SSPX update?

[Mrs_Sally]

I’m stuck on a little matter here.
After this summer’s debacle and the SSPX’s general chapter I remember reading that at the general chapter, it was decided that any sort of deal with Rome would be agreed to by a vote of the SSPX’s clergy. This would seem to be a HUGE obstacle and while we are talking about Fellay and the Pope wanting this to happen it would appear that Fellay gave up quite a bit of power to make this happen with that decision. It went from all Fellay has to do is sign a document to there will be a vote and all members will have a say… And trying to get all the members of the SSPX to agree to what color the sky is would be hard enough.

I agree and I think that’s what Br JR was saying in his post also. Just in general getting 500 people to agree about anything controversial is an issue! Even after a straight up and down vote, then what happens? It boggles the mind.

I will continue praying for reconcilliation, and continue following the story, but I can’t take the time or effort to speculate about people’s motives or actions any more. It hurts my brain too much.

 

[TimothyH]

She cannot speak for every individual associated with the SSPX anymore than she can speak for every individual associated with the mainstream Church. There are heretics in both groups and there are people in schism in both groups and those individuals are excommunicated automatically. We don’t need a big Hollywood production to excommunicate people. The law takes care of that. If you violate knowingly a law that carries the penalty of excommunication, then you’re excommunicated.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I’m a little late in reviewing this thread but this exact behavior can be seen here in Altanta.

Diane Dougherty attempted ordaination as a priest a few weeks ago. Repeated attempts by the local media to get Archbiship Gregory or Archdiocesan speokesmen to respond yeilded only a written statement which simply said “She will be automatically excommunicated.”

That’s it. There was no press conference. There was no official Church outrage. There was no demand for obedience or effort to redress grievances. Parish priests didn’t mention it in their homilies. There wasn’t even an explanation of why the Church excommunicates in a case like this. There was just a matter of fact statement “She will be automatically excommunicated” and the Church moved on.

-Tim-

 

[april32010]

MillTowns account has been hacked

 

[LightBound]

Because there was a thread that the hacker posted and Therese Martin (the Admin of CAF), removed, along with several other of his profane posts, that’s announced it was hacked. You can see his account is now in a limbo status since it was hacked. I’m sure the mods that are online are busy trying to clear this up.

 

[LightBound]

No, the hacker said he got into the account and then was posting all sorts of profanity, so it got removed. What he was doing was not of the character of MillTownCatholic. I just PM’ed a moderator that’s now online about this thread. Apparently they missed it or hadn’t gotten to it. There were about 25+ posts from the hacker they are removing

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Moderators are aware of the problem.
Lets keep the discussion of it off the public forum
Back to topic.
Thanks

 

[Dee_S]

I’m not too sure what the ‘problem’ under discussion was, but the words of Br JR are, as usual, to the point.

				Originally Posted by **JReducation** 					[forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9973522#post9973522) 				
			*She cannot speak for every individual  associated with the SSPX anymore than she can speak for every  individual associated with the mainstream Church.  There are heretics in  both groups and there are people in schism in both groups and those  individuals are excommunicated automatically.  We don't need a big  Hollywood production to excommunicate people.  The law takes care of  that.  If you violate knowingly a law that carries the penalty of  excommunication, then you're excommunicated.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV *
*

 

[Dee_S]

The 1988 encyclical Ecclesia Dei (given Motu Proprio) by Pope John Paul II is still very relevant:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html:

"c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that **formal adherence to the schism **is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.(8)"

Those in the SSPX have the overwhelming conviction that there is a ‘crisis in the Church’ - that can only be corrected by resistance and making demands for “the Church to change”. This blindness in outlook has come about and continues to exist because of a deep-seated fear - which has been inculcated and thoroughly imbibed.
“4. The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.(5)”
It is not only the Tridentine Rite which keeps them there.To whom that responsibility rests we can only leave up to God to judge.
Nevertheless, one’s perception being one’s reality, it is the major stumbling block in the process to regularize them within the Church.

