in power.
It followed Archbishop Lefebvre while he lived, but it never understood, or it chose to cease understanding, why he founded the Society in the first place, namely to resist the downfall of Conciliar churchmen seeking to bring the Church into line with the glamorous but corrupt modern world. Once he was no longer there, these leaders were all too soon re-possessed by the glamour.
Right now they are dragging down with them a number of older SSPX priests, and they are deforming the younger ones. As for the older priests, just like after Vatican II, those shaped under the Archbishop can be in torment from the Newsociety’s bending them out of shape, unless and until they make the decision to go with the flow, but thereupon their conscience has to be anaesthetized. As for the younger priests, just like after Vatican II, having been normally mis-shaped in the new direction, only by themselves can they find the old direction, because they are not being taught what the Archbishop was really about. In effect, the SSPX seminaries are slowly being turned into newseminaries. Care must be taken in recommending them for vocations.
And towards the top of the SSPX ? Here is the recent thinking of one who is thoroughly familiar with the doctrinal stand of the Archbishop. For a long time he was its defender, but since the Doctrinal Discussions of 2009 to 2011 proved that Rome was persevering in its doctrinal error, now he too, in 2013, approves of the Society’s collapse of principle at the Chapter of 2012 when it renounced a doctrinal agreement and set conditions for a merely practical agreement. Yet he is glad that in practice the collapse bore no fruit ! Surely this was only because the Romans did not yet think the collapse was complete enough, yet he looks forward to the SSPX leaders renewing contacts with the new Pope, as though, having half collapsed, they do not risk collapsing completely when they crawl back to Rome in pursuit of canonical recognition for the SSPX.
What has happened to his mind ? Just like many good priests under the tyrannical Paul VI after Vatican II, he has loosened it from divine doctrine and is making it go with the human flow. His conscience cannot be easy, but probably his will is getting set upon preferring the apparent good of the SSPX to the real good of the Faith, which is incompatible with submission to its powerful enemies. By pronouncing his solidarity with the Society leaders who want such a submission, he may not lose the faith himself, but by his new softness towards the Roman apostates he risks at the least making it somewhat easier for a number of other souls to begin losing the true faith.
As for the SSPX leaders, they are mired in duplicity because they still have to deceive themselves and others that they are faithful to the old religion of God and of Archbishop Lefebvre, when in reality they are wanting to belong to the mainstream Church dedicated to the new religion of man. The loss of souls and the duplicity are a double horror.
Kyrie eleison.
© 2011-2013 Richard N. Williamson. All Rights Reserved.A non-exclusive license to print out, forward by email, and/or post this article to the Internet is granted to users who wish to do so provided that no changes are made to the content so reproduced or distributed, to include the retention of this notice with any and all reproductions of content as authorized hereby. Aside from this limited, non-exclusive license, no portion of this article may be reproduced in any other form or by any other electronic or mechanical means without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review, or except in cases where rights to content reproduced herein are retained by its original author(s) or other rights holder(s), and further reproduction is subject to permission otherwise granted thereby
Right now they are dragging down with them a number of older SSPX priests, and they are deforming the younger ones. As for the older priests, just like after Vatican II, those shaped under the Archbishop can be in torment from the Newsociety’s bending them out of shape, unless and until they make the decision to go with the flow, but thereupon their conscience has to be anaesthetized. As for the younger priests, just like after Vatican II, having been normally mis-shaped in the new direction, only by themselves can they find the old direction, because they are not being taught what the Archbishop was really about. In effect, the SSPX seminaries are slowly being turned into newseminaries. Care must be taken in recommending them for vocations.
And towards the top of the SSPX ? Here is the recent thinking of one who is thoroughly familiar with the doctrinal stand of the Archbishop. For a long time he was its defender, but since the Doctrinal Discussions of 2009 to 2011 proved that Rome was persevering in its doctrinal error, now he too, in 2013, approves of the Society’s collapse of principle at the Chapter of 2012 when it renounced a doctrinal agreement and set conditions for a merely practical agreement. Yet he is glad that in practice the collapse bore no fruit ! Surely this was only because the Romans did not yet think the collapse was complete enough, yet he looks forward to the SSPX leaders renewing contacts with the new Pope, as though, having half collapsed, they do not risk collapsing completely when they crawl back to Rome in pursuit of canonical recognition for the SSPX.
What has happened to his mind ? Just like many good priests under the tyrannical Paul VI after Vatican II, he has loosened it from divine doctrine and is making it go with the human flow. His conscience cannot be easy, but probably his will is getting set upon preferring the apparent good of the SSPX to the real good of the Faith, which is incompatible with submission to its powerful enemies. By pronouncing his solidarity with the Society leaders who want such a submission, he may not lose the faith himself, but by his new softness towards the Roman apostates he risks at the least making it somewhat easier for a number of other souls to begin losing the true faith.
As for the SSPX leaders, they are mired in duplicity because they still have to deceive themselves and others that they are faithful to the old religion of God and of Archbishop Lefebvre, when in reality they are wanting to belong to the mainstream Church dedicated to the new religion of man. The loss of souls and the duplicity are a double horror.
Kyrie eleison.
© 2011-2013 Richard N. Williamson. All Rights Reserved.A non-exclusive license to print out, forward by email, and/or post this article to the Internet is granted to users who wish to do so provided that no changes are made to the content so reproduced or distributed, to include the retention of this notice with any and all reproductions of content as authorized hereby. Aside from this limited, non-exclusive license, no portion of this article may be reproduced in any other form or by any other electronic or mechanical means without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review, or except in cases where rights to content reproduced herein are retained by its original author(s) or other rights holder(s), and further reproduction is subject to permission otherwise granted thereby
