Skip to main content

Mary Victrix: The Cyrpto-Lefebvrist Dodge (aka The Crypto-Lefebvrist Dodge)


Setting aside the spelling mistake in the title, I noticed yet another volley in the ongoing war of words between Fr. Greiger and various other people he has labelled as 'cyrpto-lefebvrists'.

I also noticed that he has made some statements that are not supported by references or distort the actual positions of the SSPX.

As a rule I assume that a person is of good-will and not of malicious intent.

This is, after all, the Catholic approach to relations.

So at this point I am assuming that Father Angelo Mary Greiger is simply operating under a confirmation bias, that he may be using to reduce any cognitive dissonance that he is experiencing.

As such when I noticed some of the issues with the post were incorrect, I emailed Fr. Greiger my thought.

As he has not amended the article, I post below a copy of my email.


Hi Father,
You failed to provide a reference for the following statement:
"... That intention, which he explicitly stated a number of times, was that the work of the Society should serve to weaken the influence of Vatican II.  ..." 
A reference would have been very supporting - especially if it was explicitly stated - as it would also seem to be inconsistent with the statement that the SSPX has the following approach to the council:

"...  This is quite along the lines of the distinctions made by Archbishop Lefebvre to read the Council in the light of Tradition:  what agrees with Tradition, we accept;  what is doubtful, we understand as Tradition has always taught it;  what is opposed, we reject. ..." ( )
Likewise, the CNS interview is helpful:
"The pope says that ... the council must be put within the great tradition of the church, must be understood in accordance with it. These are statements we fully agree with, totally, absolutely," the bishop said. "The problem might be in the application, that is: is what happens really in coherence or in harmony with tradition?" ( )

Also, that the SSPX accepts, in this light, 95% of the Council. ( )
Also you statement that the Hermeneutic of Continuity does not allow for "... debat[ing] the merits of the Council,..." seems inconsistent with the CNS report on the doctrinal preamble:

"... but the Vatican said it leaves room for "legitimate discussion" about "individual expressions or formulations present in the documents of the Second Vatican Council and the successive magisterium" of the church. ..."  (

Perhaps I am operating under my own confirmation bias, but from my perspective you appear to have your own cultural blind spots.

At this point, I am assuming your good-will in this conflict of opinions and I am hoping you will provide corrections as noted above for those elements that contradict your statements.

Be assured of my prayers.




Popular posts from this blog

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law – Part I: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ Is a Traditional Catholic who abandons the doctrine of the Catholic Church - are they truly worthy of the name of Catholic? This is why it is important to understand Catholic Doctrine so we don't knowingly abandon it! This is a lecture provided by Dr. Lamont that touches on the topic of obedience. Obedience is one key to emerging from this crisis. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May 2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law – Part I By John Lamont (Lecture given in New York on Friday, April 4, 2014)

Updated: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

+ JMJ   Update: There was a bit of an uproar over the consecrating bishop messing up / mumbling the key words of the consecration.  This, I am told, resulted in a do-over conditional consecration.  It would be funny if it weren't so serious and sad. :-(     I've had a series of "Error of the 'resistance' for years and now they've made their biggest mistake: Fr. Pfeiffer appears to have succeeded in conning some poor people into consecrating him a bishop. I don't know who the consecrating bishop was (on the left in the photo) but wow - based on previous reports it took him close to a decade (apparently Bishop Williamson refused) to find someone to consecrate him as a bishop. Given his doctrinal issues, I predict it won't be too long before he get's himself elected the pontiff of the 'resistance', just to one-up Bishop Williamson. Well, they need prayers, lots of prayers, to remove the beam from their own eye(s). P^3 h/t Eponymous Flower: http