Skip to main content

The bourgeoisie is a group of individuals who are dissatisfied with what they have and are satisfied with what they are.

Nicolás Gómez Dávila

In the past, the SSPX spoke of the conversion of modernist Rome, and hinged on this sole condition the possibility of an agreement with Rome. In fact, this conversion of Rome would make any agreement unnecessary, because [after such conversion] everything would be back to normal anyway. Until the 2006 general chapter included, such was the official position. But then the SSPX, already morphed into the Neo-SSPX, gradually stopped talking about the conversion of modernist Rome, until finally they changed the conditions for an agreement. They no longer looked at what Rome was, but at what the SSPX itself would get out of it. Thus the point of view was changed.

That point of view was shrewdly being changed by Rome when it "mercifully" granted the lifting of the "excommunications", after it also granted "freedom" for the Traditional Mass. That was the key move with which Rome went on the offensive against the Society. In fact, after the doctrinal discussions failed, when everything seemed blocked due to a lack of [mutual] understanding, Rome went on the offensive with its own offer of peace. And the Neo-SSPX agreed to pursue that peace, without the conversion of modernist Rome.

Since then the focus was no longer placed on Rome and its problems (liberalism, modernism, apostasy), but on the Society and its "problems" (lack of canonical regularity). From that moment on they began to impose on the parishioners of the Society the idea that the Society lacked certain "things", that it could not continue, and that we had to accept that Rome wanted to give us those "things". The Society looked at itself in the mirror, was pleased with itself, and said to itself: "I am good, but I do not have everything I deserve. I do not have the appreciation that I deserve. Rome wants to give me those things, Rome wants to recognize me, and that's very good". Satisfied with itself, the Neo-SSPX was dissatisfied with what it had. Especially because it lacked the appreciation of it's Catholicity, on the part of the Roman authorities.

And so the story continued with the Neo-SSPX already dreaming about itself, without asking for the conversion of modernist Rome, just a friendly dialogue to get those "things" from modernist Rome.

Of course, in order to justify themselves and in order to hide the shame of their withdrawal from the fight, those who are addicted to the Neo-SSPX now say that it is good to receive "things" from modernist Rome because it is really God who gives the Society these things, through Francis. It is God who wants the Society to stop being persecuted by its enemies, and to be recognized little by little. Unfortunately, they say, Francis and the modernists try to poison those gifts, but we, the Society, as we are intelligent, we receive them without taking in the poison.

This last statement, repeated among others by a Menocino blogger, has this "small" inconvenience: let's have a look at the case of the jurisdiction for marriages, with which Francis imposed on the Neo-SSPX that the spouses have to give their consent before diocesan conciliar priests. Well, Bishop Fellay accepted that gift without ever denouncing any poison in it, on the contrary, he severely punished those who tried to warn him of the poison contained [in this gift]. Likewise, when the "excommunication" was lifted, Bishop Fellay did not say that he had asked for something else, and that Rome was mixing poison with that "gift", since they were lifting something that was non-existent. Neither did he clearly indicate the poison when with Summorum pontificum Rome declared that the Traditional Mass was just a different form of expressing what the Novus Ordo expresses, and by treating the Traditional Mass as an exception they confined it to a little corner, to be used by the "ralliers" [accordistas]. It is always a matter of swallowing whatever Rome gives, including all its poison. It is never a matter of talking as our Lord asked us to: "yes, yes, no, no". It is always about playing cunning games with the devil, and, as we said in another article, it is as if Eve had thought: "It is God who wants to help me through the serpent, I just have to take the fruit and ignore the poison." Take!

But the serpent seduces and manages to trip up only those who trust more in themselves than in God, those who think themselves "astute", those who obey men rather than God, those who are not straight, who are naive, convoluted and double [faced], those who like perfect bourgeois are satisfied with themselves but want to have more, who seek recognition and who believe that honor is their due, when Our Lord all his life thought of nothing but the Cross.

The bourgeois is a self righteous man who wants to be "politically correct" and, above all, to get on well with the authorities. The man of the Neo-SSPX is such a "righteous man" who desires a "correct" situation. Ignacio Anzoátegui said of this "righteous man": "To know oneself is not to be content with oneself; to contemplate oneself - which is what the righteous man does - is to be pleased with oneself. The "know oneself" of Socrates is the being "ashamed of ones misery" that Christianity teaches us. To know oneself is to prepare oneself to try and conquer oneself and not to content oneself with celebrating a conquered lie. It is not grooming, but renewing; to renew humanity in order to free it from inhumanity; to renew in order to be, to be what you have the unavoidable obligation to be, and not to settle for less."

The bourgeois is also a pacifist, who wants to be at peace with the whole world. However, he is often at war with those who expose the mediocrity and pusillanimity of his behavior. As the right man he is, he must be unquestionable.

As we do see in their advertising campaigns, the Neo-SSPX is satisfied with itself, and that is why it can not err. Consider, for example, how the Superior General is considered as someone almost infallible, unbeatable, someone who is beyond and much higher than the common faithful, whose only duty it is to follow him. So the same Mendocino blogger (with or without wine?) said the following, regarding the "Correctio Filialis" that Bishop Fellay signed:

Did the Superior of the SSPX make a bad move? (And me after I signed and approved the "Correctio", even without liking it much and only because he did it.) No. And I mean no, knowing that all this swindle that I describe, of opportunities and calibrations, don't matter [apply] to him. He acted before God and before men, that's why I follow him even when my own cunning tells me the opposite. This is all [happening] in a different dimension. And that is not pandering, because I am not pondering the man I barely know, but the Bishop, a mystery that we have failed to understand in all its dimensions, instead of a traitor who wears a beautiful miter.
You just have to do a few calculations and look at the sky.1

The same things one could say about Francis, Benedict or anyone else. "They act before God and before men. So let's follow them." From that point on we can and must accept all the betrayals and treacheries that this man does, because "he acts before God and not before men", and we, mere mortals, can not understand him. So we must follow him. Blindly. He knows best.

Then they present a whole series of irresponsible commentators who utter all kinds of falsehoods, in order to justify their position and to follow the "saint." Ah, but it's not pandering...

Not a sign of valid reasons, no analysis of facts and words, everything is pure emotion, pure illusion, subjectivism. Sentimentality. All in order to make themselves believe that the Society is a "chosen" congregation that for nothing in the world can fall, be deceived or corrupted (this version of the "chosen people" is now fed inside the "chosen congregation", perhaps because the Mendocino blogger is also of Jewish origin?). And why is it impossible for the Society to fall? We mere mortals can not understand this, but their Bishop is in another dimension and acts with heavenly vision. You just have to accept that. That's how it is.

Gentlemen: it has gone from papolatry (which made Vatican II successful within the Church) to superiorolatry (which makes "Vatican II" successful within the Society).

This never happened with Archbishop Lefebvre and he would never have allowed or encouraged that. This is happening because priests no longer denounce errors and keep their mouths closed, out of human respect, cowardice or because they have become the new bourgeois.

Leon Bloy said: "I can not conceive the sky without my Emperor". He was talking about Napoléon, of course. These neo-Societarians say: "I cannot conceive the sky without my Bishop". They speak of Bishop Fellay.

Will the new Moses make them enter the promised land?


  • 1.