John Allen, Crux, and Why 1 Million Catholics Don’t Matter

John L. Allen, Jr. at Crux wrote about the SSPX and the former SSPX Bp. Williamson, a renegade who has by now consecrated another bishop.

There is something pretty chilling in Allen’s tone, when you read him carefully.  You’ll see what I mean.

Here the title, and then I’ll skip down:

Why détente between Rome and traditionalists was always a pipe dream

[…]

[… there’s a LOT to take exception to in the top part of the article, but this is where Mr. Allen really shows how that segment of the Church thinks….]

[…]

The head of the society, Bishop Bernard Fellay, is viewed as a realist who sees his movement’s future eventually in coming in from the cold. His freedom of action, however, has been constrained by the more intransigent elements in the fold.

It’s conceivable that without Williamson and his following, Fellay may be able to move more boldly. [HEY! Williamson has been out of the SSPX since 2012!  But who would expect the MSM to get this right.  After all, these are just a bunch of kooks, right?  Hardly worth the time.]

[This is where you need to pay attention!] One might wonder why any of this matters to the Vatican. The Society of St. Pius X claims a global following of around 1 million, which, if true, would represent .01 percent of the full Catholic population of 1.2 billion. [.1%] Investing resources in trying to lure such a relative footnote back might seem disproportionate.

[…]

“relative footnote“?  “disproportionate“?   Right… it’s only a million people.

There’s more, along with Allen’s strange moral equivalence between traditionalists and the terrorist Yasser Arafat, and, later on, conjectures based on his assumption about SSPX being schism, yadda yadda.  Whatever.  I, too, am not super optimistic these day about what might happen between the Holy See and the SSPX.  I’d like to think that a Pope for the “peripheries” might show some mercy and compassion but I won’t hold my breath.

The take away from Allen’s piece is that 1 million followers of the SSPX – or, I suppose, all others who stay close to our Catholic tradition – don’t merit attention or pastoral care from the Church.

That’s like saying that they don’t count.  They’re nobodies.

Could anyone get away with saying that about any other marginalized group in the Church?

Apply that to pet groups of the marginalized whom liberals lionize and see how they react.

Divorced and civilly remarried who actually still go to church regularly and want to receive Communion? Nah, they’re a tiny number compared to the universal Church of over 1 billion.  They don’t merit our resources and time.  Active open homosexuals who denounce the Church’s teaching concerning morals but who go to Mass regularly and want to receive Communion?  Nah, there aren’t many of them.  We shouldn’t waste our resources.   Wacky women religious into cosmic consciousness and moving beyond the Church with their dying orders and institutes?  Nah, not many of them left, so let’s put our resources somewhere else.

Within the Church, the only “periphery” that matters are those which either explicitly reject Catholic tradition or who have no contact with it.

Could some Cardinal please argue for a “tolerated but not accepted” status for Catholics who embrace the Catholic tradition?

Moderation queue is ON

UPDATE:

Fr. Thomas Rosica, who has in the past threatened to sue a Canadian blogger, immediately piled on by retweeting Allen’s link. HERE

Moderation queue is ON

Posted in Liberals, Our Catholic Identity, SSPX, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged ,
34 Comments

“Dear Traditionalists,… “

Three years ago today I posted this. I haven’t changed my mind.

I had this from a reader. He said he was not advocating these things. However, liberals will advocate them.

I’ve got some other suggestions.  But first the wacky liberal stuff:

I have an idea for a blog topic – how about brainstorming with your readers on the top 10 changes that Pope Francis will make that will shock the Church and the world. I would orient the discussion around the Pope’s “vision” that the Church is for the poor and should itself be poor. For example, here are some ideas I had:

1) Pope Francis will live at the Lateran Basilica as an example that he will live a simple life away from the Vatican.
2) Pope Francis will allow the ordination of women deacons in service to the poor.
3) Pope Francis will sell the Vatican Museums to a private company and give the proceeds to the poor.
4) Pope Francis will get a petition from the English speaking bishops and will rescind use of the 2010 RM because the language is too complicated.
5) Pope Francis will repudiate Humanae Vitae since too many children tends to perpetuate poverty.

