jump to navigation

Kwasniewski and White on the True Nature of the Crisis in the Church August 22, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, horror, paganism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
trackback

Dr. Peter Kwasniewski of Wyoming Catholic College normally writes in measured, scholarly tones, always providing insightful commentary but not usually with a lot of polemic.  But he let fly with both barrels in a recent post at One Peter Five, from which I excerpt extensively below (admittedly, he claims to be quoting another, but approvingly).  Hilary White has been waging a vitriolic war of words against the tyranny of the Bergoglian papacy, and rightly so, for years.  She continues her excellent work with another strong piece also at One Peter Five.  I tie the two together and try to add a few contributions of my own, paltry though they are.

First up, Dr. K – no matter how bad you think the corruption/rot/heresy/perversion in the Church is, it’s almost certainly much, much worse, and will get still more so:

Most commentators do not begin to understand the true nature of the problem.

The ring of criminal Nancy Boys is the same ring that has been sedulously working for decades to undermine the integrity of the doctrinal, moral, sacramental, liturgical Church. These men – McCarrick, McElroy, Wuerl, O’Malley, Mahony, Cupich, Tobin, Farrell, Lynch, Weakland, Paglia, Maradiaga, their lovable mouthpiece James Martin, Thomas Rosica, and far too many others, including ones who have passed on to their eternal fate, such as Lyons, Boland, Brom – are the same ones who have destabilized and adulterated catechesis, theology, liturgy, and most obviously the Church’s commitment to the unchanging moral law, as we saw in the Amoris Laetitia debacle and all that surrounded and succeeded it. We must connect the dots and not pretend to be shocked when we see, for example, attempts under way to “re-interpret” Humanae Vitae through a false teaching on conscience, or to do away with clerical celibacy, or to introduce female deacons.

To treat the sins of this ring of conspirators as nothing more than a recrudescence of the sex scandals of the past would be to lose sight of their real enormity. These are not just men of bad moral character; they are apostates, and they are trying to remake the Church in the image of their own apostasy. The Church has been smashed up in front of our eyes in slow motion for decades and few can even begin to admit that we are now faced with a Church in actual smithereens. The Nancy Boys have conducted their campaign of demolition with a kind of imperial sway. It is not this or that aspect of the Church that is corrupt; the rot is now everywhere. It is a rot on which the McCarrick Ring still sups, like maggots feasting on a corpse. For this reason, to hear well meaning people say Bergoglio must impanel some investigative body to set things right is Alice in Wonderland lunacy. It’s like putting Himmler in charge of Nuremberg.

We do not need bishops engaging in public penance (although it’s a good idea for their souls and long overdue); we do not need episcopal investigations; we do not need new procedures and new policies. These are all cries for exculpation. Bishops beating their breasts and then going back to doing nothing about the manifest apostasy at the very heart of the Church will not solve matters. We need the apostates [and those who have enabled and covered for them, and also all the sodomites] identified, denounced, and removed. [And so the Church in the US would probably lose 90+% of its clergy at a shot, if all the moral perverts and manifest heretics were, by some miracle, removed from office.  Are we prepared for that?  I can really only speak to the Church in the US, but I understand that in many Western countries, and Latin America, the problem is even worse.  There might not even be 1% of the active priests who are not heretical, addicted to horrifically immoral sin, or both]We need a reaffirmation of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Faith. To clean up this mess, we have to clean up more than the scandal of homosexuality, with all of its attendant horrors. We have to denounce and reject the apostasy that powerful and influential homosexuals and their friends have insinuated into the Church over decades………

……….It is a package deal. This, above all, is what people need to see. The moral depravity, the doctrinal heresy, the liturgical devastation – all of it goes together. If you have the courage to follow each thread, you will find that any attack on one part of the Church, one aspect of her life, one component of her tradition, already is or will soon be bound up with an attack on the other parts, too. The real “seamless garment” is Catholicism taken in its totality. Either you have the whole or you can’t have any…….

……..The difference with the clerical sodomites is that they become professional apostates. It is not enough for them not to believe in the sacraments; they must make others not believe in them as well. They will not stop twisting and mutilating the Church until she blesses their sin, along with many other sins. To achieve their goals, they must wreak havoc on every last aspect of the Church. This is what the faithful must stop – forget about the contemptible bureaucracy of the USCCB with its well heeled lawyers and slick marketeers. We begin to stop the havoc by calling its source by its real name. McCarrick was not just a predatory sodomite, but an apostate, and all of his “brother bishops” who knew about the double life and still got their pictures taken with him [or concelebrated with him, because there is a school of theological thought that says that concelebration is a tacit admission of doctrinal conformity with the celebrant, which is one of many reasons why traditional priests abhor the practice and refuse to condone it], laughing away at the latest wool pulled over the people’s eyes – you know, the ones who are putting out videos about how unfortunate this is, what a mess, and, you know, it isn’t as bad as people are making it out to be – these are all apostates, too. They’re company men with company cars, driving in a long line to their own burials at the ecumenical cemetery…………

………The Catholic Church is being rocked to its foundations by a scandal of Modernist apostasy of staggering proportions. We are in “2+2 = 5” territory, and the “conservative” apologists have no real response to that, which is why they insist on treating the McCarrick business as a sex scandalThey are more concerned about a mendacious, ramshackle, unaccountable episcopate than they are about the deposit of the faith under daily assault, as it has been ever since the progressive European bishops maneuvered into control of the Second Vatican Council, strewing ambiguities and half-truths in its documents and dominating its implementation, particularly in the liturgical sphere – all of which has led us straight into the cesspool of iniquity and heresy in which we are stewing.

But where does this go? What do they ultimately want?  That is what Miss White tells us, and very clearly, almost prophetically, to extend her analogy:

What is the Bergoglian Paradigm about? It is about a new religion, and specifically a religion that falsifies, negates, contradicts, denies, and abominates the old religion. It is about the complete reversal of all that God has taught mankind, not only since the dawn of the Christian era, but from the beginning. If the Bergoglian Negation is true, then everything we have believed, not for 2,000 years, but since the time of Abraham, indeed since the time of the promise to Eve, is false. Every miracle, every promise, every covenant, every expression of love of God for us was all a lie……….

…….Why? Because the Bergoglians tell us not to repent, not to turn away from sin. They tell us that God will not save, will not lend you strength. They tell us even that sin is good. It is a counsel of despair; it tells you that you are helpless in your sins, that no God is coming to save you, that His grace is insufficient for you, that you are ensnared in depravity and can never escape, never hope for holiness, never hope for salvation.

And that only humanity, only their leftism, only the communist utopia, can “save” you, and that you may as well have as much “pleasure” in this life as possible, as this is the only one there is.  That is what these men have been telling themselves, every day and practically every minute, for decades now. Misery loves company.  They want to drag everyone down to their level, ESPECIALLY those who have, by some miracle, managed to maintain true Faith over the past several insanely painful decades.

But these kinds of men have come before, and God has defeated them.  The Catholic Church has appeared broken and defeated, only to experience miraculous turnarounds.  In the mid-11th century, the popes had been  under the thumb – to the point of being named/appointed and even in some sense “consecrated” by them – of the Roman “nobility” and “Holy” Roman Emperor for 250 years. This is the period when a 16 yo boy was appointed pope and proceeded to live a most scandalous and profligate life, dying of acute cirrhosis when he was only 24 or so. Most priests and bishops were 2nd, 3rd, or 5th sons of petty lords who only used their positions as clergy to enrich themselves while they married, fornicated, drank, engaged in piracy and brigandage, and left the people to starve, spiritually.  Only here and there were there isolated locations where the Faith was actually maintained and practiced, and those very few.  But it was enough.  God managed to get a man, Hildebrand, appointed as St. Gregory VII and the entire enterprise, the whole edifice, was turned around in just 2-3 decades.  Problems remained, but the Church of the 12th and 13th centuries – admitted by all as the most Catholic in history –  was created immediately after these periods of near total collapse and disaster.

I say that so people do not become hopeless, but at the same time, I feel, for a variety of reasons, that the current crisis/mass apostasy is the most dangerous, yet, because it is the most efficient, systematic, and organized the Church has yet faced.  I think it is far more organized than anyone knows.  And it is not done, yet.  Even should we, by some small stroke of God’s will, be freed of Bergoglio, his replacement may well be worse.  This may go on for many decades to come, until they believe they have sucked the Church dry of all benefit it could provide them, or some great saintly reformer comes along to start the process of setting things right.

