The SSPX Has No Vocation For Suicide

archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-6

No vocation for suicide

As the last hours of awaiting begin, I would like to make some short considerations for my concerned readers (who might be many).

Firstly, the SSPX exists just in order to offer an alternative to the horrid developments of V II. The refusal of Archbishop Lefebvre to close his first seminary, which he was ordered to do in 1975, was obviously meant to have consequences. Archbishop Lefebvre knew it, and did it nevertheless. Not for one day in the history of the SSPX being in “full communion” has been more important than, or even equally important as, existing. 

Secondly, the idea that the SSPX would, on demand, simply walk toward the executioner, safe in the knowledge that at least (and at last) they will die in “full communion” is absurd. If it were so, it would have been the dumbest thing for several V II Popes not to have “recognised” them.

“Please come here, I want to slit your throat”.

“Certainly, Holy Father. How can I say ‘no’?”

Come on…

Thirdly, the SSPX does not exist primarily for you. It exists primarily for Christ. I cannot imagine that the majority of the SSPX priests (who, as we have been told, must approve the deal) will just say: “hhmmm, this is good for me; it certainly increases my chances of being bishop one day; yep, I will throw away all that I have been and thought up to now and sell the Society to the likes of Francis. Fidelity to Christ is overrated!”

Fourthly, these are people ready to accept suspension a divinis the day they were ordained. They think of the V II church even less than you do. The word “trust” does not exist in their vocabulary in conjunction with “V II Church”. Of course the society will officially talk of “trust”. This is standard diplomatic language. But they don’t trust either Francis or his successors one bit. As well they should.   

Fifthly, it’s not that the FFI treatment has escaped them. They would have been extremely mistrustful of any V II Pope even without the FFI episode. But this Francis here, they must know he is pure poison. 

I can only imagine one scenario in which things go wrong, and it is one in which the Vatican lawyers are smarter than the SPPX ones, and manage to arrange things in a way that screws them in a way they cannot even see. An improbable, but thinkable scenario.

As I have written in the past, the matter of who controls the assets is the real pivotal point. If the SSPX keeps controlling the assets they will be able to walk away from any order to – in any way, shape or form – comply, submit or disband in a moment. Archbishop Lefebvre could refuse to close the seminary exactly because the seminary belonged to the SSPX. He could go on with his own assets, his own churches, his own seminaries exactly because everything belonged to themselves.

Keep control of your name and assets and you will keep control of your destiny. Lose control of your name or assets and you will be forced to start from ground zero when the Vatican strikes.  And I wonder how many donors will give money to a new “SSPX Mk II” if they know everything will be transferred again to the Vatican by the next trap in which the SSPX priests stupidly fall. Again, this is an improbable scenario. I am sure the SSPX respects their donors more than that.  

We should now, as the Germans say, wait and drink tea. I do not think fear that the SSPX will willingly walk toward an executioner they know to be the worst pope in 700 years and one of the worst in the history of the Church is a rational attitude.

Pray, hope, and don’t worry. 

M    

Posted on November 21, 2016, in Catholicism, FSSPX, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 5 Comments.

  1. OK Mundabor. We will pray, hope and don’t worry. Perhaps what is going on is polite posturing in the interests of charity on the part of SSPX. A diplomatic rumba so to speak.

  2. I no longer contribute to SSPX since their flirtation with the Conciliar Church. I do not trust the leadership of Bp Fellay. His pogrom against the faithful priests and bishops was both shameless and unjustifiable. Unless HE Repents, I can never trust the stewardship of the SSPX again.

  3. M, in the future, how do you see SSPX ordaining (or acquiring) new Bishops? This is an issue that still looms over the Society. The Archbishop had the same issue back in 1988 and ordained 3 to preserve the Society for the future. Now there are two and they are not getting any younger. Any ideas on this?

    • Aren’t they still three? Or am I missing something?
      Anyway, Fellay would have no hesitation in ordering more. If something huge would happen and the SSPX were to remain without bishops, I can’t imagine there would be no retired bishop (or Cardinal) ready to make the ordination for them, like de Castro Mayer in 1988 did together with Lefebvre.

Leave a reply. Please be concise and to the point.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: