Skip to main content

Bishop Williamson denounces resistance to be sedevacantist ... or ....

+
JMJ


... at least he would if he followed his old principles ... but he seems to like the new ones too much.

When the "resistors" started off, they claimed that they were the carrying on the path of Archbishop Lefebvre.  I have read that Fr. Pfeiffer even claims that he is still a member of the SSPX and that Bishop Fellay is his superior.

This is a farce.


The reality is quite different on a number of levels.

Dogmatic: the Four Marks of the Church. Fr. Pfeiffer appears to have been poorly formed (or was napping during class) as demonstrated here and  here.

Doctrine: Obedience due to a superior's lawful command. In each case the "resistance" priests either disobeyed such a command or turned out to be sedevacantist.  Hence the una cum controversy.

From the founding doc for the sspx-mc:
... A remnant of priests willed to fulfill their Oath against modernism by having nothing to do with such wicked and premature compromise. They began to resist the new liberal tendencies, by simply remaining “a little army of rebuilders”, doing what an army does, fighting, until the new mass is
forbidden, Vatican II anathematized and the old Code of Canon Law enforced again by the Eternal Rome; and Tradition itself, not us, little soldiers, be recognized by a fully converted Papacy....
Here is what what bishop Williamson wrote about this opinion ( True Catholics).
The documents of Vatican II are openly heretical. There is nothing worth salvaging from that Council.
Now I see no difference between "Vatican II anathematized" and Bishop Williamson's assessment quoted above.

So if bishop Williamson has not changed ( a mantra of the resistance even as they turn on him ) then the sspx-mc and all the "resistors" that I have encountered have been denounced by Bishop Williamson because their opinions are "moderate sedevacantist" positions.

Practical: the resistors desire something more than a loose association.  However good luck with that ... Who gets to be in charge of a group of rebels??? They will only obey as long as it suits their purposes, otherwise they'd still be in the sspx.

Revolt begets revolt, as we see as the 'resistance' turn on Bishop Williamson and rend him.

So what he should do is swallow his pride and apologize to the SG and ask for readmittance to the SSPX.

Then at least something good will have come out of this mess call the 'resistance'.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations - Courtesy of SSPX.org

+ JMJ In the blogosphere there are number of responses to this crisis in the Catholic Church that lead to conclusions that run counter to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas - if taken to their logical conclusion. The validity of the New Rite of Episcopal consecrations is one such hotspot within more extreme sections of the 'traditionalist' culture. Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations Courtesy of SSPX.org Why the new rite of episcopal consecration is valid Introduction This comprehensive study was compiled to settle a debate that has been circulating in traditional Catholic circles. Some writers have examined the new rite of episcopal consecration and concluded that it must be invalid. Since this would cause manifest problems if it were true and due to the heightened awareness of such a theory, we present a study of this question concluding that it is valid. Following the Council, in 1968 a new rite for the ordination of bishops was promulg...

De Fide Teachings of the Catholic Church (Updated)

+ JMJ  Update: I was reviewing Ott's work directly and noted that some of the Teachings are De Fide while others are different levels of authority (such as Sent Certa etc).  So please refer to Ott for the actual classification). Posts Listing the Dogmas of the Catholic Church Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader (Oct 2022) Updated List of Teachings of the Catholic Church (Oct 2021) *** Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (Oct 2015) De Fide teaching of the Catholic Church (Apr 2013)           *** Latest version