“5. Faced with the situation that has arisen I deem it my duty to inform all the Catholic faithful of some aspects which this sad event has highlighted.
a) The outcome of the movement promoted by Mons. Lefebvre can and must be, for all the Catholic faithful, a motive for sincere reflection concerning their own fidelity to the Church’s Tradition, authentically interpreted by the ecclesiastical Magisterium, ordinary and extraordinary, especially in the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea to Vatican II. From this reflection all should draw a renewed and efficacious conviction of the necessity of strengthening still more their fidelity by rejecting erroneous interpretations and arbitrary and unauthorized applications in matters of doctrine, liturgy and discipline.”
It comes back always to a mistrust of the Church.

 

[Dee_S]

The 1988 encyclical Ecclesia Dei (given Motu Proprio) by Pope John Paul II is still very relevant:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html:
"c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that **formal adherence to the schism **is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.(8)"

Those in the SSPX have the overwhelming conviction that there is a ‘crisis in the Church’ - that can only be corrected by resistance and making demands for “the Church to change”. This blindness in outlook has come about and continues to exist because of a deep-seated fear - to whom that responsibility rests is a matter for God to judge.
“4.** The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition**. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.(5)”

Nevertheless, one’s perception being one’s reality, it is the major stumbling block in the process to regularize them within the Church.
“5. Faced with the situation that has arisen I deem it my duty to inform all the Catholic faithful of some aspects which this sad event has highlighted.
a) The outcome of the movement promoted by Mons. Lefebvre can and must be, for all the Catholic faithful, a motive for sincere reflection concerning their own fidelity to the Church’s Tradition, authentically interpreted by the ecclesiastical Magisterium, ordinary and extraordinary, especially in the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea to Vatican II. From this reflection all should draw a renewed and efficacious conviction of the necessity of strengthening still more their fidelity by rejecting erroneous interpretations and arbitrary and unauthorized applications in matters of doctrine, liturgy and discipline.”
It comes back always to a mistrust of the Church.

 

[JReducation]

And trying to get all the members of the SSPX to agree to what color the sky is would be hard enough.

You’ve reminded me of something in Franciscan history. During the early years of the order, the brothers would convene in Assisi every spring for a meeting called chapter. At the chapter the brothers would give their report to Francis and he would tell them what to do. They asked and answered questions.

What happened was that while the brothers on missions away from Assisi, they would pick up new brothers. Each year there were more brothers attending the chapter. One year there were 5,000 brothers. It’s recorded in history as The Chapter of Mats. There was no place to house that many brothers. They went to a nearby field where they slept on mats for a week.

It was then that Francis realized that you can’t get more than 10 people together to answer a simple question about the sky. Some will say that it’s partly cloudy and others will argue that it’s partly sunny. Both sides are so passionate about this that neither realizes that both statements are true.

From that experience the Franciscans learned to

a. Streamline – when the community became too large, a chunk was broken off with its own government, hence the more than 100 branches of the Franciscan family.

b. Centralize – Francis and his successors have the final word on everything except over the chapter. If a superior wants to make things happen, he does so before there is a chapter. Once it’s put on the table at the chapter, the superior is bound by the vote of the chapter. But the chapter cannot overrule the superior, if he acts first.

e. Delegate – Every house sends a delegate to the chapter to represent his house. No more mobs or mats. Superiors are not delegates. They are ex-oficio capitulars. Every house is represented by its superior and by a member of the house. The superior general may not lead the chapter. The capitulars elect chapter moderator. He is the superior during the chapter.

f. Secrecy – The delegates are not allowed to reveal what was discussed at the chapter nor who said what. The community receives the secretary’s notes with the conclusions. In this case, they would say something like, “After careful consideration and listening to the voice of the delegates, the chapter concluded that reunification with Rome is in order and the superior general ratified it.” The chapter decides and the superior general signs it. He does not have the power to overrule the chapter.