Yep. This is precisely what liberals will push for, hopelessly. [In fact, they are pushing for some pretty subversive thing, but I don’t think they will get their way.  That doesn’t mean that there won’t be a lot of damage.]

What do I think we should push for?

As many celebrations of the older form of the Roman Rite as possible in as many places as possible as soon as possible.

It’s ‘grind it out’ time.

I am getting some defeatist email.

Those of you who want the older form of the liturgy, and all that comes with it, should…

1) Work with sweat and money to make it happen. If you thought you worked hard before?   Been at this a long time?  HAH!  Get to work!  “Oooo! It’s tooo haaard!”  BOO HOO!

2) Get involved with all the works of charity that your parishes or groups sponsor. Make a strong showing. Make your presence known. If Pope Francis wants a Church for the poor, then we respond, “OORAH!!” The “traditionalists” will be second-to-none in getting involved.  “Dear Father… you can count on the ‘Stable Group of TLM Petitioners-For-By-Now-Several-Months” to help with the collection of clothing for the poor!  Tell us what you need!”

3) Pray and fast and give alms. Think you have been doing that? HAH!  Think again.  If you love, you can do more.

4) Form up and get organized.  You can do this.  Find like minded people and get that request for the implementation of Summorum Pontificum together, how you will raise the money to help buy the stuff the parish will need and DO IT.  Make a plan. Find people. Execute!

5) Get your ego and your own petty little personal interpretations and preferences of how Father ought to wiggle his pinky at the third word out of the way.  It is team-work time.  If we don’t sacrifice individually, we will stay divided and we won’t achieve our objectives.

At the midway point of SEAL training, BUD/S, there is a “Hell Week” to see how much you want it to keep going.

Do you want this?  Do you?  Or, when you don’t get what you want handed to you, are you going to whine about it and then blame others?

The legislation is in place.  The young priests and seminarians are dying to get into this stuff.  Give them something to do.

And to those of you will you blurt out “But Father! But Father!… I don’t like your militaristic imagery”… in order to derail the entry, here’s a new image from your own back yard.

Pope Benedict gave you, boys and girls, over the course of his 8 years, a beautiful new bicycle!  He gave you a direction, some encouragement, a snow cone, and a running push.  Now, take off the training wheels and RIDE THE DAMN BIKE!

Comment moderation queue is ON.  Don’t be surprised if I don’t let everything through.  This is my rant.

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", Be The Maquis, Classic Posts, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Si vis pacem para bellum!, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged
21 Comments

Holy League

There is a new initiative which you should know about.   My friend Fr. Richard Heilman is involved, as is His Eminence Raymond Leo Card. Burke.

HERE

For more information you can also text keyword EPIC to 84576 (I think that might be only for these USA).

Here is the video.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, The Campus Telephone Pole, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices | Tagged , ,
10 Comments

OLDIE PODCAzT: St. Joseph: a hymn dissected & sermon of Bernardine of Siena

Back in 2009 I made a PODCAzT about the hymn sung in the Liturgy of Hours in honor of St. Joseph.

082 09-03-19 St. Joseph: a hymn dissected & sermon of Bernardine of Siena

Check it out!

____

Happy Name Day Holy Father!

In this rapid PODCAzT, we will drill into a beautiful Gregorian chant hymn to St. Joseph in the Liturgia Horarum, the Liturgy of the Hours.

The hymn is Te, Ioseph celebrent and it is in the Liber Hymnarius for 1st and 2nd Vespers for the Feast of St. Joseph.

Also we listen to an indulgenced prayer written by Pope Leo XIII, Ad Te Ioseph.

Finally, we hear St. Bernardine of Siena (+1444) preach on our Patron of the Universal Church who is Patron of the dying.

Sing along with the hymns! Buy a Liber Hymnarius!

Posted in Linking Back, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, PODCAzT, Saints: Stories & Symbols | Tagged ,
8 Comments

NOTICE: Server Upgrades

I received a note that, in the near future, the servers that the blog lives on will be upgraded.

This may create some down time.

So you know….

 

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
1 Comment

A rapid surge of interest in priestly vocations in the Diocese of…

A while back I posted about the surge of vocations in the Diocese of Madison under the influence of the Extraordinary Ordinary, Most Rev. Robert C. Morlino, the diocesan bishop.  It’s a small diocese, but there are more than 30 outstanding men in formation.  This fact has made liberals quiver with anxiety.

I received a note from a friend of mine in New York state who is well situated to hear all manner of news.

The vocations office in Albany has gone from zero to 120 inquiries from young men of the area.

My first reaction is to say, with Henry, “Let there be sung Non nobis and Te Deum“.

Next, I say, “Yep.  This isn’t rocket science.”

Then, I say, “What do you want to bet that none of these men have subscriptions to the National Schismatic Reporter?”

Finally, I remind the readers what I posted the other day.  HERE  The new bishop of Albany, Most Rev. Edward Scharfenberger celebrated Holy Mass in the Extraordinary Form in his Cathedral recently.  This was the 1st time Mass has been celebrated in Albany’s Cathedral in decades.

Let’s be clear.  I am not suggesting that there is an immediate connection between saying a Pontifical Mass and a sudden increase in vocations, though I think that the fact of the Mass will be helpful for prompting vocations in the future.  I think that, if the numbers are accurate, men are reacting to a new style, a new vision which the new bishop has brought in.   Part of that new style and vision now includes willingness to celebrate Holy Mass also in the Extraordinary Form.   He is a both/and bishop.

Fr. Z kudos to Bp. Scharfenberger.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Fr. Z KUDOS, Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity, Seminarians and Seminaries | Tagged , ,
22 Comments

A note about the term Church Militant

paper-bagI post this because our dear Michael Sean Winters had a little nutty about my use of this term over at the Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter).

All of you Catholics who are reading this, even if you mostly identify with the dissenters at the Fishwrap, are members of the Church Militant, the Ecclesia Militans.

“Militant” is a scary word for libs (keep that paper bag handy) because it looks like the English word “military” (which must be a bad thing to belong to).

Militant comes from Latin milito, “to be a soldier, to perform military service”.  Note, “service”.

As a Catholic who is militans, “militant”that means that we dedicate ourselves with obedience and zeal to the role we are given in life through our calling and through our talents and good inclinations, our vocations in life.  It means that we are also prepared to fight the enemy wherever and whenever threats to the salvation of our own souls and our neighbor’s souls present themselves.  It means working together as units and not as individuals merely.   It means good conditioning and through drills in knowing well our Catholic Faith and practicing virtues and discipline in the use of the Sacraments.  It means submission to the Church’s teaching authority and her duly ordaining pastors.  It means fidelity, loyalty and even a willingness to die.

I now urge the Fishwrap types to have at hand a paper bag they can breathe into.

The Church Militant is made up of the living, we who are still on pilgrimage through this vale of tears, as the Salve Regina describes our earthly life.  The whole Church can be described as having three main kinds of membership, namely, those who are still alive here on Earth, those who are in an earthly sense dead but who live in Heaven (the Church Triumphant) and those who have died but who are, during their time of purification in Purgatory, awaiting their entrance into Heaven (the Church Suffering or Penitent).  These three are united, in one Holy Church, in a common “communion of saints”, even though we of the Church Militant often aren’t very saintly.

Church Militant is a common and traditional way to describe the living members of the Church.  For example, find it used as a hinge pin in the Catholic Encyclopedia.  Even though the Catechism of the Catholic Church 954 doesn’t explicitly use the terms Militant, Suffering and Triumphant, the concepts are clearly there when it describes the membership of the Church:

The three states of the Church. “When the Lord comes in glory, and all his angels with him, death will be no more and all things will be subject to him. But at the present time some of his disciples are pilgrims on earth. Others have died and are being purified, while still others are in glory, contemplating ‘in full light, God himself triune and one, exactly as he is”‘

That paragraph in the CCC quotes Lumen gentium 49; Mt 25:31 (which describes the separation of the blessed from the damned); 1 Cor 15:26-27 (which describes the ultimate triumph of God at the end of things); and the Council of Florence (1439) in DS 1305.  I will add that LG 43, on religious institutes, uses the phrase “militia Christi” to describe the support given by religious families to Church.

