Post by Admin on May 24, 2019 14:18:21 GMT
Adapted and translated [via Google Translate] from Non Possumus.
Thursday, May 23, 2019
ACTS OF THE GENERAL CHAPTER OF THE FSSPX, OF JULY OF 2018
[Emphasis and Comments in red the original commentary from Non Possumus]
We publish an extract of the minutes of the general chapter of the SSPX of July 2018, and in which, among other things, the new superior general was elected.
The document is an attempt to justify the new attitude of the SSPX towards Rome, through words inspired by a false supernatural spirit (characterized by a conception of charity in the liberal way, by a deluded optimism and presumptuous messianism); attempt that contradicts what was resolved in the chapter of the year 2006 and the final thought of Bishop Lefebvre about relations with Rome dominated by liberals and modernists. In fact, in clear order according to a consensus logic, the text begins with "pious" considerations about charity with enemies, and ends with talking about the personal prelature.
With the merit of this text and what has been seen so far of the new government of the Fraternity, it can be concluded that the difference, in terms of liberal drift, between the administrations of Bishop Fellay and Father Pagliarani, lies only in that the speed of fall is smaller with this one than with that one.
Our comments appear in red.
Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X
EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF THE CHAPTER
RELATIONS WITH ROME
1. The Roman question. directive
"May they radiate fraternal love at all times, be it for the one who is already your brother or your enemy, so that your brother may do it out of love." (St. Augustine, Commentaries on the first Epistle of St. John to the Parthians, treatise 10, 7).
1. The mission of the Fraternity is to form priests and contribute to the sanctification of the clergy. To the extent that each of its members strives to fulfill it, the "Dakar dream" of Bishop Lefebvre, our venerated founder, becomes a reality: the solution to the crisis of the Church, its renewal and the restoration of the Christianity through the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. [The Neo-FSSPX customarily interprets the "Dakar dream": in the current crisis of the Church, the priority is to form a clergy centered on the traditional liturgy or, to put it another way, the first and essential thing today is not the doctrinal battle, but the preservation of the liturgy and the recovery of a non-combative spirituality that, according to the Neo-FSSPX, was that of Bishop Lefebvre. About this, read here ]
2. For the glory of God and love for the Church, we have a strict duty to continue denouncing the errors to enlighten the lost souls: "Veritatem autem facientes in caritate" (Eph 4:15). [It is true that the Neo-FSSPX (still) continues to denounce errors, although increasingly weaker. However, we must also recognize that, since 2012 at least, she fears, and increasingly, denounce the authors of these errors, especially Pope Francis; not fulfilling, with it, another strict duty. And since we speak of strict duties, it is convenient to remind the Neo-FSSPX, once again, those forgotten and forbidden words of Bishop Lefebvre in his latest book, Spiritual Itinerary: "It is a strict duty, for every priest who wants to remain Catholic, to separate from this conciliar church, as long as it does not return to the tradition of the Magisterium of the Church and of the Catholic faith."]
Indeed, we are witnessing the realization of the ultimate consequences of the principles taught by the Second Vatican Council, namely, the destruction of the natural order, because the adoration of man leads to the destruction of man.
In this situation, we can not in any way escape the mission that Divine Providence has entrusted to us.
As more and more people are becoming aware of the crisis and its causes, the Fraternity, faithful to Tradition and to its particular grace, can enlighten and help them. [He could, but the truth is that FSSPX has discarded the great historical opportunity to attract followers to the Tradition that has been presented, since 2013, with the terrible Bergoglian demolition. Why has the Fraternity missed the opportunity to assume the leadership of all those who react manly against the errors and scandals of Francisco? For having as a priority the achievement of an agreement with Rome.]