I know these are not exactly huge revelations to this crowd.  Heretics took over the human aspect of the Church, including the clergy, perhaps as divine retribution for the Church’s institutional embrace of usury via the IOR/Vatican Bank*.  But keep the Faith.  Find the best Mass/priest  you can and cling to them with all your might.  As Bear says, nail your foot to the floor if you have to.  Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus still applies, even though the institutional Church has not only lost its mind but appears demonically possessed.  It is still Christ’s Church and that is still His Body in the Blessed Sacrament.  Plus, as they say, living good is the best revenge, well, staying holy and keeping faith is the best way to deny this evil cohort the victory they desire.

*-has anyone else seen/heard this claim, that Vatican Bank/IOR activities have constituted sin of usury since the concordat with Mussolini in 1929, which transformed the Holy See from debtor mini-state to extremely wealthy and influential state?  Didn’t Malachi Martin argue this, that the Vatican had prior to Pius XI always held aloof from global financial markets due to refusal to charge interest for money or accept interest on money (as these constituted grave sins of usury, even worse than murder) and was thus impoverished from the late 18th to the early 20th centuries, but that the concordat and subsequent creation of the Vatican Bank rendered the Vatican spectacularly wealthy but required they engage in usurious practices?  And this is where all the trouble really started, as it instantly caused rapidly spreading corruption?  Thoughts?  I read the theory in this book, which seems to rely quite a bit on Malachi Martin.

Advertisements

Comments

1. Baseballmomof8 - August 22, 2018

Appreciate the thoughts. And yes, it will get worse I fear, before it gets better. But we know the Faith, and are still required to hold fast to it… regardless of what occurs in the Church. We must stay at the Foot of the Cross.

2. Camper - August 22, 2018

I believe that it was Our Lady of La Salette who prophesied: “In the End Times, Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Anti-Christ.”

As for usury, as a strict Aristotelian, I can tell you that charging any interest on a loan is almost always wrong. Keeping money in a bank at all is also bad from the perspective of the relatively Aristotelian School of Austrian Economics because it allows banks to blow bubbles in the economy. Many American Republicans and probably even trads or at least conservative Catholics think there is nothing wrong with charging mild interest on loans, but they have not read Aristotle. I believe it was St. Thomas who compared charging interest to borrowing wine and then, instead of just giving back an equivalent bottle of wine, demanding the equivalent bottle and a fee for loaning the wine. The Church was much wiser when it stayed out of banking.

I don’t like to push it, but I still struggle to understand why the SSPX does not seem like a reasonable alternative to more people on this blog when it is obvious that Rome has lost the Faith.

Tim - August 23, 2018

The SSPX does not seem like a reasonable alternative because of papolatry and obedieolatry, both of which are rampant and grave violations of the 1st Commandment. They try to turn the pope into a God and try to turn the virtue of obedience into a God.

Other factors are being bombarded by lies of 4 papacies and constant threats of “excommunication” (JP1 barely got his bags unpacked to participate in those shenanigans) over 48 years, and now we have the FSSP and ICK parroting those lies to traditional minded Catholics. Ignorance if Canon Law is also a factor. And as always weakness and human respect….it’s easier to be part of the “in” crowd. Living a truly Catholic life is hard, especially when you have priests and faithful around you who actually take it seriously.

Camper - August 23, 2018

So where do you go? At least the SSPX is not in good standing with Rome, and they recently elected somebody other than Bishop Fellay to lead them, which I thought was very good news. Supposedly, the new Superior takes a much tougher stance against Rome.

Tim - August 23, 2018

I currently attend an SSPX Parish, St. Joseph’s in Greenwood, Indiana. I was at an FSSP “shared” Parish in Indianapolis for 13 years, then the modernists ran them out of town on a rail and started Novusordoizing the Traditional Mass there. Then they brought in a married former anglican to offer the Traditional Mass and that was the last straw. Before he was made a priest he ran the choir and pushed anglican music down the trad community’s throats. He ended up beating his wife in the sanctuary a year latter.
The FSSP learned a bitter lesson at Holy Rosary, mixed parishes don’t work.

Tim - August 23, 2018
Camper - August 23, 2018

Please note Tim. I did not want my post to sound hostile or critical. I try hard to practice charity.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Tim, where do you think is reasonable if you do not like the SSPX? Did you notice they dropped Fellay and got a new Superior General?

Tim - August 25, 2018

FSSP or ICK as long as they have their own parish. Diosean…..RISKY……usually a modernist smells and bells trap.

SSPX definitely the top choice….not even close.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Yes, Tim, but ordinarily, the Ecclesia Dei communities have to give money to the Ordinary, who is going to forward Peter’s Pence to Rome. To me, this seems unacceptable, though I have to admit right now it is what I am doing because I temporarily have bizarre circumstances. Hopefully soon I will be able to begin attending an SSPX mass.

skeinster - August 24, 2018

Camper and Tim

One thing to consider re: the SSPX in the Anglophone world : Bp. Williamson.
Who. like it or not, pretty much tarred the SSPX with crazy in the minds of those American Catholics interested enough to explore them.

“Conciliar Rome” has bad bishops (and no one will dispute that for a moment), but they have several thousand. Archbp. Lefebvre had four.

And that he didn’t weed out Williamson can make the rest of his judgments suspect. Not saying that he’s wrong on all points, because of course he’s not- but you can see why people might wonder.

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

It was a tough situation for Lefebvre; he very much felt he needed a native English speaker bishop for the Society’s burgeoning American communities; and Williamson at that point was almost the only option. (Tissier de Mallerais spoke/speaks quite fluent English, as does Fellay, but this was not felt to be enough.)

But it was a mistake, one which Dom Calvet tried to warn ++Lefebvre against. There is just no getting through to Williamson defenders on this, though.

And speaking of sexual abuse, this is another area where Williamson became problematic. Williamson steadfastly defended Carlos Urritigoity, and even intervened with ++Lefebvre to secure his readmission to the Society for ordination after his initial expulsion (Urritigoity’s main SSPX accusers tended to be part of the South American sedevacantist faction, and so Williamson assumed it was a purely political opposition, despite the extensive evidence) – though Lefebvre did warn Williamson to “watch him like a hawk.” In the end, it was +Fellay who finally dropped the hammer for good on Urritigoity, and even warned Bishop Timlin of Scranton against taking him in.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Which “bishop in good standing” Timlin promptly ignored.

Yeah, Williamson is the problem!!!

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

It’s possible to hold in one’s head simultaneously the propositions that a) Bishop Timlin was a corrupt coddler of sexual deviants, and b) Bishop Richard Williamson is unfit to be a Catholic bishop.

Whataboutism doesn’t help us here.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Show me the declared dogma of 6,000,000.

Who cares about the exact number…it was wrong even if it was only one.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Tim - August 25, 2018

“Whataboutism doesn’t help us here.”

Perhaps, but neither does deflecting by attacking a convenient scapegoat because it is too painful to deal with the truth of today’s situation of the true faithful being betrayed by the highest authorities in the Church.

Bishop Williamson is not perfect, only Christ and Mary are.
But his oddities and shortcomings are a drop in the ocean compared to the crimes of the modernists and, as Benedict XVI referred to them, the “professional Catholics.”….our version of fake news.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

“Bishop Williamson is not perfect.”

Understatement of the year.

But he’s not in the Society any more. People looking to critique the Society can no longer use him as a foil. I hope I haven’t been doing that here.

Camper - August 24, 2018

I don’t know Bishop Williamson’s record too much. I heard he denied the Holocaust, which was nutty but not a sin, I would say. He also thinks women should not go to university and maybe that it is wrong for them to do so. Again, it sounds nutty. Williamson was expelled from the SSPX. The SSPX itself insists on the Latin Mass and in most other ways is pretty mainstream. Urrutigoity was a mistake, but Williamson is no friend of unrepentant pedophiles.

I am not the best at arguing it, but consider Pope Francis, who thinks that homosexuality is not that big a deal, who shut down the FFI and the wonderful Paraguayan bishop whose vocations outnumbered those in Buenos Aires, who wrote the abominable Amoris Laetitiae, and who covered up for pedophiles when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires. Folks, the SSPX blows the competition away. It is not even close. The SSPX claims to be following the example of St. Athanasius.

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

I do think Williamson was and is a nutter, too unstable of a personality to be a bishop – the Society has many, many fine priests who would have been better choices, even without a lick of English – but it must also be conceded that Williamson has not done one millionth the damage to the Church or the faith as the present pontiff.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Williamson is a “nutter”, meanwhile we have raging, flaming faggots and heretics in every nook and cranny of the Church and you are worried about what he thinks about the “holocaust”.

Get your priorities straight.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Not the right personality to be a bishop? What about the personalities of the VAST majority of the “bishops in good standing”? The lot of them are cowards, heretics, faggots, pedophiles, free masons and satan worshipers.

I’ll take his personality everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

Get real dude.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Sure sounds like a nut:

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

Again, Tim: Whataboutism isn’t a healthy response.

Look: No one here disagrees that the “regularized” hierarchical Church around the world today is a Grade A modernist disaster area.

That can’t be an excuse for one of the few sane Catholic communities to indulge bizarre and dangerous behaviors in its midst, or fail to work hard to make sure only the best men are given miters.

Consider the recent sex scandals in the SSPX community in Post Falls – the sodomy ring uncovered at the school, and the terrible judgment in hiring Kevin Sloniker as a youth camp counselor (resulting in the rape of two boys). We’re all outraged by that, and we all also don’t think that the entire Society, or even the entire SSPX Post Falls community, should be tarred with the brush of these scandals. The parents there put their children in these settings with the reasonable expectation that they were safe; the Society is usually quite vigilant about such things. But I would hope that we all also recognize that our first response to these scandals couldn’t be: “Yeah, but McCarrick” or “Yeah, but Boston had a 10% sexual abuser rate in its priests,” or “Yeah, but Reiki Masses.”

Bishop Fellay was right to boot Williamson, and I think the Society is better for it. Had he lived long enough, I think Archbishop Lefebvre would have eventually, too.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Absolutely insane!!!

Camper - August 24, 2018

Mr. Malcolm, would you really refuse to join the SSPX because they consecrated Williamson a bishop? Tim can be rough sometimes, but it really would seem that your priorities could use a rethink if that is true.

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

Hello Camper,

“Mr. Malcolm, would you really refuse to join the SSPX because they consecrated Williamson a bishop?”

Oh no, I never said any such thing.

And after all – even if I did – hasn’t +Fellay righted the mistake by expelling Williamson from the Society?

On the contrary wise, the present pontificate has heightened my admiration and gratitude to ++Lefebvre and the Society for what they suffered to preserve Catholic tradition. I do not attend Society chapels, but then, there is no Society chapel near me anyway.

The Society has its issues – any community does – but I think, based on what I have seen and heard as an outsider, that they are in a better place than they were when Williamson was in the fold, at least in the Anglophone world (the SSPX in Europe has always been culturally different anyway).

Tim - August 24, 2018

Rough?
I’m just a lovable little fuzzball!

Camper - August 24, 2018

Dear Tim,
I’ll grant you the title of “lovable fuzzball” if you really want, even though it makes you sound like a real queen, but you also deserve to be known as rough. We can combine charity with zeal and a hatred of sin better.

Camper - August 24, 2018

May I urge moving to be near a chapel of the Society? If they are not supported dramatically, civilization will collapse. It’s in the cards anyways, and many feel they cannot move, but I’d say it is worth changing states or custom designed houses for. Careers can be restarted in other metro areas.

Camper - August 24, 2018

And I still don’t understand what the big deal about Williamson is, but since we are only discussing the SSPX, not Williamson’s branch, it is not very important right now. I will say this though: Bishop Williamson is much more countercultural than the SSPX. In an age very close to permanent communism, a la 1984, plus rampant and extreme sexual debauchery among the ruling class, we need all the counterculture we can get. Please try to move to go to an SSPX chapel. Civilization really depends on it. Otherwise, one’s FSSP or ICKSP mass is supporting criminals or their legally innocent heretical collaborators. And Cardinal Burke is a mouse. The only way to stop being stepped on is to break communion, and that is not some vile thing when Rome and the bishops in good standing with it do not care at all about Orthodoxy.

Camper - August 24, 2018

In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis codified his dissent from church teaching. Officially, the FSSP and ICKSP are dissenters from Pope Francis’ novelties. They can be stamped out at any time, and by serving under such bishops, they are positively contributing to heresy. So in case you do not think Vatican II is grounds for leaving the faith, which it is according to the plaques present at SSPX chapels that cite, I believe, Quas Primas by St. Pius V, then Pope Francis’ codification of his heresy is in Amoris Laetitia. Folks, we have to have a backbone. Breaking with Rome is not wrong when Rome has codified heresy.

Tim - August 24, 2018

That’s right Camper, try to inject a little humor in and now I’m labelled as just another faggot. FYI, I’ve been married to the same woman for 25 years. Your characterization of me couldn’t be more wrong or less charitable. Good day sir.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Come on, Tim, it’s a joke. I’m sure you are perfectly straight. You have far too much Catholic zeal for anything else. Tim, it is great to be zealous; it’s inspiring, but a sense of humor can also be good.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Dear Mr. Malcolm, I’m not sure what you mean by “Whataboutism”. I think it is often helpful to avoid terms that end in ism or ist.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

Camper,

“Officially, the FSSP and ICKSP are dissenters from Pope Francis’ novelties. They can be stamped out at any time…”

Agreed on both points.

Theirs is a precarious existence.

“…and by serving under such bishops, they are positively contributing to heresy.”

Respectfully, I don’t agree; I think there is precedent for the course they have followed.

At some point, their position might no longer be tenable. I don’t think that moment has arrived yet, however. Because that moment would necessarily entail a formal schism, and a formal refusal to recognize Francis as Pope altogether – which is something even the Society is not prepared to do.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

“Dear Mr. Malcolm, I’m not sure what you mean by “Whataboutism”. I think it is often helpful to avoid terms that end in ism or ist.”

I’m gonna crib from Wiki: “Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent’s position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.” It’s not a school of thought, just a logic fallacy. It acts as a kind of diversion from an argument.

So for example, if I were to note Bishop Williamson’s dogged defense of Carlos Urritigoity in the face of mounting evidence of sodomy, pederasty, grooming of seminarians, etc., to a Williamson follower (and I recognize that you are not a Williamson follower), and the Williamson follower responded only with a litany of the doctrinal and sexual deviancy of Francis and American bishops, that wouldn’t be responsive to the concerns I leveled against +Williamson – it would be changing the subject. *Of course* Rome and various American chanceries are bacchanals of heresy and notorious sin; but that doesn’t mean that Williamson didn’t screw up with Urritigoity.

But again: fortunately, Williamson is no longer in the Society. He is off doing his own thing now.

Tim - August 25, 2018

2 attempts at jokes misfired. Ok, let’s move on.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Dear Mr. Malcolm, what precisely would that precedent be? St. Athanasius broke with Rome.

By the way, please let me urge that the new posts start at the end of the comment section. Posting everything under post #2 is making the comments quite confusing and jumbled.

Camper - August 25, 2018

One could be building Orthodoxy (SSPX), but instead one supports the FSSP, etc. Bishops will demand conformity eventually. If they cannot control their faggoty desires, there is no telling what else they will do.

Please let’s move the new comments to the bottom of the comments section for the sake of clarity and ease.

Camper - August 24, 2018

Dear Mr. Malcolm, I guess I should take back what I said about Williamson. I don’t literally think he is crazy, but he is certainly confused about the Holocaust. Everybody these days is so brainwashed into various forms of leftism that we should welcome Williamson with open arms. Yes, denying the Holocaust is weird, but so what? It doesn’t mean he isn’t capable of being a bishop or doing what God approves.

Tim - August 24, 2018

He did not deny “the holocaust”, he questions the numbers.
Show me the declared Catholic dogma of 6,000,000.

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

Tim is right: There is no dogma about what we’re required to believe about what happened in the Holocaust (or call it what you will). Bishop Williamson’s views were not tantamount to heresy.

It’s also true that +Williamson did not deny that Jews were killed – he argued that the number was far smaller, and that they were killed using other methods. Some say that this is still a species of Holocaust denial, since in practice it seems to amount to a message of “the Holocaust was no big deal.” That’s a point which could be debated.

You can believe that the Moon landings were hoaxes and still be not only an orthodox priest, but even a holy one.

But it’s fair to worry, as Bishop Fellay and other Society clergy have, about the prudence of a bishop spending his public witness speculating about such things when he could be teaching the faith.

Camper - August 24, 2018

Bishop Williamson is condemning the “twink-lusting faggot” bishops, as Miss Barnhardt has so colorfully described them. Very few bishops in good standing with Rome do. The communists took over the hierarchy in good standing with Rome and it is no longer the Church of God. Now people who want to save civilization have to put there hope in the SSPX. Those in good standing with the Francis should lose all hope of renewal with Francis because he has adulterated very badly the College of Cardinals. The Catholic Church has not died. The gates of Hell have not prevailed, but they have prevailed over the group of bishops owing their allegiance to the Francis. If the world does not join the SSPX or anybody who cares about orthodoxy, then this criminal gang, that deserves to be investigated in America under the laws against racketeering, then the world will slip into permanent tyranny and we will get the End Times. It’s that simple.

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

“Bishop Williamson is condemning the “twink-lusting faggot” bishops, as Miss Barnhardt has so colorfully described them.”

In which case, it’s unfortunate that he was utterly unable to recognize Carlos Urritigoity as a twink-lusting faggot when he had him in his midst in Argentina, every single day.

Camper - August 24, 2018

Mr. Malcolm, the fact remains that Pope Francis’ cabal is no longer the Church. They do not believe in Christianity and they hate us because we do not want leftism. Atheism, leftism and sexual immorality are what they want. If huge numbers do not join the SSPX or some other group of bishops trying to be orthodox, then the world will slip into tyranny. End of discussion.

Richard Malcolm - August 24, 2018

Hello Camper,

I’m not a sede. But then I also don’t necessarily disagree with this, either: “They do not believe in Christianity and they hate us because we do not want leftism. Atheism, leftism and sexual immorality are what they want.” I mean, I am not a mind reader, but it’s really impossible to look at and listen to someone like Cdl. Coccopalmeiro or Cdl. Maradiaga and think that this is not a perfect characterization of them.

The Church has had faithless men, and even monsters, wearing miters and tiaras before – albeit never to this extent, and with such damage inflicted on the life of the Church.

Camper - August 24, 2018

Mr. Malcolm, the SSPX are not sedevacantists, but they do believe themselves to be the Church, after what St. Athanasius said [paraphrase]: Even if a small number remain who are orthodox, they are the true Catholic Church.

Camper - August 24, 2018

I don’t know anything about Williamson’s interactions with Urrutigoity, so I cannot comment, but based on the rest of Williamson’s life and actions, it would be impossible to believe that he coddled a man who was a screaming pervert. I have heard about Urrutigoity and I suspect that he would have had to be quite sneaky to get away with as much as he did.

Bishop Williamson has started his own sect, and its arrangements and chapels are pitifully scarce. Hard to square that with a man who sympathizes with child predators.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

I think my position is roughly that of our kind host: I currently assist at “canonical” TLM’s, which sometimes is a diocesan TLM, which I helped start and help organize, by a diocesan priest of sound formation and character, and sometimes includes the FSSP parish in Baltimore; if the SSPX was what was on hand for me to have traditional sacraments, then I would be willing and ready to go there. I do not attend the Novus Ordo any longer.

For what it is worth, the FSSP at St. Alphonsus in Baltimore has been given a total remit of its entire cathedraticum; it does not pay a cent to the Archdiocese of Baltimore. I realize that this might not be satisfactory to you, since the remit could be cancelled, and they are still technically canonically subject to the ADB. But the trads up there, despite being a flinty lot, seem content with the arrangement. For a diocesan TLM, one must of course be somewhat more creative with one’s tithe.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

P.S. I fully concede that the SSPX is not sedevacantist – they are adamantly opposed to that, as ++Lefebvre made this a red line at the outset, and ejected “the Nine” in no small part for this reason. (Williamson has steadfastly remained opposed to sedevacantism as well, of course.)

Some in the Resistance seem to be shimmying up to the sede line; I know of one priest who omits Francis’s name from the Canon.

Tim - August 25, 2018

“Canonical” today means under the thumb of the modernists, not a wise plan.

Camper - August 24, 2018

Where is the hatred of homosexuality? On traditioninaction.org, it teaches, in keeping with the Magisterium, that sometimes it is a sin not to get angry.

Tim - August 24, 2018

The central question….thank you!

We’re all too worried about “holocaust” numbers.

What about the abortion holocaust??….makes Hitler look like a rank amateur.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Williamson “tarred with crazy”? Yeah, right.

John XXIII “open the windows of the Church to the world”,Paul VI & V2/Novus Ordo: JP2 Assissi/Koran kissing,etc., etc., etc./ Benedict XVI “flee for the wolves” quiter and of course Francis….compile your own endless list. Not to mention all of their WONDERFUL picks for bishops….and you have the temerity to question Levebvre??? WOW!!

Yes, Williamson was certainly “crazy”.

Good grief!!

skeinster - August 25, 2018

Tim,
What part of “whataboutism is not a good argument” do you not understand?

My point was that there may be other factors than “papalotry and obedieolatry” that make English-speakers wary of the SSPX. Bp. Williamson is one of those.

As Richard points out, it is entirely possible for more than one thing to be true at the same time. Vatican II can be a disaster, and Williamson can be a bad episcopal choice simultaneously. Lefebvre could be a saintly man who also made some bad decisions.
It’s not either/or.

It’s an observation, not an attack.

Tim - August 25, 2018

The Williamson conundrum doesn’t even register with most trads, let alone Novusordites. Sure there are asterisk type reasons for discomfort with the SSPX, but the main reasons are papolatry and obedieolatry. PERIOD. CLOSE. THE. BOOK.
Modernists and their Novusordite followers perpetrate calumny throughout the world about Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX, but think the V2 popes are the greatest thing since sliced bread. Should Bishop Williamson have kept his opinions about “the holocaust” to himself, perhaps, it’s not important in the scheme of things. I hare to quote Hillary Clinton but the holocaust numbers debate fits: “At this point what difference does it make?”

The Williamson irregularities are just a red herring to avoid dealing with truth. The Faith has been preserved by the SSPX . The FSSP/ICK do what they can but at the end of the day if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.
I’ve been in communities of all 3, none are perfect, as they’re all composed of humans, but the SSPX is the best option hands down.

Also, America needed its President Trump, tge

Tim - August 25, 2018

Continued…..
The Church needs its Pope Williamson….he is a rock of dogma, even with his eccentricities.

Commence Williamson derangement syndrome.

Camper - August 24, 2018

Things are so bad with Pope Francis’ sect that one has to begin to wonder what they would have to do to make their confessions invalid if their confessions are not invalid already. Apparently there are a lot of gurus who talk about this, but PF’s heresies are very manifest. This isn’t a relatively difficult discussion about the two natures of Christ, the will(s?) of Christ, or whatever like in the Arian and Monothelite, or Monophysite heresies. Contrary to the Old Testament, the Francis has condemned the death penalty – the only way that the Church can reestablish credibility in the case of these predators. He has denied that marriage is indissoluble. He does not hate homosexuality and he has said that he knew communists “and they weren’t bad people.” The main is an agent of Satan.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

As far as I am concerned, the SSPX’s confessions have always been valid. It goes without saying that their Masses are valid.

For that matter, Rome was quietly treating their confessions and marriages as valid for some time before Pope Francis said anything.

Tim - August 25, 2018

Yes, they were, do one thing, say another. Dirty, filthy liars, those modernists.

3. Jason Victor - August 23, 2018

Quick! CANONIZE MORE POPES! #ProblemSolved

Tim - August 23, 2018

Good plan!

Tim - August 25, 2018

I think V2 popes should have the death requirement waved for beatification.