The old Catechism of St. Pius X uses the tripartite division, describing the Church Militant as the Church to which we actually belong.  Of course, you have to know that “actually” means “now”, and not loose English “really”.

In the Baltimore Catechism, in its explanation of the articles of the Creed, we find a great description

“The communion of saints:”

There are three parts in the Church. We have, first, the Church Militant, i.e., the fighting Church, made up of all the faithful upon earth, who are still fighting for their salvation. [The catholic Left, the Fishwrap types, are going to hate that description because of the implication that not everyone is saved (except for those meanies who don’t want to redistribute wealth or approve of sex with just about any carbon-based life form] The Holy Scripture tells us our life upon earth is a warfare. [Get that bag if you need it!  Then check 1 Tim 6:12: “Fight the good fight of the faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses.”  Then check 2 Cor 10: 3-5: “For though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every proud obstacle to the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ.”  Yes.  We have enemies.] We have three enemies to fight. First, the devil, who by every means wishes to keep us out of Heaven-the place he once enjoyed himself The devil knows well the happiness of Heaven, and does not wish us to have what he cannot have himself; just as you sometimes see persons who, through their own fault, have lost their situation trying to keep others out of it. [The devil has earthly agents, even within the Church.  Think of, for example, the horrid example of priests who harm children and also writers in the catholic media who consistently deceive souls and undermine the faith and good discipline of the Church by promoting dissent.]

Our second enemy is the world. This does not mean the earth with all its beauty and riches, but the bad people in the world with their false doctrines; [See above.] some telling us there is no God, Heaven, or Hell, others that we should pay no attention to the teaching of the Church or the laws of God, and advising us by word and example to resist our lawful superiors in Church or State and give free indulgence to our sinful passions. [I have the impression that the catholic Left’s agenda is mainly focused on sex. When they perceive that something is a threat to their own desires, they attack it.  Of course they will attack any traditional expression of the Faith, because worship and doctrine are inextricably intertwined.]

The third enemy is our own flesh. [See above] By this we mean our concupiscence, that is, our passions, evil inclinations, and propensity to do wrong. When God first created man, the soul was always master over the body, and the body obedient to the soul. After Adam sinned, the body rebelled against the soul and tried to lead it into sin. The body is the part of our nature that makes us like the brute animals, while the soul makes us like to God and the angels.

When we sin, it is generally to satisfy the body craving for what it has not, or for that which is forbidden. Why did God leave this concupiscence in us? He left it, first, to keep us humble, by reminding us of our former sins, and, secondly, that we might overcome it and have a reward for the victory. [Yes, its a war and, as Christians, we are soldiers on the march.]

The Devil is not a myth, friends, and Hell is real.  We have to fight against the effects of Original Sin constantly.  We need to take seriously the admonition of Paul in Ephesians 6 to put on the whole armor of God.  Read this and then say we are not the Church Militant:

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the equipment of the gospel of peace; besides all these, taking the shield of faith, with which you can quench all the flaming darts of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints.

Church Militant is a perfect description of who we are as Christians.

Think about this.  How do we fight again, say, temptations of the flesh or of other appetites?  We pursue the opposite.  If you are tempted to avarice, be generous.  If you are tempted to gluttony, fast.  If you are tempted to lie or gossip, hold your tongue and speak rarely.  Get it?  This is war.  We have to be good tacticians in every skirmish.

And another thing!  Who thinks that the “New Evangelization” is possible if we don’t also understand our roles in a Church that is also Militant?

The tripartite description of the Church doesn’t exclude other ways of describing our membership.  We aren’t either/or in this.  We can say that we are both the Church Militant and, say, the People of God, or even the Ecclesia Docens et Discens, the Teaching and the Learning Church, referring to the hierarchical teaching office and those who exercise it and those who are formed by the same.  We can use all sorts of ways to describe the Church, and, when they are balanced with each other, we have a far richer view of who we are and what we are called to.

However, leaving out one like Church Militant is, in light of the world, the flesh and the Devil, imprudent to the point of being either foolhardy or wicked or both.

