Canonical Recognition (A Rat’s Tale/Tail)
A seminary rat is granted a clear canonical recognition by Empoy the cat. As agreed the rat is taken as he is, since they all heard the promise “you shall be taken as you are”, a rat is a rat.
Yet it is cat eats rat by the dozen, and one wonders why past experiences have never taught anything to the unsuspecting creatures.
The claws and thongs worked an unexpected embrace and it is the rat that joined the cat’s tradition by a straightforward digestion and assimilation.
Severed heads and tails often lay about as a warning and reminder; cats prowl about everywhere and lay in ambush to the young rats who are not listening to the advice of departed old rats.
Never have cats departed from their ways, nor will rats. Cat + Rat = Cat.
The bamboos were not coming last December, as there are only two good months to cut them in order to minimise bukbuk infestation.
Hence I ordered Bro. June Mark to order all possible bamboos in the valley.
Then after two months an uphill avalanche of more than 1000 bamboo pieces came. The fields around the seminary were strewn with bamboos. They are now stored properly, yet, what shall we do with them?
The ugly skeleton of the upper building awaits its flesh, just like in the vision of Ezekiel.
If it is still not enough to absorb the quantity, the building will grow further west.
Delays are gripping the construction of the tower drawn in the previous issue, but all bamboos will fulfil their destiny.
All things considered, the four Cardinals have elected to return to silence. Francis can move on. At least they were truthful enough to admit it is not worth the fight for the truth because not enough prelates wish to side with them (they could also tell us “we did not calculate accurately the costs that the service of the truth entails”). Truth will have to fight its way without their voice, it never used them much before anyways. If only truth had a greater following, those eminences would gather some means, yet since too many men are not interested, let’s follow Scorcese’s advice and be silent...
...otherwise we are going to be expelled, persecuted, misunderstood or taken as revolutionaries. Blame it on the truth, for it is Truth itself who said, after everybody had abandoned the Truth “... and you, do you also want to go?” Peter should have replied “I don’t have enough prelates; only 11 others; one of them a traitor, sorry, Lord.”
When will clergymen at last understand that the object of our religion is to adore the Truth? The true faith is the formal cause of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is not an assembly of people... for at this level you are at the material cause of things: Islam, Mormons, Hindus, born-agains... are assemblies, yet they are not the Church because nothing but the Truth defines the true Church.
Moreover, and it is quite important – the truth is watching. “Dominus de caelo prospexit”, “The Lord sees from the heavens”. And what did he see? “There is no one, not even one.” “All have declined and become useless together”, just like those Cardinals who want to stay together with their confrères, uselessly.
Why do men repeat constantly the same mistake? I think it is because they want to live (a normal) life. They are in communities, families, societies, companies; that’s their life. If these assemblies of men are in the right or in the wrong, what does it matter? The Americans say “my country, right or wrong”. Our Lord is interfering with this attachment of men, even conflicting with it “if anyone does not hate his father, wife, children...”, “He who shall save his life shall lose it.”
Hence what Our Lord contends is that life is the truth, and not “life is life”. He clearly states “I am the Truth and the Life”. St John points it perfectly “in Him life remained (the Latin “Erat”) and this Life is Light” or the Truth. St Peter saves the day in John VI “Where shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life” meaning, there is no life outside of your Truth. No two ways: either this life or His divine life.
Poor Cardinals, and poor liberal Catholics: they are sailing towards death, they are not even abandoning the Truth in a time of persecution... the enemies of the Truth even say they would back down if there was a greater resistance to the operation of error; so the question is this: if those who did not stand for the Truth lost their eternal life when persecution was raging, what is going to happen to those who abandon the Truth outside of times of persecution?
You may say, “It is hard to resist”, “It’s tough to go against the flow”. Then truth has dispositions well prepared to answer that question, “My yoke is sweet”, “I am your overexceeding reward” etc. Our Lord was waiting for that one.
Our Lord is not going to love his friends?... Nor reward them now? He died in witness for the Truth, came into this world to bear such a witness and has always looked for like minded people to run His church and keep it from sinking into the ocean of lies. This was seen throughout the history of the church, and now, according to these eminences, truth is going to triumph with the applause of the world?
Ultimately, the world will listen, and the world will convert, but it won’t be by telling what the world wants to hear, but by loving the truth at the expense of the world’s good pleasure... But it is only then that a paradox happens: As the world fights and condemns the witnesses to the truth, many eyes start to open that would not have opened otherwise. And that’s the way the truth has always triumphed in the past. We saw the reverse with Vatican Two. They wanted to reconcile with the modern world, and the more they did, the less the world listened, the more the Novus Ordo church became irrelevant.
No. If you want the world to listen, tell the Truth that hurts first, then heals, second, like a good medicine.
Satan has enough well positioned heretics, Francis is the best positioned of them, to spread his lies; all he expects from those who know better is to be silent. How much they lie to themselves when they say they are on the right side by being silent! By not “standing in the truth” they lied to the world and lost against it, and ultimately lied to themselves.
SSPX Canonical Frankenstein
Will they ever tire of squaring circles and circling squares year after year? Last year it was about ordinations and confessions, now, marriage. In a nutshell, Bishop Fellay wants every SSPX priest to ask the diocese for ordinary jurisdiction, and use supplied jurisdiction only by default.
- The problem is that the conciliar doctrine and praxis is very far, far away from the teaching of the Church, and even the words of Christ Himself. That is why the faithful must be protected, because in the forum of the Novus Ordo, marriage has become something so fragile, so dissoluble. Pope Francis is butchering marriage just now...
- The extraordinary form of marriage, which we are using now, is not subject to the permission of the ordinary. It is based on the natural law, that enables a man and a woman to marry if the ordinary channels of authority fail (Canon 1098). Some tried to strike down this case of exception, in the (useful and discarded by Cardinal Bea) preparation of Vatican II (but the Prepatory Commission wisely rejected this attempt). Bishop Fellay does not realise that a law of exception is not subject to the law normally, and if it were, he would need a lot more proceedings than a simple, and yet convoluted Menzingerial communiqué.
- While admitting that one cannot operate under two types of jurisdiction, (ordinary and supplied (Can. 209)), Menzingen is placing the Society and all other friendly communities under a dual, contradictory, jurisdiction. A squarcle.
- What is to be done of the SSPX marriage that the conciliar authorities declared invalid? Should we petition Novus Ordo officials to validate some of our marriages while they consider the rest invalid? And if they do a healing in the root of our marriages, what can they do of the marriages they broke then (I know several cases in the United States, at the hand of the Society of St Peter)?
- Like Benedict in 2007, Francis is simply repackaging the Novus Ordo position on SSPX marriages. The so-called generous offer he is making was already in effect, just like before Benedict, John Paul II had granted “permission” to celebrate the true Mass on condition Vatican II and the New Mass were accepted. In his document Francis in no way concedes the validity of SSPX marriages without Novus Ordo canonical form.
Hence Bishop Fellay has nothing to thank him about.
The French Reaction
Yet something is not going to plan in this canonical recognition in tranches, in stages, in phases, in little two steps forward. Seven deans and three communities rose against the idea of submitting our marriages to the Novus Ordo. The problem is big, since even Fr Puga, who was supposed to replace Fr de la Rocque, is supporting the deans (Fr Vassal is out, perhaps because his antecedents are known even in France).
It is of capital importance for those confrères to understand that their demotion/mutation is not of disciplinary but of doctrinal nature. Menzingen needs to paint their endeavour as “subversion” while it is the putting of Catholic marriage which is real subversion. Subversion, the turning of things upside down, has happened from above, like a demolition crane levels a house from above, like Monte Cassino got bombed from above by the RAF.
Like in 2012, Menzingen wants to demolish the bulwarks, while archiving, (vertically as well), the complaints of the priests, but squeal, shriek and erupt if the matter is brought to the knowledge of the ultimate victims: the faithful.
If the problem continues to be brought to the knowledge of the faithful, then those priests are saving their souls, because also the faithful are saving theirs by being warned not to rejoin the gradual reconciliation of the irreconcilable.
Not only that, but they fulfil their priesthood, which is sealed in the death of the King who laid down His life in testimony to the Truth, as he so explicitly told Pilate, just a few hours before dying.
All they need to insure themselves is that they are speaking the truth, leaving the rest to Providence, who will continue to bestow additional graces to those who are putting their career and worldly image to forfeiture.
Of course we would love to see those priests point out the perpetrators of the selling out of Tradition to the New Rome, but that moment is not too far off in some of them. It is also a happy surprise to see some priests, whom we did not expect to break the law of silence, swallow their fears and make a public stand. They need our prayers, and the devil is cunning... He will try to cut short this good start and transmute a rebuke into a reBurke.
The Vienna Consecrations
In the meantime the Resistance further organises, and Bishop Williamson completed the quatuor of Bishops on the 11 of May, full moon (symbol of Our Lady) of the month of Mary in the 100 year of Fatima. The ceremony, in spite of being on a rainy weekday gathered 500 souls, then 320 came to the banquet. Less people came on the first pontifical Mass of Bishop Zendejas, but the sermon on the consecration of Russia was outstanding. The impression one gets in seeing these four traditional Bishops working in unison is that of a return to the situation Archbishop Lefebvre left. Moreover “Facienti quod in se est, Deus non denegat gratiam”, their intent is to do everything in them to call on to Heaven while things fall apart around them, knowing that when God sees that, He’s much inclined to come and help.
It is also quite important to witness the orderly and public performance of these consecrations, while we see sedevacantists still debating the validity of their respective lines: the SSPV (Mendez line) denies the validity of the Thục line (Bp Sanborn) and vice versa. The consecrations of both lines were performed before so few witnesses; two only witnessing the critical consecration of Bishop Guérard des Lauriers. They did not take place in public places, but in motels or private homes. Canonical papers are missing or are deeply flawed. On the Thục side, we cannot be sure Bishop Thục was “compos mentis”: he consecrated the Palmarian church papal line, and a great host of dubious subjects. Several people claim they heard him saying “I withheld my intention”, while before, during and after them he never was a sedevacantist. Fr/Bp Guérard had to correct him constantly on that point, even within the ceremony of his dubious consecration. Bp Thục went on very soon concelebrating the New Mass with John Paul II and was all along a Novus Ordo Bishop in good public standing with the Novus Ordo.
The situation is so inextricable that many sedevacantists urge both lines to hold a convalidationalfest, reconsecrating each other then reordaining conditionally all sede priests, but that looks unfeasible and egos are always inflating, let alone tempers.
Even Fr Cekada wrote “one Bishop in every garage” to take down the Thục line he now upholds. Non conclavist sedevacantism is now irremediably split; so that when people are tempted with sedevacantism they must consider not only the doctrinal flaws of that position, but also the question of the validity of their sacraments.
Hence it was of capital importance that the Vienna and Campos consecration were performed adequately. The ire of Bishop Burbidge is also a tacit endorsement of the validity of the ceremony.
Statement from the Most Reverend Michael F. Burbidge on the Consecration of Father Gerardo Zendejas, Member of an Independent Church
On May 11, 2017, at the St. Athanasius church in Vienna, Virginia, Bishops Richard Williamson, Jean-Michel Faure and Tomas de Aquino will consecrate Father Gerardo Zendejas a bishop of a schismatic community, that is, a group that refuses to submit to the ecclesiastical authority of the Roman Pontiff.
St. Athanasius is not a church in communion with the Roman Catholic Church or the Diocese of Arlington, and its clergy do not lawfully celebrate the sacraments in the Diocese of Arlington. As the Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Arlington, I cannot and will not recommend or condone attendance at St. Athanasius at any time for anyone in communion with the Roman Pontiff and the Roman Catholic Church.
Bishop Williamson was expelled from the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in 2012. Since that time he has affiliated himself with an independent church formed by groups around the country. While authoritative information about these groups is incomplete, it appears that they are currently in schism from the Catholic Church, refusing to submit to the authority of Pope Francis, the legitimately elected and governing Successor of Saint Peter. Under church law, “schism” refers to a refusal to submit to the Pope or a withdrawal from communion with the members of the Church subject to him (Canon 751).
The illicit consecration of a bishop is an act of grave disobedience, a wounding of the unity of the Church and a source of serious scandal. Canon law states, “A bishop who consecrates someone a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person who receives the consecration from him incur a latae sententiae [that is, automatic] excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See” (Canon 1382). Since Bishop Williamson previously consecrated Bishop Faure and Bishop Tomas without a mandate from the Holy See, these three bishops who plan to participate in the consecration scheduled to take place on May 11 have each already incurred excommunications under Canon 1382. #
Please join me in praying that all those involved in this illicit episcopal consecration may, through Our Lady’s intercession, return to full unity with the Catholic Church.
With validity there must also be licity, or the permission to proceed. In normal time, that permission to obtain a Bishop who shall defend the deposit of the Faith was readily granted by Rome. The ceremony of consecration is adamant on the profession and transmission of the faith as the capital duty of a Bishop.
Today’s Papacy mandates the destruction of the faith; “they are criminals in the faith” said the Archbishop in 1988. There is no way we can obtain a mandate that protects the faith. Yet the Church has a mandate and a command from the Lord “to teach all nations whatever I have commanded”. This direct order of God still stands, should the official church fail to issue a faith-transmitting apostolic mandate.
That is why, just like the Archbishop, who set our precedent in 1988, we say “we have a mandate from the Roman Church” yet the situation of 1988 has grown worse, and the neo-SSPX Bishops are not blocking the canonical, doctrinal, and moral reconciliation with those who have departed from the faith, or who are leading unsuspecting Catholics away from the faith.
On the part of the latter, there is also a duty to save one’s soul, to which corresponds the necessity to have a Bishop, since Bishops, not priests, are the source of sacraments which effect the salvation of the soul. In many instances, the law of the Church provides sacraments whenever necessity calls. In baptism, marriage, confession... so in Holy Orders to even perhaps a greater extent, since it is the source of other sacraments.
Then, no presumption of assuming ordinary episcopal jurisdiction is taken (even if Canon 209 provides an ad hoc supplied jurisdiction still), and the usage of this mandate is strictly reserved to the time period of peril of the faith at the hands of the conciliar hierarchy. “Once a Pope who is unmistakably Catholic” is given again to us, the mandate stops, and everything goes to his hands.
Not too far from Vienna, Virginia; a certain General Robert E. Lee stated: “These dispositions are sound, the rest is in God’s hands”. And he went on winning the Battle of Fredericksburg, and this year of grace, 2017, fills us with an even greater expectation.
In Iesu et Maria,
Fr François Chazal