How The SSPX Can Pave The Way For “Reconciliation”

The SSPX seems – not for the first time – on the brink of “reconciliation”. I am assuming here that the reconciliation will be what every sensible person would insist on: complete control of assets, seminary and command structure. As I have written many times, nothing else would be acceptable.

However, there seems to be in some quarter some fear that the SSPX may either “go native”, or become scandalously silent in front of this scandalous Pontificate because of the carrot being dangled in front of them.

Luckily, Mundabor comes to the rescue and suggests a very simple way for the SSPX to obtain both aims: reconciliation with both the Vatican and their mistrustful supporters.

The solution is a scathing attack against Amoris Laetitia and Francis’ heretical pontificate. I don’t care how they call it in sophisticated theological term. What I would like to see is that they hurt him badly.

After that, only one of two things can happen. The first is that Francis abandons the idea of the reconciliation. This shows that he only wanted to keep them silent as the carrot dangles in front of them. The SSPX sees the cards and wins the hand. The second is that Francis decides that his “mercy” dividend is still worth the attacks of the SSPX, and the reconciliation process moves on under the banner of “mercy”. The SSPX keeps intact credentials and wins the hand again.

What’s not to like? If Francis really has interest in the “mercy credentials”he won’t mind the steamroller going over him; actually, the accusations will help him in presenting himself as meek and very, very Ghandian.  If he closes the door to the SSPX then he didn’t have anything “merciful” in mind in the first place.

Can’t see what the SSPX has to lose if they – as I am sure they do – value Truth first.

M

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Posted on March 23, 2017, in Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 16 Comments.

  1. The SSPX has very beautifully pointed out the errors and problems of Amoris Laetiae in several official SSPX documents. These moves are sufficient on the chessboard. It seems that promptings from the Holy Spirit have led the Holy Father to the position of bringing the SSPX into full communion. The SSPX would do well in my opinion to let the status quo of verbal positions remain. Time, in every sense, is in the favor of the Holy Roman Catholic Church in its tradition, and the SSPX! The opposing prelates don’t have enough ammunition to derail the SSPX’s admission into full communion at this time, given the positive stance of the Holy Father to the SSPX. For the SSPX to do what you propose, brings to a possibility a very strong negative hand-grenade to be thrown at the SSPX, and dissuade the Holy Father in his intent at this time. Ultimately in the course of all finality, the Lord will have other pontificates to deal with the necessary clarifications required for straightening out the problems and issues – the MESS – brought about by the purposely ambiguous writing of modernists in V2 Documents, and worse yet, in their interpretation and their application following the close of V2 by modernists and other misguided souls. Above all, this is the time of prayer for the Holy Father and for our Holy Roman Catholic Church.

    • Prudent people may obviously disagree about the best course of action. However, I think that in doubt, being a tad harsher is never wrong.

      You may flip this particular coin and say that just because “the Church has always time” (Italian saying) it does not have to happen that the reconciliation is signed under this squalid individual.

      M

  2. Food for thought regarding previous “reconciliations/regularizations”:

    What happened to Abbot Agustin Joly’s Abbaye Saint-Joseph de Clairval in 1987?

    What happened to Abbot Gerard Calvet’s Monastery of Le Barroux in 1988?

    What happened to the young seminarians of Ecóne who left in 1986 to found the “traditionalist” seminary Mater Ecclesiae at the behest of Ratzinger?

    What happened to the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter in 1988?

    What happened to the Society of St. John Vianney in Campos, Brazil in 2002 and with Bishops Rangel and Rifán?

    What happened to the Society of St. John in 2005?

    What happened to the “Oasis of Jesus the Priest” of Father Pedro de la Inmaculada Muñoz Iranzo in Catalonia in 2007?

    What happened to the Good Shepherd Institute in 2006?

    What happened to the Papa Stronsay Transalpine Redemptorist Community in Scotland in 2012?

  3. Very good idea.

    It definitely would clear the air.

  4. I still don’t see what is to be gained by SSPX in signing up with the Vatican. Once they sign up how can they criticize the Pope’s actions without seems small and petty. As Christ reminds us: In who’s name would they cast out devils.

    • Archbishops Lefebvre ctiricised the Vatican all the time before being forced to “rebel” and he did not seem petty at all.

      We have become so accustomed to the SSPX being “not signed” that we now think that reconciliation means becoming V II. Not true.

  5. But first, SSPX must give up on their own “marriage tribunal.”

  6. ilovevictoriasbows

    “The second is that Francis decides that his “mercy” dividend is still worth the attacks of the SSPX.”
    Heh heh. Good one, Mundabor!

  7. The Church is our mother, and we should want the best for her. The best is the SSPX, with safeguards for its integrity, for our Church needs to have back the essentials for a correct directionality. The road will not be easy, but it will lead us back to Rome in its fullness. Ubi caritas, ibi Deus est!!! Bishop Fellay can lead the way! I do not have an SSPX Chapel any where near where I live, so I am nominally a “novus ordo” Catholic. I reject in toto, all of V2 documents because I know the devastation V2 has brought about, even though I know that the ambiguously written documents are the devil’s pleasure, for misinterpretation and erroneous application. They are in great need of clarification. I know also that a great proportion of what was meant by the Council Fathers is true. I sat in sad disbelief for so many years in this mess which was sometimes seemingly sacrilegious and unseemly. If it had not been for the SSPX there would not have been the move by our Holy Father, P. Benedict XVI, to publicly state the simple truth about the Mass. Again, ubi caritas, ibi Deus est! Procedamus in pace!

    • This is all very beautiful, but it fails to explain in what, exactly, “caritas” should consist. Is it more charitable to fire from all cannons at heresy, or to choose a “diplomatic” path that runs the risk of diminishing the SSPX in front of those who love it most?

  8. I think that the “diplomatic” path is the road to be taken. I think that it is urgent to have all of Christendom to see that the SSPX is not just part of the Church. It is our Church, and the Church of God’s “caritas.” He loves His Church infinitely, we can be sure. He had not the choice of leaving it in the hands of angels for its administration; that is to say He had no choice but to leave it in the hands of human beings. (Need I say more?) The sooner we have the SSPX fully engaged for us the better off all of us will be. At this moment, I am drawn to remember what drove me from one novus ordo parish to a more orthodox one with its Mass sung in Latin with Canon #1 facing eastward: it was the removal of the Crucifix from the altar, to make way for a happy meal kind of service. WE NEED THE SSPX!

  9. And may I say to you also, that the particular Novus Ordo Catholic Church I now attend in Northern Virginia would not be having a Mass in Latin were it not for the influence of the SSPX upon the Church, as a whole. Yes, I am grateful for God’s SSPX, and I want to see it completely recognized for what it is: It is the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Roman Catholic Church!

  1. Pingback: Canon212 Update: There’s No Point in Happiness Engineers Trying to Prop Up AlinskyChurch – The Stumbling Block

%d bloggers like this: