“The modern clergy, in order to save the institution, try to get rid of the message,” wrote Nicolás Gómez Davila. Today we can put it like this: “The clergy of the SSPX, in order to save the institution, try to get rid of the message”. In other words: ignore Monsignor Lefebvre’s instruction to stay away from the Conciliar Church in order to remain Catholic.
What seems to be the modernists’ final stroke to recycle the SSPX into Conciliar Rome in order to disintegrate it, has just been accomplished. “Cede to defeat” is one of the governing principles of Judo. It is a matter of using the force of the opponent in order to unbalance and beat him: the opponent believes that is gaining ground, but suddenly he is defeated by his own momentum that is used against him.
The modernists, and especially Francis, have used this clever tactic with the SSPX: cede to defeat. And so they managed to pull them over to themselves, to their own terrain, to where the Romans are much stronger.
Recently an article by an SSPX accordista (Fr. Knittel) mentioned that with Francis, Rome has imposed “a logic of appeasement”. In fact, Francis applied this logic to the Society in order to appease it, and he achieved just that. But the modernists and the liberals are not content with that, and they won’t stop their war against the true Catholic faith. That is why this unilateral appeasement, disguised as friendly and diplomatic, has had no other purpose than to render the Soceity harmless. Today we can clearly see - in Rome itself! - their resulting success. And this is how the traditionalist mouse, following the smell of the Roman cheese, finally entered the cat’s house.
These are the recent events: the SSPX organized a group pilgrimage to Fatima, and the two districts of South America [organized] the same to Rome. And in Rome, Francis ceded several of the most important basilicas to the SSPX priests to celebrate Mass in: St. Lawrence, St. Mark, St. Sebastian in the Catacombs, St. Peter in Montorio, St. Salvatore in Lauro, St. Praxedes, St. Giovanni Rotondo (outside of Rome). Thus now it appears that the SSPX triumphantly entered Rome with the Tridentine Mass. That they started demolishing Conciliar Rome. That now we can all sing victory.
Victory? But, are Francis and the modernists turning to Tradition then?
No. Francis detests Tradition. Francis is one hundred percent a modernist, an ecumenist and a judaizer. Francis is a blasphemous destroyer. And this Francis just said that “the liturgical reform is irreversible.“
Well, Rome cedes that some [priests] celebrate the Tridentine Mass in their churches and basilicas in exchange for… their silence. Modernist Rome tolerates the SSPX while the SSPX tolerates modernist Rome. That is: as long as you don’t question them, as long as you do not denounce them, as long as you don’t fight them. As long as you let them continue with their conciliar disorders and their UN agenda. While they carry on. That is, as long as the SSPX tolerates what they not only should refuse to tolerate, but what they should fight against.
Celebrating the traditional mass in today’s Rome has a price. The SSPX is willing to pay that price. And they paid it.
We are witnessing a “logic of appeasement”. Did the Society not end up weakly deploring that “Pope Francis visibly distanced himself from one of the intentions formulated by the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum: to serve as a mutual enrichment between the two forms of the rite, enhancing on the one hand the sacredness and the verticality of the pre-conciliar form, and on the other, highlighting the richness of the scriptures and the participation of the faithful of the post-conciliar form“1?
Did the Society not just tell us that the only difference between the truly Catholic Mass and the bastard Mass of the council is a matter of “security” that they have to offer: “Be that as it may, between the reform and the reform of the reform, the traditional rite or the Mass of St. Pius V remains the surest way of rendering to God the worship due to Him in all justice, in a spirit of adoration and truth“2?
It is no longer a matter of fighting modernist errors, with the risk of being “excommunicated” (that was in Monsignor Lefebvre’s time, what do you expect?), but of shwoing a positive facade so that there may be a mutual enrichment.
Now is no longer a time to be intolerant. Tolerance is a fundamental principle of Freemasonry. Francis tolerates Luther and the Muslims, he tolerates the Jews and the homosexuals. And now Francis tolerates traditional Catholics. In the Bergoglian polyhedron we now have the whole “reconciled diversity”. Because the important thing is “the culture of the encounter” …
Meanwhile they brush aside the whole Catholic religion and morality. Meanwhile the Catholic faith is demolished.
Because, as Gómez Davila says, “no one is more respectful of the beliefs of others than the devil,” but he tolerates [only] the beliefs that are not intolerant of himself. And the only one that is truly intolerant of evil and of error is the Catholic Religion. Totally and sincerely. In all its doctrinal purity. In its holiness. Whenever it [the Catholic Religion] becomes corrupted with a little bit of liberalism, it starts to become tolerant of error, it starts to assume a double facade, it starts to love the world and all its pomps, it starts to love the first places at banquets, all those things that the devil knows how to procure [for them].
We have just witnessed a formal act of surrender of the SSPX to Rome: Rome cedes its temples, and the SSPX returns its … silence.
Rome opens its temples and the Society closes its mouth.
This is not an opinion. This is a fact.
We have seen and heard the sermons of Fathers Trejo, Montagut, Gomis, Rubio, Conte, Cortés and Jimenez. Are they priests or tour guides? Logically, all of them begin their sermon by expressing their gratitude to those who opened their doors for them to celebrate their Masses. Then how could they criticize the Chieftain of all those kind vicars and priests who loaned them such venerable temples? Of course they couldn’t say anything inconvenient. Francis and Bishop Fellay have good relations (so assures us that same Francis). So, in their sermons they give us a tour of the history of these temples and of the saints and martyrs that were there. And they talk over and over again about Eternal Rome. They talk about the past … without drawing any lessons for the present.
Good gracious! Say something of today’s Rome, which Monsignor Lefebvre called the Rome of the antichrist, or Conciliar Rome? Say anything against the modernist heretics? Say anything against Vatican II? Say anything against the statue of Luther in the Vatican? Anything against sodomite masonry installed inside Rome? No. That cannot be. There is no crisis in the Church, there is no Francis. Nothing. Nothing at all. There is only Eternal Rome. The one that they reduced to temples and statues, because they refuse to boldly carry on fighting and speaking out.
Don’t be a party pooper now!
In the Basilica of San Marcos, Fr. Trejo spoke of a “Mark the lion who roars in the desert”. But Fr. Trejo the cat purrs in Rome with an effeminate tenderness. The sermon was totally harmless, pusillanimous, embalmed, coming from the district superior, to conclude the great “triumphant” pilgrimage of the SSPX. No doubt for them this is how to get to Aconcagua [Ed.: Aconcagua is the highest mountain in the Western hemisphere, located in western Argentina, near the Chilean border]. And these priests are at the pinnacle of their careers. Thanks to Francis and bishop Fellay!
As the Colombian “integralist” Alejandro Ordoñez recently told a well-known sodomite journalist: “speaking the people will understand”.
And meanwhile they talk about the martyrs …
At the end of his sermon, Trejo says: “Our message is humble and silent” (sic). Yes, he did not have to say so, but he did and he confesses it: “a silent message” … It looks a lot like the “silence” in Scorsese’s movie, doesn’t it? The martyrs died for not being silent. And that death gave them life. The Society lives by silence. And that life will bring it death.
In his turn, Fr. Gomis also appealed to Monsignor Lefebvre, hiding what does not suit his accordist propositions. I already drew attentioin to Fr. Gomis’s background on this [Syllabus] blog3.
Gomis mentions Monsignor Lefebvre and his “Spiritual Journey”, when he speaks of the Romans, that one can not be a Catholic without being Roman, etc. Very well. But Gomis takes great care not to mention Monsignor Lefebvre when he speaks of Conciliar Rome, being in opposition to Eternal Rome. And all those criticisms that in the same text the Archbishop raised against the modernist authorities. Or those immortal words that have now been erased from the memory of today’s Society: “It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith.“
“They will persecute you in my name,” recalls the pretentious and pompous Fr. Cortes, defending a congregation that preferred to stop being persecuted (which is no longer persecuted by those who persecuted the Society of Monsignor Lefebvre, as Menzingen herself says4), to pursue favors from the enemies of the Catholic Faith. Hollow words that reverberate through the walls of the Basilica of San Sebastian and that leave through the door to get lost in the Roman heat, while the “chic” people of the city then go to the same temple in order to celebrate their duly performed marriages, between Roman lust and pomp.
