Change of Doctrine...? - 2012

"Change of Doctrine...? Where...?"
+ PAX +

July 24, 2012
St. Christina, Virgin & Martyr

“CHANGE OF DOCTRINE? …WHERE?”

Dear N., Dear N.,

As N. remarked in his letter, the Second Vatican Council’s great success for the Revolution was in the ambiguous documents.
The same success was accomplished in the Society by ambiguous phrases found in the CNS Interview on May 11, 2012, DICI Interview on June 7, 2012, the General Chapter Statement & Six Conditions of July 14, 2012, the April 15, 2012 D O C T R I N A L Declaration and the June 27, 2013 Declaration.

The change of doctrine is found directly or indirectly in the texts of the above documents & interviews. The new doctrines are:

1. The errors of the Council are surmountable, open to discussion and not really from the Council, “but from the general interpretation of the Council.”

2. Religious Liberty and Ecumenism are surmountable and “limited”. The new, erudite wording fails to condemn these heresies as the pre-Vatican II popes had done, and treats them as occasions of error rather than condemned errors that DIRECTLY attack Christ the King and the Faith.

3. The New Mass is now declared to be “legitimately promulgated” which is equivalent to calling it a legitimate Mass. (See talk of Fr. De La Rocque on May 18, 2012, proving this). This compromise has lead many other groups to accept and celebrate the New Mass. At best, the new Declaration charges the New Mass as “diminishing” Christ’s Reign, it also “curtails” and “obscures” the Sacrificial nature of the Mass, rather than saying that, in fact, it directly ATTACKS and UNDERMINES by omission, these essential qualities of the Mass, which Cardinals Bacci, Oddi and Ottaviani’s Study proves. Furthermore, since “how one prays expresses how one believes” (“lex orandi lex credendi”), for the SSPX to acknowledge as legitimately promulgated a way of prayer that fundamentally attacks what Catholics must believe, is to call that which attacks and undermines the Catholic Doctrine a legitimate prayer, pleasing to God!

4. Consequently, the New Rites and New Sacraments are also considered valid and legitimate. Where does this put our conditional Confirmations and Ordinations?

5. The New Code is accepted, with no distinctions. The New Code is penetrated with the errors and heresies of Vatican II, which must also be implicitly approved by accepting the New Code.

6. The new ecclesiology of recognizing the Conciliar Church as ONE with the Catholic Church of all time is now taught. Abp. Lefebvre always recognized the pope is head of TWO churches, as a result of the crisis; the Conciliar Church by his Modernism, and the Catholic Church by his lawful authority. Faithful Catholics are obliged to acknowledge him and resist him, simultaneously. This state of the Pope’s right to our disobedience exists until Rome returns to Tradition!

7. The acceptance of Vatican II as “enlightening” and “deepening” Tradition as well as admitting that there are doctrines “not yet conceptually formulated” as part of the “living transmission” of the Faith, constitutes a betrayal and unacceptable compromise of the Faith that every Catholic is bound to resist!

This answers your question: “Change of Doctrine? Where?” Vatican II & its Reforms attack the doctrines on:
– The One True Church
– The Social Reign of O. L. Jesus Christ
– The Eternal Priesthood of O. L. Jesus Christ & the priesthood
– The Union of Church and State
– The true and false notions of Liberty & Human Dignity
– The Monarchical Structure of the Papacy
– Outside of the Catholic Church, No Salvation
– The Sacrifice of the Mass
– The 7 Sacraments and their Institution
– The Faith as a whole! (since Modernism is the “synthesis of all heresies” and permeates the entire texts of the Council).

To say “the affirmations of Vatican II…must be understood in the light of the whole, uninterrupted Tradition” as Bp. Fellay does, is to admit a blatant CONTRADICTION! Why? “…Because I do NOT believe that the Declarations of the Council on Liberty of Conscience, Liberty of Thought, and Liberty of Religion can be compatible with what the Popes taught in the past! Therefore we have to choose. Either we choose what the Popes have taught for centuries and we choose the Church OR we choose what was said by the Council. BUT WE CANNOT CHOOSE BOTH AT THE SAME TIME SINCE THEY ARE CONTRADICTORY” (Abp. Lefebvre, Press Conference, Sept. 15, 1976; in a special issue of “Itineraires”, April 1977, p.299).

8. The lies continue perpetrating that “nothing has changed” while the doctrinal compromises, listed above, exist in official documents, officially sent to Rome, in an official capacity! Remember, La Barroux, Campos, Good Shepherd Institute, etc., all boasted that “nothing has changed” and they maintained the right to criticize Modernism & Vat. II! All of them have compromised AFTER their agreements with Modernist Rome. The only difference for the SSPX is that the compromise came BEFORE the written agreement!

9. Tactics are the same as all Revolutionaries; two steps forward, one step back. “…But the annoying thing is that the Liberals themselves practiced this system in the text of the schemas: assertion of an error or an ambiguity or a dangerous orientation, then immediately after or before, an assertion in the opposite direction, intended to tranquillize the conservative conciliar fathers” (Abp. Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him, ch. 24,p.168).

10. All the above new doctrines are further confirmed by the silencings, punishments, threats, refusals of Holy Communion, punitive transfers, canonical monitions and expulsions for all those who openly oppose the new doctrines and orientation expressed by the Superior General and official documents.

Moreover, the fact that the Resistance is not a reaction specified to one location, but all over the world, shows it is a universal problem of the FAITH! The 3 bishops, on April 7, 2012, tried to alarm and warn Bp. Fellay, but they were rebuked and ignored. The fruits of the new doctrines have since appeared, as they had forewarned: division, loss of Faith, confusion and loss of trust in the SSPX authorities.
Even if, by a sudden change of mind, a truly solid, Traditional Catholic Declaration appeared from Menzingen tomorrow, it would still not undo the scandal and compromise of the Faith in the official documents expressing the SSPX’s new position! As Fr. Girourd remarked, it would take an equally serious General Chapter and Statement publicly denouncing, rejecting and correcting the scandalous compromises and errors against the Faith, found in the official documents and interviews since early 2012.

The Society would have to simply reaffirm the clear position and mission of its Founder, as before the “Vatican II-B” in July, 2012, and obviously replace the leadership with non Liberals.

“In practice our attitude should be based on a previous discernment, rendered necessary by these extraordinary circumstances of a Pope [or Superior General (addition, mine)] won to Liberalism. This discernment is this: when the Pope says something that is consistent with Tradition, we follow him; when he says something that goes contrary to our Faith, then we cannot follow him! The fundamental reason for this is that the Church, the Pope, and the hierarchy are AT THE SERVICE OF THE FAITH. It is not they who make the Faith; they must serve it. The Faith is not being created, it is unchangeable, it is transmitted.

“This is why we cannot follow these acts of these Popes that are done with the goal of confirming an action that goes against Tradition: by that very act WE WOULD BE COLLABORATING IN THE AUTODEMOLITION OF THE CHURCH, in the destruction of our Faith!
“…Someone once advised me, ‘Sign, sign, that you accept everything; and then you continue as before!’ (The May 5, 1988 Protocol). NO! ONE DOES NOT PLAY WITH HIS FAITH!” (Abp. Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him, ch. 31, p.229).

I hope this answers your question. How we must pray to the Immaculate Heart to hasten Her hour!

In Christ the King,
Fr. David Hewko


www.therecusant.com/fr-hewko-changed-doctrine