4. Tim - August 23, 2018

Even the Washington Compost is turning on tge pope.

https://mundabor.wordpress.com/

Richard Malcolm - August 23, 2018

No, Hugh Hewitt, a conservative Catholic commentator, is turning on Wuerl. It’s just a guest op-ed.

Of course, the decision to run it may say something; but until I see a staff editorial calling for Wuerl (who has had an excellent relationship heretofore with the Post, for obvious reasons) to go, I’ll remain skeptical.

Tim - August 23, 2018

The fake news overlords still have control of what gets printed.
When I hear “conservative” Catholic an alarm goes off…NEOCON Novusordite…..in other words a liberal, just not as radical.

Tantumblogo - August 24, 2018

Agreed. Sorry I missed all the discussion! Some good comments here, but also some rather tired arguments.

Tim - August 24, 2018

Such as?

5. guy Mcclung - August 23, 2018

When you realize that their spiritual father is not God Almighty, but the Father Of Lies, you come to know that – if there are 1000 victims known eg in Pennsylvania – there are 1000s more there , 10000s more across the country. I personally know 4 who have been silent, and who probably will stay silent. I do not fault them for this in any way. Light, light, light – that is all that will make these sodorapist priests and homopredator bishops crawl back to hell. We already know about approx 12 bishops who themselves are perverted predators, and 100s of prevpriests – think about it- that is the TIP of the prelature and presbyter pervert iceberg; there are more, almost certainly many many more. Thank God for the media and internet-imagine if this was 1957 – we, the faithful laity from whom $billion$s have been stolen, would know nothing.. Light, light, light, like UV destroys germs. Pray for lawsuits and empaneled grand juries nationwide – civil suits, criminal and RICO – and then grants of full immunity to underlings, minions, personal chefs (check out Donna The Girl’s) and lower aux bishops-to totally spill their guts. Guy McClung, Texas

6. Tim - August 23, 2018

Oh yeah, our sodomite leaders are also in “solidarity” with murderous illegal invaders of our sovereign nation.

7. TF - August 23, 2018

Regarding the Vatican Bank and the sin of usury: that sure would explain a lot! Is there a connection between usury and the errors of Russia? I have read that it was high finance that created and sustained Russian Communism (cf. the works of Anthony Sutton), but can usury be considered one of the errors of Russia, per se? The usurers are definitely behind all the revolutionary movements in the world today; they are now attempting to foist Chinese Communism on the West, and they are perilously close to being successful it seems. Hardly anyone has noticed that China is basically calling the shots in all of our major cultural institutions. Ever hear anyone call out Apple for relying on Chinese slave labor to produce their increasingly insidious products? Why is it that no statesman will do so?

8. Camper - August 23, 2018

Hi TF. I don’t think the bankers are behind everything, but a lot of people say they are behind plenty. Soros is a speculator, not a banker, and he is certainly pretty influential. I don’t think China dominates our academic institutions. If they did, the level of sexual morality there might be higher. In China, pornography is illegal and its use is guaranteed to get the guilty party three years in jail, thanks to the _morality_ of the Chinese Communist Party. Not saying the Party is good, but it isn’t always satanic, either.

9. Kathleen O'Regan - August 23, 2018

Thank you to Dr. Kwasniewski, Ms. White, and Tantum for your excellent commentary.
We suspect as is being confirmed this is far worse and larger than we thought. To be honest, I always questioned the ascendance of the worst pope in history with the worst American president in history, Barack Hussein Obama. That just didn’t seem coincidental. Something big is behind this, and while Satan certainly is, he has human helpers.
I have long considered that the real crisis in the church was going to come if Fatima came and went and there was no divine intervention. That seems the case, it tests the spirit or confidence in the institution to see the level of complicit cooperation there is to keep this machine going, this evil robot that has taken over, this virus that has infected the church and the faith. They are nervous, good. They are paying attention, good. They will never admit to either apostasy and their sodomy of boys. We suspect we may be closer to the truth to assume the church is a huge international pederasty ring, where boys are traded like baseball cards. This would be Satanic. Why would we suspect that level of diabolical activity? Because NO bishop is truly calling this out for what it is, they are obfuscating and denying, some having the gall to blame US!
I’m not going to waste even virtual ink on this vile apostate of a “pope”. He is and always was in the pederasty corner, and he is clearly hates and works every day to dismantle the actual Catholic faith.
We despise the Marxist USCCB and the Muslim and Central American invasion the pope and these men have foisted on Christendom, and their manipulation of Catholics over this issue. They have helped to bring suffering to Christendom and have effectively annihilated nations themselves. Who knew Our Lady’s warnings would come in such a form!

We do not all have access to the SSPX nor the FSSP. We have lost some confidence in both, although we acknowledge they are probably both far better than our diocesan situation. We will never attend the NO Mass again. We have attended the TLM, but our bishop is playing peekaboo with priests and we get no explanation. Our faithful priest is gone and we are suspicious of the new plant.
Frankly, we’re at a loss.
The only thing certain, the one thing we know, is we are 100% DONE with supporting or attending this apostate church. The water has boiled and these frogs are jumping out of the pot.
We need God to provide a leader. If a Cardinal or a Bishop makes a case for a schism and gives us the marching orders we need, we are ready. This church is dead to us. They left us, we didn’t leave the church. We remain Catholic, until the end. Our allegiance is to Christ and Our Lady and the faith, not a cabal of boy sodomizers and apostates. The resolution will probably not be in our lifetime, but please God, it will come someday.
God bless all hurting Catholics and all here.

Camper - August 23, 2018

I hope you don’t mind me recommending Bishop Fellay and Archbishop Lefebvre. sspx.org.

Tim - August 25, 2018

Good recommendation.

10. Canon212 Update: Perfumed Prelates and Their Smelly Accomplices – The Stumbling Block - August 23, 2018

[…] AND WHITE ON THE TRUE NATURE OF THE CRISIS IN THE […]

11. Tim - August 23, 2018
c matt - August 23, 2018

I wish she would just say what she really thinks.

Camper - August 23, 2018

She still hasn’t approved of the SSPX, so who are the fanatics here?! I like her strong language!

Tim - August 24, 2018

She’ll come around in time. She’s been fed a heap of lies bu the soft trads.

Camper - August 24, 2018

If she does, Tim, it’ll have taken quite a bit. I am not sure it would happen any time soon. I recently read a post/video of hers in which she proposed execution for Jon Corzine to Peter Schiff because Corzine stole a billion dollars from his clients.

Tim - August 25, 2018

I don’t understand what her position on those criminals has to do with the SSPX.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Ann has a very strong and conservative personality that led her to propose execution for Jon Corzine, yet she still is fanatically loyal to Rome, despite its faults, which she is constantly criticizing. I’m not sure what the catalyst for her joining the SSPX would have to be. “Twink-lusting faggot” bishops doesn’t appear to be it, and if not that, then what?

c matt - August 24, 2018

fell out of an ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down

I laughed for a solid five minutes 🙂

12. Monica - August 24, 2018

1st commandment, Honor No False Gods. This new church with their new sacraments honors a false god. Our Lady told us that in the end we will have the rosary and the scapular and that will be all we need. We have Spiritual Communion and perfect acts of contrition. Our Lord does not command or expect us to fullfil an obligation by attending questionable services. and, it is a danger to our Faith. In the end, all we must do ,is keep The Faith.

13. Camper - August 25, 2018

Mr. Malcolm, I would like to point out that even if your FSSP church is not giving money to the DIocese, the property still probably belongs to the diocese. The Diocese of Baltimore cannot be trusted with anything.

Tim - August 25, 2018

YEP

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

Oh, quite true.

This is not always the case – the FSSP owns its own property in Houston and Kansas City, the ICRSS owns the Shrine now in Chicago – but in Baltimore, yes, the ADB owns the Shrine. Of course, even they are still dependent on the local bishop for faculties.

Is it a risk? Sure. No question. I have worked with the Archdiocese of Baltimore directly, and know just what they are (the Facilities guys are decent characters, and that’s about it). But again, different traditionalists have to decide how to evaluate that. I don’t think it’s fair to impugn the St. Al’s crowds as sellouts or aesthetes for preferring the historic shrine church to a Society fly-in Sunday Mass at a funeral home for the last 30 years, especially now that the FSSP runs it. My sense is that the vast majority will stay so long as they can keep doing exactly what they’ve been doing, and not a day longer.

14. Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

A general response here…

[The combox does make it hard to keep threads coherent – not a complaint, grateful to Tantum for the blog and the opportunity to respond.]

The debate we’re having here about SSPX v. Ecclesia Dei/Summorum communities is obviously not a new one. It’s been going on since at least 1988.

As I have said here before, I believe each option comes with its advantages and disadvantages. As someone who stays “canonical,” I am well aware of the costs and risks that come with that, believe me. It seems apparent that Tantum does, too. I tend to sum up the equation in this way: Ecclesia Dei societies/orders take on higher risk and public (outside the walls of the church) restraint for the opportunity to reach a lot more Catholics; the SSPX sacrifices the ability to reach more Catholics to avoid the risk and the restraint.

I know enough of the Society’s history and its people to be of good will to it, and to be grateful for what it has made possible. I also know that in some cities where the Society co-exists with Ecclesia Dei parishes (Kansas City, for example), there’s more movement back and forth than was once the case, often dependent on very personal and parish dynamics issues.

Which is another way to say that I think there’s room for prudential assessment in how individual traditional Catholics in this country make these decisions in what looks to be the gravest crisis the Church has undergone. I fully respect those who take the SSPX route where and when available; I would hope for the same charity and consideration in return, though obviously I have no right to insist on it. I know there has been enough invective in this debate over the past years to harden some attitudes, and I work hard to avoid it – anything negative I’ve said here today has really only been about a particular prelate who is no longer even in the Society, and who should not be conflated with its cause.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Richard, I wish I could get you some of the SSPX’s polemics. Staying with Rome really is the path to judgment and destruction.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

I will say that I’m not unfamiliar with some of the Society discussions of all this, and “Recognize but Resist” creates some tensions I don’t feel are really resolved.

Which isn’t to say that the common sedevacantist critique is really compelling, either. Crude consistency they may have, but sedevacantism is a rabbit hole from which there is no escape.

But who knows? Papa Bergoglio may yet find a way to create the rupture for canonical traditionalism you’ve been hoping for.

Camper - August 25, 2018

Let me ask: what kind of “unresolved tensions”? What kind of objections? I hope you could explain. Alternately, I understand if you are tired of this. I just urge you to read some of the books of the SSPX such as “Is tradition excommunicated?” and “100 Years of Modernism” which shows that the doctrines taught at V2 were condemned several times in the Church’s past, including in 1950 by both the Holy Office (doctrine) and Pius XII himself.

Camper - August 25, 2018

I’m not saying you would go to Hell. I’m saying it will lead to temporal punishment.

Tim - August 25, 2018

Fr. Hesse clears it all up:

15. Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

Camper,

“Dear Mr. Malcolm, what precisely would that precedent be? St. Athanasius broke with Rome.”

I’m afraid that’s not a characterization of St Athanasius I would accept.

(I would offer up this following overview, for lack of time to say more on this point: http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/component/content/article/79-history/559-obedience-of-athanasius.html )

But let us say that we did agree on it. Just what is being advocated with such an example? Formal schism? The Society’s official position is that it rejects any such action. It may “Resist,” but it still “Recognizes.”

Camper - August 25, 2018

I would say Francis is in schism with the Church. That is the only kind of characterization that makes any sense given the circumstances. Or better yet, he is outside the church. After all, he is a heresiarch who has formalized his heresy in Amoris Laetitia. Let me try to ready the article to which you linked.

Richard Malcolm - August 25, 2018

Does this mean he is no longer pope?

Tim - August 25, 2018

Refer to Fr. Hesse

Camper - August 25, 2018

Francis is not a Catholic, and a non-Catholic cannot be Pope, right? Then there is the teaching that nobody can judge the Pope, but I just get the feeling that that teaching doesn’t apply here. I am not an expert on these issues, and we could argue about semantics, but it is a basic tenet of Catholicism that we must support bishops who are orthodox. It is just… mathematics. If orthodox bishops are not supported, they will wither. If heretical bishops are supported, heresy and tyranny will grow.

16. Tim - August 25, 2018

Comment #100!!! Yehaw!!!

Camper - August 25, 2018

So, Tim, are you desperately bored like I am? 😉

Tim - August 25, 2018

I’m never bored, just crazy!

Camper - August 25, 2018

I’m trying to listen to the video featuring Dr. Hesse. I really hope sometime that conservatives will invent an alternative to youtube before everything is banned.

17. Tim - August 26, 2018
Camper - August 26, 2018

I’ve already heard. Hopefully it will bring the disgusting Argentinian down permanently. The trouble is that he has already adulterated the college of Cardinals so badly that I still think his cabal has to be abandoned.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Tantumblogo really has to write an article on this if he wants his blog to be important at all. Not saying we deserve it, since he gets practically nothing for his pains, but just saying.

Tim - August 26, 2018

It does seem that for Tantumblogo tgis is a thankless task and a labor of love.
I am of the opinion that he has one of the best Catholic blog sites on the internet. We all here have disagreements from time to time but I think they are for the most part handled in a charitable manner……rare in this day and age. Yes, I am rough from time to time. A priest once told me that my zeal is both my best quality and my biggest enemy….still working on that. If you think I’m rough now, it’s a good thing this blog wasn’t going a decade or so ago….Tantumblogo may have banned me. My wife got her passage out of Purgatory on our wedding day!

Camper - August 26, 2018

Tim, you might want to be careful when you talk about purgatory on the wedding day. It might come off wrong. Just a thought. This article had posts that had a lot of charity, though it looks like Mr. Malcolm finally tired of it. To me it is unfathomable why almost nobody wants to join the SSPX. The ED priests really have drilled it into them.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

No, I’ve just been busy with work….and then this Vigano thing blew up.

But hey: Tantum’s apparently in the same boat as me, not hostile to the Society but still attending an FSSP parish. So I figure I’m in good company.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

“To me it is unfathomable why almost nobody wants to join the SSPX.”

I do think Archbishop Lefebvre’s own record may be helpful on this score.

He took a *very* long time before he took a final step of disobedience in ’88. Up until that point, he worked repeatedly to secure a canonical solution. Indeed, the Society began as a fully canonical entity, a requirement he worked hard to meet. He met repeatedly with Paul VI and John Paul II, men whose orthodoxy he doubted, to that end, and requested fairly modest concessions, all in the face of numerous injustices and assaults from various members of the Church hierarchy. He repeatedly expressed an aversion to the danger of setting up a “parallel church.”

In this, the good archbishop reflected deeply Catholic instincts, ones ingrained in him from childhood onward. It should not be a surprise to see the same instincts in many Catholics, even the most traditionalist and aggrieved ones. You can say “that was then, this is now,” but people travel at different speeds, and see things through different lenses.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Lefebvre was never “disobedient”. You obviously haven’t listened to Fr. Hesse.
You need to let go of obedieolatry.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Again, humor….remember when you advised me that a sense of humor was important?

Camper - August 26, 2018

Tantum actually is actually slightly, maybe considering eventually joining the SSPX. I communicate with him and that’s what he told me, if I’m not mistaken.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Yes, but it isn’t Catholic to follow the Pope practically no matter what he does, and that is a fair characterization of what those who insist on being in good standing with Rome are doing. The list of Francis’ heresies, scandals, and errors requires a book at least to cover fully, and now it has come out that Francis and maybe even Benedict were aware of McCarrick’s vile sins.

While terrible for those affected, Francis’ latest mistake will prove to be a gift to his enemies, even if he will probably just be replaced with somebody equally vile.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

“Lefebvre was never “disobedient”.”

D*mn it, I could see this response coming a light year away….

I had to characterize it *some* way. John Paul II ordered ++Lefebvre not to consecrate the four. ++Lefebvre did so anyway. What do we call it? We can say it was an unjust order, if you like.

The point is, ++Lefebvre tried hard for a very long time to work in compliance and agreement with the Pope, and it shouldn’t be a surprise to see a similar instinct at work in other traditional Catholics.

P.S. I think I have listened to nearly all of Fr Hesse’s talks. It’s one of the great regrets of my life that I never had the chance to meet him in person before his untimely passing.

Tim - August 26, 2018

” The ED priests really have drilled it into them.”

Lies, told often enough become “truth” in the heads of the weak minded. People cave often due to their attachments to ease and comfort and the desire to be part of the “in” crowd.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

“Yes, but it isn’t Catholic to follow the Pope practically no matter what he does, and that is a fair characterization of what those who insist on being in good standing with Rome are doing.”

Well, what does it mean to “follow?”

Do you think Amoris Laetitia is being taught in Fraternity or Institute parishes and oratories?

How often, in fact, has it been denounced in various ways in those communities?

In the FSSP parish in Kansas City, in fact, the pastor just this month issued a letter to the congregation rejecting Francis’s alteration to the Catechism on the death penalty, and you can find that letter easily online.

Isn’t just about every traditional community refusing to follow this pope in *some* regard? Aren’t they just doing it in different ways?

This is to some degree my frustration, and not just my frustration, with some devotees (and yes, clergy) of the Society: the adamant insistence that their is the *only* way; that *only* within the four walls of the Society is to be found the correct response to this crisis. All the Ecclesia Dei groups are dead wrong, and should be rejected at all costs. Even other non-canonical groups (the Resistance, etc.) are in the wrong, full stop. It is *not* a frustration that keeps me from sympathy for the Society or gratitude for its role in keeping Catholic tradition alive. But maybe – just maybe – many otherwise sympathetic Catholics are put off by this attitude, which can – just maybe – come across as lacking in charity.

But if a refusal of any formal relationship to this pontificate is the only possible answer, why does this premise not lead to a sedevacantist position? I think we’re reaching a point where that question is becoming very hard for the Society to answer in the way it traditionally has.

Camper - August 26, 2018

I think Lefebvre was duty-bound to try to stay in the good graces of the Pope, but JPII, whose scandalous Papacy would have been criticized or condemned by a wise Pope, much less canonized, refused to let him do so on reasonable terms. Really, the Church is extremely out of whack. Officially it agrees with numerous heresies, only some of which came out of Vatican II, and the only remedy is to break communion. It’s a legitimate remedy practiced by St. Athanasius. Tim is right. Those in good standing with Rome who think it is the right thing to do seem to be willing to follow the Papacy endlessly. I remember an ED priest basically telling the laity to be quiet and submit to indignity when a novus ordo bishop was completely out of line. The ED priests just do not think like Catholics in this regard. In times of emergency, even the laity must criticize the Popes and bishops.

Besides, they are not following camels into the desert. They have bishops leading them.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

“The only remedy is to break communion. It’s a legitimate remedy practiced by St. Athanasius. ”

Is this a a sedevacantist position being advanced? I’m just asking honestly, without teeth.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Mr. Malcolm, the difference is that the SSPX does not submit to Rome fully and does not pay them money. As I have tried to tell others who are in good standing with Rome, it is the theology and platforms of bishops that determine for what their Eucharist stands. That’s just basic Catholic theology. That’s one reason it would be sacrilegeous to accept the “Eucharist” of an Anglo-Catholic Protestant pastor who had determined to become a Catholic but was still in communion with Protestants, even if he were a validly ordained Catholic priest. I know that is not an example of which you were thinking, but it is a valid point.

Maybe it is an argument for sedevacantism. I do not understand why that is such a big deal. Francis is an agent of Satan and a heartless heresiarch. I do not sympathize with Lutherans, but he positively makes Luther seem like a decent man in contrast.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Let’s start a new thread, please. This one is getting very long.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Richard, by your responses to Camper you show that uou have been brainwashed by the Novusordites and soft trads and practice obedieolatry. Your scandalous remarks about Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX give you away. You obstinately cling to falshood even though I have given you the link for clarity on this discussion with Fr. Hesse. Please watch the video. Fr. Hesse had more knowledge of the truth of the SSPX situation than all the folks on this blog combined. Accept truth and reject Novusordite and soft trad error and set ypurself free.

The SSPX is canonical, that is settled fact. Just because some Novusordites and soft trads say otherwise does change objective truth.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Should say “doesn’t “.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

I must say that you chaps don’t lack for persistence.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Tim, your language again is too harsh. There are ways to be ardent and criticize without the tone of your post.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Richard,
If you have listened to all his talks, then why don’t you understand his clear explanation about the Episcopal Consecrations?

Rejecting the clear truth is simply being obstinate since you don’t seem to be stupid on any sense.

We must obey God before men. That is the highest form of TRUE obedience.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Tim, he said “you chaps certainly don’t lack persistence.” He is getting tired. We should let him go for now.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

“If you have listened to all his talks, then why don’t you understand his clear explanation about the Episcopal Consecrations?”

It’s one of those rare points where I am not fully persuaded by Fr Hesse, God rest his soul. I could explain in-depth, but it is a Sunday, and well…

Poking around, I rediscovered one of Tantum’s comments from several months back: “I don’t want to see the comments turn into one of those endless SSPX/anti-SSPX imbroglios. They are boring and have already been done to death 1000 times over.”

Our host has been quite hands-off in this combox, but perhaps I should refrain from pushing my luck. 🙂

Tim - August 26, 2018

Richard,
No offense, but your “take”, which sadly coincides with that of Novusordite heretics, on the Consecrations compared to a Canon Lawyer and Doctor of Thomistic Theology who has publically recanted his sin of offering a liturgy that is against Divine Law and us not of the Church, doesn’t fly. Please listen to Gr. Hesse, over and over if need be, until it becones clear….the truth shall set you free.

Richard Malcolm - August 26, 2018

Hi Tim,

“Your “take”, which sadly coincides with that of Novusordite heretics, on the Consecrations compared to a Canon Lawyer and Doctor of Thomistic Theology who has publically recanted his sin of offering a liturgy that is against Divine Law and us not of the Church, doesn’t fly.”

Unless I’m mistaken, I don’t believe I’ve actually offered my “take” on the ’88 consecrations – I only alluded to it. In fact, it’s a little more complicated than you might suspect. I’m not offering it now partly because I’m not here to try to persuade you of it, and even if I was, you are certainly not under any obligation to accept it.

I hope we are not going to convert this discussion into an exercise in credentialism. If we were, I would have to insert my MA in Theology from a reputable Catholic institution into the record, but I don’t believe that obliges anyone to give any special credit to what I say (and certainly not the much more estimable late Fr Hesse). Fr Hesse was an amazingly erudite (and orthodox) man, but he was not the Magisterium, as he himself was wont to point out repeatedly, and he thought enough of my favorite Ecclesia Dei priestly society, the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, to offer extensive assistance (through the good offices of his old superior, Cardinal Stickler) to Msgr. Wach in helping to secure its first apostolate in Gabon.

Again, prudence has to supply minor premises in guiding our actions in this crisis, and it can provide answers that differ in differing circumstances – as it seems to have with Fr. Hesse, too. And with that, I will recede from this discussion with reference to my last comment referencing Tantum’s previous injunction.

In Christ,
Richard

Tim - August 26, 2018

Richard,
Just to clarify, I have history witg both FSSP and ICK. I like them both. Tge modernists in Indianapolis
drove the FSSP out after 13 years, I was quite content. Then things got so crazyand unhealthy that we made tge switch to the SSPX. From that experience has simply shown me that of the three, the SSPX is the best, mainly beacuse they don’t have to play footsie and compromise with the modernists. It does not mean that I dislike the FSSP or ICK.

God bless.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Michael Voris is saying it is the biggest news in the Church in 500 years. Let’s see: Vatican I, Vatican II, the suppression of the Jesuits in 1774, the French Revolution, the thirty years War, Fatima, La Salette… sounds like hype to me. Nevertheless, could be the biggest story in the Church since Vatican II.

Tim - August 26, 2018
Camper - August 26, 2018

I boycott the WaPo and I guess I do not want to patronize any other news outlet on Sunday. I hope Michael Voris, who is doing a press conference this afternoon, will not go to Hell for working on Sunday.

Tim - August 26, 2018

A press conference is not menial labor. I think Mr. Voris is safe on that one. And reading a news article on Sunday is not a sin.

Camper - August 26, 2018

We could argue, but holding a press conference requires hiring reporters. Are the reporters working for free?

Camper - August 26, 2018

It requires hiring cameramen, reporters, maybe security, maybe others. Just an argument.