By putting these systems in place, discussions such as whether it’s partly cloudy or partly sunny are easy to control, because very few people are talking. What they say is unknown to the rest outside. No one can point the finger at Bishop Fellay or Bishop Williamson or someone else. No one will ever know who said what or what was said. Only the conclusion is printed. “After voting, it was agreed that it’s partly sunny.” Everyone has to accept it. From that moment forward, those who said it was partly cloudy are not allowed to mention clouds again. It’s over. The fat lady sang.

The notes are sent to Rome. The Holy See reviews them. If the pope approves, he signs off and whatever is on that paper is now law until the next chapter in six years.

These are the kinds of things that a young community like the SSPX will learn over the years, if it survives that long. In the meantime, they will blunder and trip all over the place trying to work cooperatively, until they realize that they need a centralized government that no one from the outside, lay or clergy, can influence and that speaks to no one outside, except to the Holy See.

People will claim that secrecy breeds conspiracies. Others will claim that the community has no right to keep their decisions a secret, because they have been faithful supporters of the community. They have even sold their homes, pulled their kids out of school and moved across country to be near the community. But guess what? People get over it. They realize that it’s going to be this way and that no one is asking them to like it or follow the drum. They can follow another drummer if they so choose to do. When you get very firm, but continue to love the other person, that person will eventually relax.

The SSPX has what I call “institutional adolescence.” It’s like the teen who has a man’s body, but a boy’s mind. He is trying to prove that he can do this on his own without looking to others for example and without consulting others. Eventually, its leadership will realize that the Society is too big to govern this way and then the leadership will look to communities that have governed themselves successfully for a very long time. The rest of us have to be patient and let them go through adolescence. However, like every adolescent, it does not mean that they can manipulate, make demands or fly under the radar.

That’s my :twocents:

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Moore11]

You’ve reminded me of something in Franciscan history. During the early years of the order, the brothers would convene in Assisi every spring for a meeting called chapter. At the chapter the brothers would give their report to Francis and he would tell them what to do. They asked and answered questions.

What happened was that while the brothers on missions away from Assisi, they would pick up new brothers. Each year there were more brothers attending the chapter. One year there were 5,000 brothers. It’s recorded in history as The Chapter of Mats. There was no place to house that many brothers. They went to a nearby field where they slept on mats for a week.

It was then that Francis realized that you can’t get more than 10 people together to answer a simple question about the sky. Some will say that it’s partly cloudy and others will argue that it’s partly sunny. Both sides are so passionate about this that neither realizes that both statements are true.

From that experience the Franciscans learned to

a. Streamline – when the community became too large, a chunk was broken off with its own government, hence the more than 100 branches of the Franciscan family.

b. Centralize – Francis and his successors have the final word on everything except over the chapter. If a superior wants to make things happen, he does so before there is a chapter. Once it’s put on the table at the chapter, the superior is bound by the vote of the chapter. But the chapter cannot overrule the superior, if he acts first.

e. Delegate – Every house sends a delegate to the chapter to represent his house. No more mobs or mats. Superiors are not delegates. They are ex-oficio capitulars. Every house is represented by its superior and by a member of the house. The superior general may not lead the chapter. The capitulars elect chapter moderator. He is the superior during the chapter.

f. Secrecy – The delegates are not allowed to reveal what was discussed at the chapter nor who said what. The community receives the secretary’s notes with the conclusions. In this case, they would say something like, “After careful consideration and listening to the voice of the delegates, the chapter concluded that reunification with Rome is in order and the superior general ratified it.” The chapter decides and the superior general signs it. He does not have the power to overrule the chapter.

By putting these systems in place, discussions such as whether it’s partly cloudy or partly sunny are easy to control, because very few people are talking. What they say is unknown to the rest outside. No one can point the finger at Bishop Fellay or Bishop Williamson or someone else. No one will ever know who said what or what was said. Only the conclusion is printed. “After voting, it was agreed that it’s partly sunny.” Everyone has to accept it. From that moment forward, those who said it was partly cloudy are not allowed to mention clouds again. It’s over. The fat lady sang.

The notes are sent to Rome. The Holy See reviews them. If the pope approves, he signs off and whatever is on that paper is now law until the next chapter in six years.

These are the kinds of things that a young community like the SSPX will learn over the years, if it survives that long. In the meantime, they will blunder and trip all over the place trying to work cooperatively, until they realize that they need a centralized government that no one from the outside, lay or clergy, can influence and that speaks to no one outside, except to the Holy See.

People will claim that secrecy breeds conspiracies. Others will claim that the community has no right to keep their decisions a secret, because they have been faithful supporters of the community. They have even sold their homes, pulled their kids out of school and moved across country to be near the community. But guess what? People get over it. They realize that it’s going to be this way and that no one is asking them to like it or follow the drum. They can follow another drummer if they so choose to do. When you get very firm, but continue to love the other person, that person will eventually relax.

The SSPX has what I call “institutional adolescence.” It’s like the teen who has a man’s body, but a boy’s mind. He is trying to prove that he can do this on his own without looking to others for example and without consulting others. Eventually, its leadership will realize that the Society is too big to govern this way and then the leadership will look to communities that have governed themselves successfully for a very long time. The rest of us have to be patient and let them go through adolescence. However, like every adolescent, it does not mean that they can manipulate, make demands or fly under the radar.

That’s my :twocents:

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Very interesting. I was hoping you could address this idea of the chapter needing to “vote” on a regularization. As a superior how much of an obstical is this? Could +fellay tell some how to vote using his status as superior? You are in a unique position to answer this. If your brothers were to vote on something this important could you influence them or not?

 

[JReducation]

Very interesting. I was hoping you could address this idea of the chapter needing to “vote” on a regularization. As a superior how much of an obstical is this? Could +fellay tell some how to vote using his status as superior? You are in a unique position to answer this. If your brothers were to vote on something this important could you influence them or not?

It is against Canon Law for the superior to order anyone to vote in any direction at a chapter.

For this reason, many superiors in Bishop Fellay’s position would have signed the preamble when it came to him and simply reported to the chapter what he had signed. At that point, the chapter decides how to implement what the superior has agreed to with Rome. But the chapter cannot undermine the superior’s actions prior to the beginning of the chapter. The superior cannot undermine the chapter’s actions. There is one more option left to the chapter that I’ll mention below.

To avoid a conflict of interests. The superior’s authority is suspended during the chapter. The delegates to the chapter elect one from among them to lead the community. The superior takes his place among his brothers as an equal. This is done in different ways. In our Franciscan tradition, the leader who is elected cannot be a superior. He can’t be the superior of the house in the next town, the superior of the house of formation, or the superior of the southern region, etc. If he’s a superior, he has a vested interest in certain decisions that the chapter may make. The leader has to be a brother who holds no office in the community.

I don’t now about the SSPX. They’re kind of different. They have brothers; but their brothers are religious while their priests are secular. I’m not sure if the brothers have a voice and a vote at the chapter or if it’s only the priests.

In a religious community, any of them, the delegates to the chapter must have completed their formation and have made perpetual vows. They need not be priests. The delegation is formed of priests and brothers. They have equal ranks and their votes count the same. The superior, whether he is a priest or bishop as is Bishop Fellay’s case, at that point lays down his claim to authority. He is one of the boys. Any attempt on his part to influence votes is considered hijacking the chapter. If prior to the chapter he orders any member of the community to vote one way or another, he is automatically excommunicated.

This part is very interesting. Anyone can lobby before the chapter begins. You cannot threaten, command, or deceive someone into voting your way. Once the chapter is in session, all lobbying must come to an end.

If I want something very badly, I would make it happen before a chapter. At the chapter, if the delegates want to change it, they need 2/3 majority to do so. This is not easy to get, as we well know from civil government.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Burdensome1]

R C posted:

Ok, my apologies, I should use some words more carefully.

You should use the internet more carefully. Your opinions seem misguided, to be charitable.

 

[Melchior_1]

I don’t now about the SSPX. They’re kind of different. They have brothers; but their brothers are religious while their priests are secular. I’m not sure if the brothers have a voice and a vote at the chapter or if it’s only the priests.

Brother, wouldn’t the religious (and those who belong to a secular order) attached to the SSPX have more pressing concerns other than the chapter?

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but by affiliating themselves with the SSPX and not their original community, have they broken away from their solemn vows? From what I’m reading in some books, I can’t imagine the Rule being very forgiving in this case.

 

[Stylites]

You should use the internet more carefully. Your opinions seem misguided, to be charitable.

His opinions are not in any way “misguided” in my opinion. Your opinions may differ. God, of course, has no opinions.

 

[JReducation]

Brother, wouldn’t the religious (and those who belong to a secular order) attached to the SSPX have more pressing concerns other than the chapter?

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but by affiliating themselves with the SSPX and not their original community, have they broken away from their solemn vows? From what I’m reading in some books, I can’t imagine the Rule being very forgiving in this case.

I’m referring to the Brothers of the Society of St. Pius X. The SSPX actually has religious brothers. The difference between them and other institutes of apostolic life, such as the Vincentians, is that their brothers are on equal footing with their priests. In the SSPX page for the brothers, the brothers were founded to serve the needs of the priests. There is a different relationship there.

Brothers who come from other religious communities and who associate themselves with the SSPX against the will of their superiors are dismissed and risk excommunication. This is the problem with the Capuchins at Morgon. They are not truly Capuchins. The law is very clear. No Franciscan can be a superior if he’s not canonically elected. Only a canonically elected can receive new vocations and grant faculties to any friar who is a priest. Their vows are not public vows, because the superior is not the successor of Francis.

Also, the law says that you cannot belong to two institutes at the same time, secular or religious. If you pledge obedience to the superior and rule of your community, you cannot pledge obedience to the SSPX superiors. One cancels out the other.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JustaServant]

Been a while since I have been on the TC forum, so I am just getting updated on the goings on with the SSPX.
IMO the chances for reunification would have been better back in the 1990s. The longer a group is independent, and stays cut off from the Church, the harder it is for reconciliation, almost like a divorce. This is a problem Protestant churches are very familiar with. When the Anglican communion reconciled with the CC, there were still break-away groups who will never return.
When the first generation of trads started to die off, the reasons for reconcliation became dimmer for the next generation. Thats why I put emphasis on that in earlier posts because neither liberal nor trad really understand that first generation. My parents attented an independent church back in the 1970s that had the TLM, but I can guarentee they would have run fast and far from what passes as ‘Traditionalism’ today.

 

[JReducation]

Been a while since I have been on the TC forum, so I am just getting updated on the goings on with the SSPX.
IMO the chances for reunification would have been better back in the 1990s. The longer a group is independent, and stays cut off from the Church, the harder it is for reconciliation, almost like a divorce. This is a problem Protestant churches are very familiar with. When the Anglican communion reconciled with the CC, there were still break-away groups who will never return.
When the first generation of trads started to die off, the reasons for reconcliation became dimmer for the next generation. Thats why I put emphasis on that in earlier posts because neither liberal nor trad really understand that first generation. My parents attented an independent church back in the 1970s that had the TLM, but I can guarentee they would have run fast and far from what passes as ‘Traditionalism’ today.

This is the same situation with the Eastern Orthodox Christians. After generations, the original issue is a non-issue and other problems arise.

If traditionalists are not careful, they will end up as a hybrid between Catholicism and Protestantism. They’re saying all of the Catholic things, but they’re speaking Protestant. Just the whole idea that they are waiting for the Church to covert back to Catholicism or back to tradition is very Protestant. This is the language of the early Protestant reformers.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JustaServant]

This is the same situation with the Eastern Orthodox Christians. After generations, the original issue is a non-issue and other problems arise.

If traditionalists are not careful, they will end up as a hybrid between Catholicism and Protestantism. They’re saying all of the Catholic things, but they’re speaking Protestant. Just the whole idea that they are waiting for the Church to covert back to Catholicism or back to tradition is very Protestant. This is the language of the early Protestant reformers.
Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Very good point Brother Jay.
This is not to say the interpretation of Vatican 2 back in the 60s and 70s (at least here in the States) was correct, but much of that is being turned around. They are missing a golden opportunity with this Pope they may not get again.

 

[Dee_S]

… the following extract from his most recent eleison commentI refrain from posting a link to his now-no-longer-hidden website)

"In brief, I think that the situation of today’s Catholic Resistance calls for no hurried action, but for a thoughtful measuring of men and events until the will of God becomes more clear. I think – I may be wrong – that he wants a loose network of independent pockets of Resistance, gathered around the Mass, freely contacting one another, but with no structure of false obedience such as served to sink the mainstream Church in the 1960’s, and is now sinking the Society of St Pius X. If you agree, by all means make contributions to the St Marcel Initiative because they will certainly come in useful, maybe sooner than I think. For myself, as soon as my situation stabilizes in England, I am ready to put my bishop’s powers at the disposal of whoever can make wise use of them."

I am quoting this extract from last week’s eleison comment, having taken a look at the latest called the “Marcellus Initiative”. It has me wondering if my first impression is not perhaps correct, in that Bishop Williamson really has ‘no place to land’?

Between the SSPX and Rome there is something of a No Man’s Land that does not have too many “pockets of Resistance” that he can offer service to. There are the half dozen or so renegade priests who have been expelled from the SSPX and perhaps some other individual traditional priests here and there, but can these be the “whoever” that make up his future support?

It is curious that knowing he was not prepared to fit into either SSPX or Rome, that he did not have plans or the means to establish himself prior to this, and is only now attempting to do so? Something odd about this ‘picture’ as can be seen from the following extracts:

"After last week’s presentation of details of the “Marcellus Initiative” set up to facilitate donations to the cause of an « expelled » bishop, a few readers reasonably asked what the “Initiative” would be for. To begin with, it will cover his personal expenses of moving out of Wimbledon, maybe out of London, and then living elsewhere. Over and above those expenses, the word “Initiative” was chosen deliberately to leave options open. However, it is important that nobody should think that their donations will any time soon go to the setting up of a replacement for the Society of St Pius X or a substitute seminary. There are good reasons for not hurrying to do either."

Having stated that the solution is not to be found with the Church or the SSPX, whose authority he believes is flawed, he goes on to speculate as to how the Pope’s authority could be restored and how he would fit in:
"Thus as God alone could establish Moses’ authority by a sensational chastisement of rebels (cf. Numbers XVI), so in our day surely God alone will be able to restore the Pope’s authority. Will it be by ”a rain of fire”, such as Our Lady of Akita forewarned in Japan in 1973 ? Be that as it may, oases of the Faith remain an immediate and practical possibility, and I will do my best to serve them."

He goes on to say that he will not be using the funding to start up any seminaries, claiming "It is more and more difficult to make Catholic priests out of modern young men, say I."

It appears he is hoping to be the spiritual leader of a new organization
**“Does that mean that God has given up on his Church, or that he means to leave us without priests for tomorrow ? Of course not. But it does mean that no Catholic organisation set up tomorrow to save souls can be allowed to lose its vision of the soul-destroying nature of the Conciliar Church and the modern world.”
**

His conclusions are chilling…
**“By hook or by crook, tomorrow’s Congregations and seminaries must keep their grip on reality, and not get lost in dreams of how “normal” they are, or need to be. Can it be done ? With God’s help, yes. But God is God, and for the salvation of souls tomorrow it may be that he will no longer resort to the classical Congregation or seminary of yesterday. For myself, I shall attempt to follow his Providence in the ordaining of priests - or in the consecrating of bishops. God’s will be done.” **