“Take care of your priests, esteem your priories,” demands this priest. It would be better to turn this around, that these priests would take care of their faithful and esteem them enough to be able to give their lives for them, or even more so, to open their mouths in order to preach valiantly in continuity with Christ, the Apostles and their great Founder. Because Christ came to serve, and here it seems that the Society wants to be served.
And then there is Fr. Conte (another effeminate) who came out saying “Faith is here in the heart”. Of course, it’s no longer in the head, which reminds us of that other quote of Gomez Dávila: “When a Catholic puts up a better fight against vices than against heresy, there is little Christianity that remains in his head.“
And so we can follow the same pattern in any of these elaborate tourist sermons.
Meanwhile, faithful Catholics groan and pray that God may put an end to this calamitous papacy, and that He may once and for all rid us of this type of Nero who is occupying the chair of Peter. And at the same time they do their best to resist the assaults of the modern world against faith, morality and the family, and to resists the priests of the Soceity, who instead of calling us to arms and to courageous and virile resistance convey the insincerity and lukewarmness of a congregation that has already lowered its arms, and who organize campaigns of visits that, to top it all off, should prepare in the faithful a spirit amenable to an agreement with Rome, which appears to be inevitable.
And one might ask: why did they go to Rome? Were they not to give glory to God? Have they no zeal for His glory? Do not they love Christ? And if they love Christ, do they not hate everything that is odious to Christ? Are they not there in order to fight for Christ the King? Is Rome not the best place to proclaim the whole truth at the top of one’s voice? Is not there where the first Christians were martyred the ideal place to shout to the modernists who occupy Rome what Monsignor Lefebvre said: “We adhere with our whole heart, and with our whole soul to Catholic Rome, the Guardian of the Catholic Faith and of those traditions necessary for the maintenance of that Faith, to Eternal Rome, Mistress of Wisdom and Truth. Because of this adherence we refuse and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies, such as were clearly manifested during the Second Vatican Council, and after the Council in all the resulting reforms”? Did anyone over there remember these words of the founder of the Society ?
But that we must fight the ideas presently fashionable in Rome, coming from the Pope’s own mouth, .. is clear, clear, for all they do is repeat the opposite of what the Popes said and solemnly stated for 150 years. We must choose, as I said to Pope Paul VI: “We have to choose between you and the Council on one side, and your predecessors on the other; either [we are] with your predecessors who stated the Church’s teaching, or with the novelties of Vatican II.“
And we must not waver for one moment either in not being with those who are in the process of betraying us… “After all, we must be charitable, we must be kind, we must not be divisive”… They are shaking hands with the Church’s destroyers. They are shaking hands with people holding modernist and liberal ideas condemned by the Church. So they are doing the devil’s work…They are in an impossible situation. Impossible. One cannot both shake hands with modernists and keep following Tradition…That is what killed Christendom in all of Europe… It was the Liberals, it was those who reached out a hand to people who did not share their Catholic principles.
We must choose.. We too have chosen to be Counter-revolutionary, … to be against the modern errors, to stay with Catholic Truth, to defend Catholic truth…This fight between the Church and the liberals and modernism is the fight over Vatican II… The more one analyzes the documents of Vatican II, and the more one analyzes their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, the more one realizes that what is at stake is not merely superficial errors, … but rather a wholesale perversion of the mind… A wholly different version of Revelation, of Faith, of philosophy!
What can you do with people like that? What do we have in common with people like that? Nothing!…it is not our fight, it is Our Lord’s fight, which the Church has carried on…So we cannot waver. Either we are for the Church, or we are against the Church and for the new Conciliar Church which has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, or less and less to do with it.5
Effeminate, petulant, stupid, deceptive, servile, proud, fatuous, cowardly, obsessive, Pharisaic. Those are the priests that Bishop Fellay wants and those are the ones that form the Neo-SSPX.
Monsignor Lefebvre also said of the liberal Paul VI that “through this psychological weakness, this Pope offered a dreamed-of occasion, a considerable opportunity for the enemies of the Church to take advantage of him: all the while keeping one face (or half a face, as you will) Catholic, he did not hesitate to contradict Tradition. He showed himself favorable to change, baptized mutation and progress, and went thus in the direction of all the enemies of the Church, who encouraged him“6
This can also be said of Bishop Fellay, who uses the enemies of Catholic Tradition to destroy the SSPX. “What I do now is to say to Rome: the only thing, the only condition sine qua non [for us] to accept a recognition, is [for you] to accept us as we are” Bishop Fellay said at a conference to the faithful in Brazil in November 2015. So, as they are? They just demonstrating it publicly in Rome. They are demonstrating it in their publications and websites. They are demonstrating it in the liberal and aberrant principles that have invaded their schools. They are demonstrating it with their silence before Francis.
“Live and let live” is the first of the principles of Francis’ decalogue to be happy. And in that he is perfectly understood by bishop Fellay.
“We are called to respect the religion of others, its teachings, symbols and values,” said Francis on the occasion of him congratulating the Muslims for Ramadan. With their silence, the Neo-Society is giving the same message: “We respect the religion, the teachings, the symbols and values of the Roman modernists, because they cede us this nook of a glorious basilica for us to recite our Mass.“
But this arrangement can only produce lukewarm and cowed Catholics. “This discouragement,” said Monsignor Lefebvre, “this weariness is not the spirit of the Church, of those who have fought for the faith, who have shed their blood to keep the faith: the martyrs refused to offer incense to the idols of their time. The liberals, on the other hand, want to get along with the enemies of the Church, they want to be on good terms with the world, they prefer to abandon their faith in order to get along with the world rather than to be martyrs. We must preserve the spirit of the martyrs: to suffer with the Church and for the Church.“7
We remember what Chesterton said: “A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.“
The SSPX was dragged by the current towards Rome, because it is moribund and without strength. It does not stay in Rome because it is not dead yet. But its chain will come to drag it again, and next time [that pull] will be stronger. And then it will remain there where the Anti-Church resides, where the network of the sewers of all heresies converge, as St. Pius X put it. Not in Eternal Rome, of course, but in modernist Rome.
One of these priests tells us that it is in the church of the Catacombs of San Sebastian that the footprints of Our Lord Jesus Christ are imprinted in rock, recalling how St. Peter, coming out of the Via Appia while the persecution was raging in Rome, how he looked in the other direction as the one where Our Lord came from with the cross. Then we find this dialogue:
“Quo vadis Domine?” (Where are you going, my Lord?), to which Christ replied: “Romam vado iterum crucifigi” (I am going to Rome to be crucified again).
Today it is the following dialogue that would take place, this time Our Lord being the one who asked:
“Quo vadis Fraternidad San Pío X?“
“I am going to Rome, fleeing persecution and pursuing recognition by your enemies, my Lord.“
- http://fsspx.news/en/search/dici/irreversible ↩
- Ibid ↩
- http://syllabus-errorum.blogspot.mx/2014/01/soberbia-y-rebeldia.html ↩
- http://syllabus-errorum.blogspot.mx/2017/04/control-de-danos-en-la-neo-fsspx.html ↩
- Archbishop Lefebvre’s address to his priests given in Econe, Switzerland on September 6, 1990, two years after the consecrations of 1988 ↩
- Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him, Chapter XXXI, page 228 ↩
- Archbishop Lefebvre, Spiritual Conference in Ecône, December 3, 1982 ↩