Tim - August 26, 2018

So, is it a grave sin to eat in a restaurant on Sunday?

Tim - August 26, 2018

You haven’t pointed out any unnecessary menial labor.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Labor that brings wages or profit is forbidden if it isn’t necessary. I think it might be a sin to eat at a restaurant on Sunday if it isn’t necessary for sustenance or possibly some religious reason. Voris could do the conference tomorrow morning.

Tim - August 26, 2018

I’ve eaten in restaurants on Sunday with both SSPX and FSSP priests. What say you?

Camper - August 26, 2018

I say I’m not a theologian, but I think sometimes even SSPX priests might be a little lax. Maybe if it is a religious feast it could be accepted, but why not use volunteers? I think even Latin Mass priests are far too open to eating out on Sunday. Think of the workers. Sunday has to be made special.

Camper - August 26, 2018

I think the correct response might be that Benedict knew McCarrick was a monster but tried to silence him and make him do penance. I guess I should wait until Monday so that I can read a pertinent article.

18. Camper - August 26, 2018

I would love to see some diplomatic penalties paid for Francis’ malfeasance. That seems to be the only kind of thing this crowd would take seriously. I think Ireland withdrew its ambassador to the Holy See five years ago. Hopefully, more will follow. Who would have thought that the French Republic, for instance, would have had better morals than this Vatican? It looks like it could happen.

19. Camper - August 26, 2018

Mr. Malcolm, the difference is that the SSPX does not submit to Rome fully and does not pay them money. As I have tried to tell others who are in good standing with Rome, it is the theology and platforms of bishops that determine for what their Eucharist stands. That’s just basic Catholic theology. That’s one reason it would be sacrilegeous to accept the “Eucharist” of an Anglo-Catholic Protestant pastor who had determined to become a Catholic but was still in communion with Protestants, even if he were a validly ordained Catholic priest. I know that is not an example of which you were thinking, but it is a valid point.

Camper - August 26, 2018

I guess a better example would be that that is the reason it would be sacrilegeous to accept a Eucharist that came from a mass that had been concelebrated by a Catholic priest who had formally declared heresy elsewhere, and spouted Protestant ideas from the pulpit, and a Protestant minister. It would be sacrilegeous to participate in such a mass.

Camper - August 26, 2018

I think sedevacantism looks like the height of “establishment thinking” compared to the extreme Bedlam-level insanity coming out of the heresiarch’s mouth. This man’s sins know no end.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Sedevacantism and Novusordoism are the two errors on either side of the coin….papolatry and obedieolatry. Tradition is the safe path as always.

20. Camper - August 26, 2018

The ED priests are basically dissidents who contradict themselves. Officially, they are in agreement with everything their bishops say, but then betray their bishops at the pulpit. That is what they are doing. It is like the Trump Administration berating El Salvador for switching its diplomatic representation to Beijing despite the fact that Trump has kept our ambassador there. Officially, America’s position amounts to it being sinful. It officially recognizes Beijing and gives them all comfort and support, but gives a large amount of aid to Taiwan, which according to itself is merely a rebellious province. This is due to Richard Nixon, another idiotic “pragmatist” who didn’t believe in morality and shot himself, his country, Taiwan, and all its friends and allies in the foot.

What the ED communities amount to is a group of priests who are talking out of both sides of their mouths because they have given into the communists.

Tim - August 26, 2018

At the risk of sounding harsh…I agree.

21. Camper - August 26, 2018

Dom Gueranger, abbot of Solesmes, if I remember correctly, said, “When the shepard becomes a wolf, then the first duty of the laity is to defend itself.”

Tim - August 26, 2018

AMEN!

22. Tim - August 26, 2018

Camper,
“Too harsh”..what are you talking about?
Specifics please.

Camper - August 26, 2018

Tim, you accused him of being obstinate. That simply might be a false accusation. The man has the charity to have talked to us for a long time, so give him the benefit of the doubt. There are probably objections possible with what Fr. Gruner said. I think he is wrong too. It is possible to criticize somebody in a forthright way without becoming the proverbial firing squad. Besides, Richard has already indicated that he is tired of it and that Tantumblogo might step in and shut the conversation down.

Tim - August 26, 2018

His behavior is objectively obstinate. I have no ill will against him. I mistakenly thought a man with his intelligence would see the truth of the matter from a expert third party (Fr. Hesse), since the two of us ate obviously less qualified than Fr. Hesse. I was simply pointing out that he obviously refuses to accept truth from an expert on the matter. I understand when folks aren’t convinced by the lijes of you and myself. His rejection of Fr. Hesse is text book obstinance.

If Tantumblogo wish to put the brakes on this discussion, so be it, it’s his blog.
I myself grow weary of this subject, but I will never let weariness persuade me to stop trying to help the blind see the truth. I think I’ll go mow the lawn, pull weeds in the garden and do laundry now. Then I’ll go out to eat. Happy Sunday. (JOKE)

23. Camper - August 26, 2018

That said, maybe he just doesn’t have the time to delve into the issues deeply. People have families and jobs they have to go to. On Sunday, people need rest… even restaurant workers and reporters… 🙂

I was once asked to work at a restaurant for pay on Sunday. I refused.

Tim - August 26, 2018

Really, the only time we eat out generally, Sunday or not, is when we travel. We rarely eat out here in the Indianapolis area.

24. Camper - August 26, 2018

Looks like Benedict XVI did not punish McCarrick enough. Should have defrocked him and reported him to the police. So Benedict too was part of the coverup.

25. Tim - August 26, 2018

Just for the record, I pray for the day that the SSPX, FSSP and ICK are no longer necessary.

26. Camper - August 27, 2018

Notice how the horrible Francis is trying to stall? Maybe he is trying to think of a slick thing to say. He deserves to burn…

Tim - August 27, 2018

That’s God’s call.

Camper - August 27, 2018

Seriously, Tim? You really don’t think he belongs in Hell? Do you really think he is in a state of grace?

27. Tim - August 27, 2018

What you and I “think” doesn’t mean squat….God gets the final call.

As far as the state of grace, The Council of Trent dogmatically defined that no one can be totally certain that they are in a state of grace.

Our personal opinions are worthless in the arena of eternity.

Now, that being said, I THINK he is an abominable man and has sinned greatly(so have I in my life). But the only opinion of whether someone belongs in Hell that matters is God’s.

28. Tim - August 27, 2018

Well said Mr. Voris, my respect for you is partially restored. You still need to publicly repent and make reparations for your calumny against the SSPX.

God love you.

Tantumblogo - August 27, 2018

“You still need to publicly repent and make reparations for your calumny against the SSPX.”

Agreed. Or more broadly, for contributing to the divisions within the traditional/faithful Catholic community. We’re small enough as it is. That is Father Rodriguez’ key point, sure we may disagree on various points, but the enemy is the modernists, not the SSPX or the FSSP or whomever. That kind of stuff just kills us.

Tim - August 28, 2018

Michael Matt coined the term traditional firing squad and its danger to our collective cause. The modernists and the Novus Ordo are the enemies. Most of all their leader, the evil one.

29. Camper - August 27, 2018

Tim, I was disappointed that our efforts to persuade Richard didn’t lead anywhere. Maybe I agree with you that Richard was being obstinate, or at least that he did not seem to be very interested in being persuaded. I think the trouble with labeling him obstinate is that I am not sure I find Fr. Hesse entirely persuasive. In any case, I practically need a written document to persuade me. With youtube videos, it is hard to refer back to critical parts.

Tim - August 27, 2018

Perhaps I should have said that he is acting obstinate. I don’t know the man personally. Fr. Hesse’s logic is air tight, I find him extremely persuasive. Oh well, it’s hard to dislodge people from their comfort zones, myself included sometimes.

30. Camper - August 27, 2018

I find documents much handier. With a youtube video, there is no way to go back to refer to key points, as I mentioned. Big difference.

Tim - August 27, 2018

Yes, you can….you simple rewatch it.

Camper - August 27, 2018

Right, but it is much harder, in my opinion, to try to find the correct position in a timely manner compared to an article. Basically not possible for somebody on a time budget. Something to think about. Besides, youtube is owned by Mordor-by the Bay and could be blocked at any time. There could be filthy ads on it.

31. Tim - August 27, 2018


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: