Commentary by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
Father Z is my favorite internet blogging priest. I have been reading his posts for longer than I can remember, that is, more than a decade. He was also and remains the biggest promoter of the Lepanto Flag, and helped Ordo Militaris Inc. raise more than $10,000 to help persecuted Christians, when, because of his love for Our Lady of Victories he spoke highly of it when it first was offered for sale. Thanks, Father. I am still very grateful.
Father Z, however, occasionally misses some important points regarding current affairs. I cannot blame him, since as a convert from Metodism, it can happen. Hey, he has come a long way. I praise him for it.
But in his recent comments rightfully rebutting another preposterous claim by Bishops Athanasius Schneider — who seems given to worse exaggeration and error as the years go on – though he began with a stellar sense of Catholic Orthodoxy — Father Z misses an important point.
Yes, Father Z is correct to correct Bishop Schneider. The priests of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X are not outside the Church in the sensus plenius of that term, because yes, they profess the Catholic Faith and are validly ordained as Catholic priests and offer the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to approved liturgical books, in the ancient (and only true Roman) rite. [Here, I disagree with Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum, but this is no crime or fault, since he did not add to his decree a sanction for anyone dissenting from his claim that the Traditional Mass Ritual and the one invented by Bugnini, the Freemason, on a napkin at a Roman Restaurant, are equally forms of the one Roman Rite.]
However, it is NOT true to say that the SSPX is doing what was done in the Arian crisis.
In fact, if you read the history of the Church in any detailed or slovenly popularized version, you will find NO example of anyone doing what the SSPX did. So let’s not name the great St. Athanasius as their example.
The Saint traveled from diocese to diocese and reconstituted the Church. He fought to save the Church, not the mass. He restored Dioceses, he did not found a private priestly club, which owns 7 star hotels that serve the globalist elites (FromRome.Info’s exclusive exposé). He was not funded by money of dubious provenance (Here). He has absolutely no reputation for promoting or protecting pedophiles (here, here, here and here). He was not a Jesuit laxist in morals. He was not part and parcel of an international medical scam to genocide humanity itself (More here, here and rightfully faulted by Bishop Schneider here). And he was emphatically never in communion with or a supporter of an anti-pope (here), apostate, idolater or heretic (here). He was not a member of a satanic fraternity, nor was he a fifth column of internationalists. Quite contrary.
The SSPX. As I was saying…. PLEASE DO NOT COMPARE THEM WITH THE GREAT SAINT ATHANASIUS.
Because if you do, I think you are implicitly blaspheming ….
13 thoughts on “Father Z was saying, the SSPX are doing nothing different than (Nope!)”
The brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho had warned that a disciple of Frithjof Schuon named Rama P. Coomaraswamy had been a professor at the SSPX seminar in Écone. Not only that: it appears he wrote the first Trad book after the Second Vatican Council: “The destruction of the Christian tradition” (1972). Given this, a question arise: what influence did the Islamic esoterism of Guénon and Schuon have on catholic traditionalism?
Coomaraswamy has been very influential in the English speaking world. I think after marrying, he got himself ordained a priest by a sedevacantist bishop. The SSPX is a traditionalist group in the classical sense condemned at Vatican I, because they are asserting a principle of traditionalism to justify their actions to protect their own existence while doing nothing to help the Church other than to exist. In fact, 9 out of 10 chapels founded by the laity for the Traditional Latin Mass have disappeared through the decades once the SSPX came to know of them and sought them out, since the SSPX only says mass on the condition that the property be given to them. They use their mind controlled laity to take over institutions, non profits, boards of directors, to seize property and once they get it, they sell it and close down the Mass. But they maintain a secret chain of elite hotels in Europe which serve the globalists. Their money is controlled by the Rothschild agents and seems to come from the NAZI loot stored in Eastern Switzerland. The Nazi’s were also occultists and claimed aryan traditionalism as the justification for their movement. The SSPX is most likely a Gladio organization under indirect control of NATO and the CIA, because the role of Gladio Religious organizations is to attack the Catholic Church by promoting and maintaining dialectical division, to break down unity, dissipate forces, and always be a problem rather than a solution. Their promotion of pedophiles is only explicable under this long term political rubric.
The Vatican knows more that it is telling, but the game between the Vatican and the SSPX is largely theatre since the CIA has had its claws in the Vatican Banks since 1946 when Pius XII made a deal with the CIA to fund the Christian Democrat Party in Italy. Finally, the close proximity of the HQ of the SSPX and the St. Gallen Monastery, where the St. Gallen Mafia met and planned the take down of the Vatican, is not a mere coincidence.
Thank you! I am sad for the seminarians of this decade because they are brainwashed and will become priests of Satan.
I recall the prophecy of St. Francis of Assissi “… woe to those who remain obedient to their order …”
You say that the Saint Gallen monestary and Econe are very close are, but if I have identified the locations correctly they are 3 1/2 hours away from eachother. Is this correct? Not sure i have the locations right.
Econe is not the HQ of the SSPX.
That response is a gift on the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It sums up so much.
Our Lady of Sorrows definitely wanted the Mass on her feast day be celebrated in communion with Pope Benedict XVI.
I think when Benedict finally regains the Papacy, he should thank Br B for his endeavor to reinstate him to his office and recommend him as a successor.
Fr Z names Francis in canon, right? Isn’t he in grave mortal sin like everyone else who does? Along with those who assist at those Masses…as there are only a few priests worldwide who name B16, who is also a modernist?
St Athanasius, pray for us!
Our Lady of Sorrows, pray for us!
I cannot speak for Father Z. He says mass in private, I think.
Isn’t that a little bit over the top? Can you name a single bishop that refused to offer the New Mass? Of course there are a few ( bishop Oscar Mayer, for one, one of the co-conservators). Can it be denied that the New Mass is illegitimate ? Illegitimate in law, development. And illegitimate in implementation ?
If Lefebvre used “dark money “. So what. ? For one , if he did, he will not be the first nor the last. We do not know the intentions of the donor.
St Paul in 1 Timothy says:
19Against a priest receive not an accusation, but under two or three witnesses. 20Them that sin reprove before all that the rest also may have fear.
And he adds “ 21I charge thee, before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing by declining to either side”
Archbishop Lefebvre never was given a canonical trial , and it seems you have already trued and convicted him of receiving “ dark money”.
Canon law is a mess, and even Pope JP II admits that the Holy Roman Catholics Church has disrespected Our Lord in the Eucharist .
“I would like to ask forgiveness-in my own name and in the name of all of you, venerable and dear brothers in the episcopate-for everything which, for whatever reason, through whatever human weakness, impatience or negligence, and also through the at times partial, one-sided and erroneous application of the directives of the Second Vatican Council, may have caused scandal and disturbance concerning the interpretation of the doctrine and the veneration due to this great sacrament. And I pray the Lord Jesus that in the future we may avoid in our manner of dealing with this sacred mystery anything which could weaken or disorient in any way the sense of reverence and love that exists in our faithful people.” https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/letters/1980/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_19800224_dominicae-cenae.html
The point is the circumstances under which Archbishop Lefebvre found himself are extenuating and extreme. To his credit he may have saved the Latin Mass.
( God would have provided any way)
Peace be with you. I pray for your apostolate
I think you misunderstand English syntax. I never Said that Archbishop Lefebrve did anything. I said that Saint Athanasius did not. As for the New Mass, it can be theologically illegitimate and yet still contain what is necessary for a valid consecration. But I do not believe that it was ever effective as a propiatiatory offering, since God has nothing to do with the works of the hands of the wicked, and all of those involved are shown to be by history very dubious and evil men. So how can God accept it. Yes, nearly everyone was deceived. But gradually Catholics are begining to connect the dots. Cardinal Ottaviani observed, that the true developments in Catholic Faith, with richer and more explicit understanding of the Mass should have been the foundation and structure of the liturgical renewal. What we got was a Masonic farce designed to prepare for the antichrist.
The communion in the hand was the very first sign that the graces were truly deprived, though it is valid.
Now we are being forced to accept that “Bergoglio is a successor”.