So, if you are alive, and a Catholic, you are a member of the Church Militant, even if you are AWOL or a slacker or you are undermining your fellow members through dissent or vice.  If you are a one of those, by the way, God help you.  There’s hope for you while you are still drawing breath.  Once that breathing thing stops, however, it’ll be too late for you.  We can pray for you now, but we can never pray you out of Hell.  So, get yourselves squared away, especially through a good confession, and then do better.

By the way… Membership in the Ecclesia Militans… reason #1 for Summorum Pontificum.

Get out there and militate (i.e., be a good Catholic).

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, Our Catholic Identity, Si vis pacem para bellum!, The Coming Storm, The Drill | Tagged ,
20 Comments

Winters attacks

Michael Sean Winters of the National Schismatic Reporter brought a smile to my face today!

Winters is primarily reacting to Ross Douthat’s recent piece HERE.  Douthat commented in his piece on those who are more traditional and how they see Pope Francis.

However, Winters take the time to attack both me and His Excellency Bp. Robert Morlino by name.  Winters, clearly reacting to this post HERE, is terrified of the fact that Morlino and the Diocese of Madison have lots of solid seminarians and that both he and they are open to the Extraordinary Form.   This terrifies the Fishwrap and their kind.  It’s really pretty funny.

Let’s see a snip or two with my emphases and comments:

When Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum, he was seeking to address a felt pastoral need that had been expressed to him: People missed the old Mass and wanted it back. [That’s only part of the story.  Benedict also did that as a way to jump-start a process of organic development of our liturgical worship.  But I have written about that elsewhere.  The point is, Benedict did not do what he did merely from concern for a small group of people.  He did it for the good of the entire Church.] The fact that this particular form of dissent [“dissent”?  Where did that come from?] is not new is not comforting, however. As I have written before, I think it may have been necessary but it was very harsh to ban the old Mass when the novus ordo was introduced. But, I do not believe that Benedict intended to start a movement, still less an ideology. [And then the introduction of another scare word.]

You have only to read some of the traditionalists’ websites to realize that they think like a movement and have turned the old Mass into an ideology. This applies, as Douthat argues, to Rorate Caeli, which is pretty far out there, but also to more mainstream sites like Father Zuhlsdorf’s. When he compares enthusiasts of the old Mass to the Maquis, or uses the term “Church militant,” as he does this morning, you see evidence of that movement mentality that could easily turn schismatic.  [ROFL!  Suddenly Winters is worried about dissent and schism?  THAT’s rich, coming from the Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter.] And, it is one thing to see older folk who miss the old Mass seeking it out:  [See what he did?  The provisions of Summorum Pontificum are really only for old people who, from nostalgia, pine for the old days.  Fail.] It is another to find seminarians who do not remember it adopting it as a kind of badge of conservatism. [This is what scares them.  Seminarians, priests, bishops who are open to both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Form.] If I were a bishop and I had a young priest or a seminarian who was attracted to the celebration of the old Mass, I would be worried not comforted. And, bishops like Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin, who has taken to celebrating the old rite with greater frequency in public are not helping to keep this movement in check. [This is Winters way or signaling to his readers that it is time to attack Bp. Morlino.] The trads may be few in number but they are disproportionately represented among the clergy and that should be very worrisome. [It seems to me that Winters main problems is not so much that he doesn’t like the Extraordinary Form… he doesn’t like the people who like the Extraordinary Form.  He doesn’t like the people.]

Douthat correctly notes that a larger group of critics is found among those who do not much appreciate the pope’s comments on economics and politics. Douthat is right that this group is larger, and he is right that it is not schismatic, and he is right when he notes,

it’s still mostly a new version of a very old discussion among American Catholics — one that goes back to the Eisenhower-era controversy surrounding William F. Buckley Jr.’s criticisms of the encylical [sic]Mater et Magistra” and extends through Reagan-era arguments about economic policy — about how to apply Catholic social teaching in the American context, and whether that teaching can or should be reconciled with what you might call Anglo-Saxon capitalism.

The fact that this particular form of dissent is not new is not comforting, however.

This is rich.  Suddenly MSW and the Fishwrap are worried about dissent and schism!

I had to smile at the irony… and the additional traffic today!  Thanks!

 

Posted in Green Inkers, Liberals, Lighter fare, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , , , ,
34 Comments

Pope Francis and “doctors of the law”

Here is an interesting contrast.

First, a snip from an off-the-cuff, non-Magisterial remark of Pope Francis during a daily homily.  Note his disparaging words about “doctors of the law”.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Hmmm… it seems to me that there is something missing.  Of course these are only off-the-cuff remarks that have no magisterial weight whatsoever and no preacher can be expected in a short time to hit every possible point.   But it seems to me that he has set up a straw man: who the heck are these “doctors of the law” whom he has been disparaging with some frequency?  I think he means those who argue that people who are divorced and civilly remarried should not be admitted to Holy Communion because they are objectively living in a state that is inconsistent with our understanding of the Eucharist.

Next, let’s review Benedict XVI’s Post-Synodal Exhortation Sacramentum caritatis, which has teaching about the Eucharist and marriage.

The Eucharist and the indissolubility of marriage

29. If the Eucharist expresses the irrevocable nature of God’s love in Christ for his Church, we can then understand why it implies, with regard to the sacrament of Matrimony, that indissolubility to which all true love necessarily aspires. There was good reason for the pastoral attention that the Synod gave to the painful situations experienced by some of the faithful who, having celebrated the sacrament of Matrimony, then divorced and remarried. This represents a complex and troubling pastoral problem, a real scourge for contemporary society, and one which increasingly affects the Catholic community as well. The Church’s pastors, out of love for the truth, are obliged to discern different situations carefully, in order to be able to offer appropriate spiritual guidance to the faithful involved. [NB] The Synod of Bishops confirmed the Church’s practice, based on Sacred Scripture (cf. Mk 10:2- 12), of not admitting the divorced and remarried to the sacraments, since their state and their condition of life objectively contradict the loving union of Christ and the Church signified and made present in the Eucharist. Yet [here we go] the divorced and remarried continue to belong to the Church, which accompanies them with special concern and encourages them to live as fully as possible the Christian life through regular participation at Mass, albeit without receiving communion, [and] listening to the word of God, eucharistic adoration, prayer, participation in the life of the community, honest dialogue with a priest or spiritual director, dedication to the life of charity, works of penance, and commitment to the education of their children.

You see?  It doesn’t have to be a choice between “come to Mass and receive Communion anyway” and “don’t come to Mass if you can’t receive Communion”.   Another option, and one that Francis didn’t choose to mention when attacking “doctors of the law”, is as described, above, by his predecessor Benedict in what clearly is a magisterial document.

We have to ask ourselves the questions:

Is it nothing to go to Holy Mass and not receive Communion?

Do we get nothing out of Mass unless we receive Holy Communion?

It seems to me that the near mania to have everyone receive at every possible opportunity has created an unhealthy expectation that, in turn, has fogged our understanding of what the Eucharist is.

People who are not properly disposed to receive Communion (because, for example, they are living in an ongoing adulterous relationship) nevertheless still can participate in the life of the Church in many ways, as Benedict XVI (and that previous Synod) pointed out.

Comment moderation is ON.

Posted in Benedict XVI, Francis, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , , ,
40 Comments

Former SSPX Bp. Williamson, soon to be excommunicated … again

I saw at CWR that former SSPX Bp. Richard Williamson intends soon in Brazil to consecrate at least one priest as a bishop.

He will immediately incur, again, the excommunication which he had incurred at the time of his own illicit consecration in 1988 by the late Archbp. Marcel Lefevbre. That excommunication had been lifted by Benedict XVI as a sign of good will toward the SSPX. Williamson was subsequently expelled from the SSPX for his extreme positions.

So… I am reminded of my old analogy of old fashioned women’s silk stockings. Once they get a snag in them the fabric starts to run and there’s almost no way to stop it.

BTW… it seems to me that one of the reasons that Pope Francis is turned off by things traditional may be his hearing about what Williamson was like as rector of the SSPX seminary in Argentina. In 2009 the head of the SSPX, Bp. Fellay, removed Williamson from that seminary after Williamson denied the Holocaust. After that he was removed from the SSPX.

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, SSPX, You must be joking! | Tagged , ,
27 Comments