That is why the spirit of reconquest and combat of faith, the radiance of the Catholic spirit must continue to encourage us, following the advice of St. Augustine to hate sin and love the sinner. [The FSSPX now believes, like all liberals, that the resolute and frontal attack against the perpetrators of the evils that plague the Church, would imply a lack of charity. As with all liberal Catholics, the SSPX has become contradictory: on the one hand it declares that it wants to fight for Christ, but on the other it fears to undertake, as in the early days of its history, the enemies of Christ. And then his "combat" is progressively confined to the academic plane and the abstractions. "It is not enough, then, to bend to avoid the shot, no; The first and most effective is to leave the shooter disabled. Thus, it is convenient (...) to disavow and discredit in some cases his person. Yes, his person, that this is the main element of the combat, as the gunner is the main element of the artillery, not the bomb, nor the gunpowder, nor the cannon. You can then, in certain cases, publicize their infamies, ridicule their customs, cover their name and name with ignominy (...) It should only be taken into account not to put the lie at the service of justice. (...) The same Holy Fathers that we have quoted prove this thesis. Even the titles of his works clearly say that, in combating heresies, the first shot sought to direct him to the heresiarchs. Almost all the titles of the works of San Agustín are addressed to the name of the author of the heresy: Contra Fortunatum manichoeum; Adversus Adamanctum; Against Felicem; Against Secundinum; Quis fuer Petilianus; From gestis Pelagii; Quis fuerit Julianus, etc. So that almost all the controversy of the great Augustine was personal, aggressive, biographical, so to speak, as much as doctrinal; body to body with the heretic as well as against the heresy. And so we could say of all the Holy Fathers. Where did Liberalism come from, the novelty that by combating mistakes people should be dispensed with, and even pampered and cherished? Stick to what the Christian tradition teaches you about, and let the Ultramontans defend the faith as it has always been defended in the Church of God. That wound the sword of the catholic debater, that hurt and that goes right to the heart; that this is the only real and effective way to fight! " (Father Sardá and Salvany, Liberalism is Sin)]
3. In this battle, we face two fronts:
- On the one hand, men of the Church hostile to any return to Tradition. Unfortunately, they occupy positions of authority and are the most numerous. On this front our attitude must be firm, without compromises or concessions.
- On the other hand, to a growing number of people benevolent to the Tradition and who understand, often still very imperfectly, the problematic of the crisis and its philosophical and theological roots. To the bishops, priests, religious, simple faithful, as well as to the members of the Ecclesia Dei communities taken individually; We must show, as good Samaritans, a caring and patient attitude; helping them on their way does not mean in any way to justify their obvious deficiencies.
[1) It would be good to ask one of the heads of the Neo-FSSPX, in which of the two groups he puts the Pope. 2) The attitude of the SSPX with Msgr. Huonder (whom the Fraternity should consider as part of the second group) -among other examples- is that of the Good Samaritan? It is, rather, that of the foolish virgins of another parable, because this liberal prelate intends - according to his own words, those of his spokesman, those of Card. Müller and others - to be the good Samaritan who helps the SSPX, to help her out of her "irregularity" by integrating her into the conciliar structure].
Our response to these two different fronts comes from the same source: "lgnem veni mittere in terram et quid volo nisi ut accendatur" (Lk 12, 49).
This attitude is not a contradiction or a lack of logic: "Per caritatem arguebat errantes, ut corrigerentur; per caritatem pro lapidantibus orabat, ne punirentu ...; e t quem habuit in terram persecutorem, in coelo meruit habere consortem"1 (San Fulgencio) [Once again the scruples - if we do not have to suppose something much worse - in terms of fighting the people responsible for heresies, errors and scandals; and again the justification based on a conception of the charity of liberals. "The propagators and fautores of heresies have been in all times called heretics as authors of them. And as heresy has always been considered in the Church as a grave evil, it has always called the Church evil and wicked to such prophets and propagators. Register the collections of the ecclesiastical authors. See how the Apostles treated the first heresiarchs, and how the Holy Fathers continued to treat them, how the modern controversies and the Church itself have treated them in their official language. There is therefore no lack of charity in calling bad, bad; to the authors, fautores and followers of the bad, evil; and to the set of all its acts, words and writings, iniquity, malice, perversity. The wolf was always called a wolf, and he never thought that he would do bad work to the herd or its owner by calling him and apostrophising him like this. " Quote by Father Sardá and Salvany in the same work]
4. To the Superior General belongs the full right to decide the opportunity of contacts with the Holy See. It corresponds to him, with prudence and when the time dictated by the Divine Providence arrives, to take into consideration a modification of the canonical statute, without prejudice to the prior convocation of a Chapter.
The Fraternity is a work of the Church. Therefore, he has no agreement to conclude with the Holy Father. [Remarkable ambiguity: it is true that a true Catholic does not make agreements with a normal Pope, but simply obeys. But the fact is that the Neo-FSSPX - although it does not want to use the word "agreement" - is willing to conclude an agreement, under certain conditions, with a liberal and modernist Pope, which constitutes a betrayal of its founder and - much worse and ultimately - to [the] Faith, to the Church, to Christ himself.] However, when the time comes, the true rights of the Fraternity [and what about the Rights of Christ?] will be recognized and codified canonically. [Note that a mere desire or aspiration is considered as a certain or certain thing, as if the SSPX had some special gift of indefectibility. Here seems to be underlying this presumptuous and messianic idea: "the SSPX will be rehabilitated and then it will save the Church" (*)] That is why the members of the Fraternity are invited to speak more precisely of a normalization , a recognition , a solution or modification of the canonical statute , or a renewal of our canonical approval. [Useful euphemisms for the self-justification of a great betrayal]
5. It is through our spirit of faith and fidelity to our duty of state that we work in the spiritual edification of the Fraternity and, with it, for the good of the Church. Our venerated Founder expressed it in the following way:
"The only solution for the renewal of the Church and Christianity is not only to transmit the authentic priesthood, not only in the sound doctrine approved by the Church, but the deep and unchanging spirit of the Catholic priesthood and the Christian spirit essentially linked to the great prayer of Our Lord expressed eternally in his Sacrifice of the Cross. (This is) to designate the paths of the true sanctification of the priest in accordance with the fundamental principles of the Catholic doctrine of Christian and priestly sanctification. "(Spiritual Journey, Preface) [And what about the banned appointment of the same book? Spiritual Journey?]
Hoec est victoria qui vincit mundum, Fides nostra. (1 Jn 5, 4)
Regarding the matrimonial delegations and the letter of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei to the Ordinaries of the competent Episcopal Conferences, regarding the permits for the celebration of marriages of the faithful of the Fraternity Saint Pius X, dated March 27, 2017 and published on April 4, 2017.
1. This letter, which deals unambiguously with the marriages of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X, does not change the dramatic situation in which the Church finds itself, nor the analysis that the Fraternity has always made of them.
However, this letter, of a disciplinary nature, written from the point of view of the hierarchy, is likely to cause problems among us.
Indeed, although there is no explicit question about the validity of marriages, the main argument of the letter is based on an alleged irregularity of the priests of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X. Even if there was an irregularity, this would not be, according to the law, an argument to refuse to give a matrimonial delegation.
2. It is important to specify that the reception of marital consents is not an act of jurisdiction, but only the act of the qualified witness who is the priest with the delegation of the Ordinary. [As to the fact that the performance in the marriage celebration of the qualified witness (priest), is not a jurisdictional act; It must be clarified that this statement does not correspond to canon law or the unanimous opinion of the canonists, but rather "the most common opinion", as Cance says in the work cited by the SSPX in note n ° 2 of this document (n 389, page 576)
The presence of this witness is necessary for the validity of the sacrament of marriage according to the disposition of the Council of Trent (Tametsi decree). The use of delegation applies this traditional disposition and corresponds to the spirit of the Church, but without submitting to the Code of Canon Law of 1983 or to the new spirit that it transmits. [And what about the meddling of the conciliar clergy in the life of the SSPX, allowed by herself since Msgr. Fellay made unrestricted or unconditional acceptance, on April 4, 2017, of the letter of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei on the Therefore, where the delegation of the Ordinary can be received and exercised without difficulty [false assumption, unless one wants to believe that danger to the faith implied by the intervention of the modernist clergy, it is not some kind of "difficulty "], Every priest of the Fraternity must make use of it . ["Should". It is a strict order, be clear; but it is an order that a Catholic priest is not obliged to obey]
3. If an Ordinary created an objective situation of "grave incommodum" 2, a situation that must be verified by the Superior of the District, the extraordinary form would be resorted to. [From the "state of general need in the Church" to the "serious discomfort created by an Ordinary" ... Go change of the SSPX. «This dramatic attitude of the ecclesial authorities undoubtedly entails a state of need for the faithful. Indeed, there is not only a serious inconvenience but a real danger in putting their salvation in the hands of shepherds imbued with this spirit "adulterous", harmful to both faith and morals. We have no other option than to protect ourselves from such authorities, because they "are in a situation of incoherence and permanent contradiction" and because "as long as this misunderstanding is not dissipated, disasters will multiply in the Church". We live in circumstances where true obedience demands disobedience, because "it is necessary to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). Until the ambiguity of the ecclesiastical authorities is not dissipated, the serious inconvenience foreseen by canon 1098 will also persist, and the celebration of marriages according to the extraordinary form is justified.] » (From the Charter of the Deans of the SSPX and Superiors of Congregations of France)]
4. Priests have an obligation to instruct the betrothed that any problem that may arise in their marriage should be addressed by the Fraternity of St. Pius X. [The SSPX continues or does not continue to reserve the exclusive right to judge the causes Married? Given the ambiguous wording, the doubt remains in this regard.]
2. Roman documents. Reminder
The Superior General has the power to request priests of his own choosing, if he considers it appropriate, to be able to quickly carry out a first analysis of the documents coming from Rome, before proceeding to a more profound evaluation. However, it is necessary to emphasize in this respect the harmfulness of precipitation; that each District Superior do everything possible to be understood by the priests and the faithful.
3. Personal prelature. Consideration
In the hypothesis of a legal structure proposed by Rome, the personal Prelature would be better adapted to the current reality of the Fraternity of St. Pius X. It would be finalized once the doctrinal question has been resolved in a manner satisfactory to the Tradition. [Serious ambiguity: what is to be understood as a "satisfactory" solution for Tradition? Note that the FSSPX no longer speaks of "conversion of Rome" or of "return of Rome to the faith", but of "satisfactory solution for Tradition". Oh! But "nothing has changed in the SSPX"]
1. This personal Prelature would not change our status as secular priests without vows and living in community;
2. The end of the Fraternity and the means ordered for this purpose, in accordance with our current Statutes, as well as spirituality, would remain unchanged; [The spirituality of the SSPX is already badly damaged because of its liberal drift, and that can only get worse when the conciliar modernists turn it into a personal prelature. Read here .]
3. It would adapt to the situation of the Fraternity of St. Pius X according to what it is today, that is, a society of priests spread throughout the world and in charge of a priest animarum that can not be circumscribed to a territory. The Prelature would be constituted mainly to take into account this cure, enjoying the exemption of the local Ordinary, to the extent permitted by the constitution of the Church. [On the true scope of that supposed exemption, read the article The personal prelature will be the coffin of the SSPX. On other serious evils that will inevitably fall on the SSPX when it is converted into a personal prelature, read the entry More on the personal prelature]
4. This personal Prelature would be erected through the most solemn of legal documents by which the Church legislates: an Apostolic Constitution. [What, for the SSPX, is no guarantee of any sufficient defense against liberal, modernist and apostate Rome, against Rome occupied by legions of heretics, sodomites and other antichrists. But from this the Fraternity now prefers not to speak ... We are far from a clear and simple language, increasingly away from the yes yes, not not from Christ]
***1. San Fulgencio, sermon 3 for the feast of San Esteban, December 26, second night: "For charity he argued against those who erred in order to be corrected, for charity he prayed for those who stoned him for fear of that they were punished .... As for the one who had persecuted him on earth, he had merit to have him as a brother in heaven.
2.- The "grave incommodum" referred to in the Code (c. 1008; No. 1116) may consist of any notable difficulty that the future spouses have in presenting themselves before the Ordinary, the Pastor or the delegate priest. It can refer to health, material goods, reputation, etc., or to the use of extraordinary means (Commentary of the BAC to c.1098). "This serious inconvenience exists if the celebration of the marriage has as a consequence a serious prejudice, material or moral, for the common good, for the future spouses or for one of them, for a third person, or even for the competent priest." Adrien Cance, Le Code de Droit canonique, Commentaire , t. II, Paris, Gabalda, 1951, n ° 395, p. 582
(*) Perhaps this idea comes from the well-known "prophecy" of Judas Iscariot (!) In an exorcism narrated in the book Warnings of the beyond to the Contemporary Church , by P. Renz; work that, obviously, never would have passed the controls and preconciliary censorship, and that, nevertheless, has been sold in certain priorates of the SSPX: Exorcist: -What is it you said ?, repeats Judas Iscariot! Whose are you about to talk about? In the name of Jesus, tell the truth and only the truth! Judas Iscariot: -After a long fight, Ecône will triumph. Exorcist: - Speak in the name of Jesus! Judas Iscariot: -Ecône is the only one who is on the right track. Exorcist: - That corresponds to the truth? And what does Heaven say? Speak in the name of Jesus. Judas Iscariot: -In referring to the fact that he is on the right track, it does not mean that there is no one else on the right track, but that the path that Ecône follows is the only good one. That's what we want to say: there are not many roads that are good, but there are many people who are on the right track. Ecône is on the right path, and many people who do not know Ecône, but who seek the truth, are also. Judas Iscariot: - Monsignor Lefebvre will still have much to suffer, but he is good. (The different versions of this work that can be found on the web, have divergent texts, but in all it seems the phrase " Ecône triunfará")