The Legal Maneuver of the neo-sspx!

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Member 149 is Machabees

The Legal Maneuver of the neo-sspx!

What are they truly after?


Recently on the sspx.org media website, they have re-branded their pages now presenting a caption “SSPX’s status”. Wherein, they present four serious topics the old-sspx stood on: State of Necessity, Legal existence of SSPX, Supplied Jurisdiction, and Authority speaks.

upload_2017-2-23_22-14-57.png
This is extremely interesting for the fact that these positions gave the SSPX the legal and moral binders to do what they have been doing for 42 years [up to 2012].

With the neo-sspx placing this caption on their website at a time when they are just a “stamp” away from their exhaustive recognition with the modernists, since the secrecy of 1994 GREC, this new maneuver is more than curious, it is rather quite strategic.

There is only one of two ways that caption can go.

First, providing language for their deal. To do so, the neo-sspx is claiming there is no longer an objective State of Necessity in the church (stemming from a new promoted religion) along with a real canonical censure that allows them to beg and incorporate with the conciliarists. Thus, there is no longer “harm” and need to remain out of the false conciliar environment to protect the faith the old-sspx maintained all those years.

By claiming this, the neo-sspx therefore, has NO right to “negotiate” and make ‘demands’ or “deals” with the pope. They MUST put their bishops’ miters and priests’ collars before the feet of the pope immediately or they are truly held in schism regardless of their pompous rhetoric. There is not democracy in the Church to “negotiate”; only obey rightful commissions.

Nonetheless, the neo-sspx is being reconciled with them so they have told us many times.

Or the caption is of the second way. Remaining in the same language of the old-sspx –there is an objective State of Necessity for which the neo-sspx CANNOT by law and spirit put the faith in danger and proceed with a false political “reconciliation”.

It is one or the other; which is it? It is obviously of the first since Fr. Rostand made know in a conference right after their 2012 sspx General Chapter, stating his infamous “It is a matter of prudence and not principle that we reconcile with [conciliar] rome”. (sic) Right?

But that is not the case; that recent caption depicts the true old-sspx position. Each of the four serious topics the old-sspx stood on.

But why, why now? Isn’t that blatantly hypocritical and obviously suicidal? Yes to all those fair questions. Then comes strategy only a secular mind could understand; deceive their supporters and benefactors to act like “staunch” traditionalists – “take us the way we are”. All planned; all theatrics. (sic)

The only catch: their people have to be unread and stupid. What a prize to go and “fix” things from the “inside”.

I have been saying for years, from day one in fact, like Archbishop Lefebvre, the SSPX is a true and legal branch of the Church; by Church law and by Faith. As with, the modernists' illegal suppression of 1975 constituted an invalid order...clearly against Church law; hijacked by conciliarists which continues in their abuses to this day.

Here is a very good article, succinct in fact, proving the "Legal existence of SSPX" the neo-sspx, mind you, is presently promoting in a caption box on their website as a true to form old-sspx position.

Starting in the introduction:

"This canonical study by Rev. Thomas C.G. Glover, Doctor of Canon Law, was first published in the January 1982 issue of The Angelus...As the canonical study below will demonstrate, these acts or authorizations and approvals of Bishop Charriere were never legitimately withdrawn by his successor, Bishop Mamie, therefore the SSPX still has a legal right to exist."

Which explains in detail the exchanges and events that took place. To wit, the SSPX concluded in that article, they have NEVER been suppressed and continue as a true legal branch of the Catholic Church!

"VII. Conclusion

The existence of the Society does not depend exclusively on moral arguments, but also on the answer to the legal question of the suppression of the Society. The answer must be that it was not suppressed, but that it still exists. This is not the place for a treatment of the decree of suspension of His Excellency the Superior General. It is sufficient to say that the whole case for the validity of the suspension depends on the validity of the suppression. We may conclude: "No suppression, therefore no suspension.""

Including in their other staple old-sspx article “What is the canonical status of the SSPX?” (caption: Authorities speak), quote:

“3. The SSPX has been correct when claiming (based upon the principles of Canon Law and Catholic teaching) that no canonical censures against the SSPX have ever existed.”
http://sspx.org/en/what-canonical-status-sspx

So why is Bishop Fellay seeking a “recognition” and purely political agreement with modernist Rome as if, they now tell us, they have a canonical impediment? Surely this cannot be and is a fair question.

In 2012-2017, the neo-sspx addresses this present anomaly by skipping over it completely in their latter articles “The Society and Rome where they give a similar account to “unfairness” yet OMIT this entire 1975 event as it didn’t even exist; only to find itself with a 1976 “suspension a divinis” to act on; but this too has not merit either! So why these obfuscations?

Excerpt:
“In 1974, two apostolic visitors…scandalized the seminarians and the seminary professors by their attitude and especially by their theological opinions.

Following that visit, Archbishop Lefebvre composed a statement dated November 21, 1974, which manifested his decision to remain faithful to what the Church has always done and professed: We adhere, with all our heart, with all our soul to Catholic Rome, guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions necessary for the preservation of that faith, to Eternal Rome, teacher of wisdom and truth…“Without any rebellion, any bitterness or any resentment,” Archbishop Lefebvre continued his work of priestly formation. But in 1976, because of his refusal to accept the New Mass and the conciliar reforms, Archbishop Lefebvre was disciplined with a suspension a divinis.

From 1976 to 1988, despite the canonical difficulties and the debacle of the “Conciliar Church”, the Society continued to develop and to extend its work in the world.

“…Hidden behind the question of the Society’s canonical status is the real problem throughout the Church today.”​

“Hidden” is an understatement!

Bishop Fellay now says along with his other elevated superiors, including Fr. Pfluger, quote:
  • 17/10/2012 STATEMENTS OF P. Pfluger, first assistant Bishop Fellay. "As for us, we also suffer from a defect, due to our canonical irregularity. Not only is the state of the post-conciliar Church is imperfect, ours too "And later:". The obligation to work actively to overcome the crisis can not be contradicted. And this work begins with us, trying to overcome our abnormal canonical status ". http://cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/chronology-of-suicide-for-the-sspx.3864/#post-6567
  • Father Niklaus Pfluger: Because the pope and Rome are realities inseparable from the Faith. The loss of faith in the Church’s structures—a loss of faith from which we have been spared, thanks be to God–is only one aspect of the crisis in the Church. For our part, we suffer also from a defect: the fact of our canonical irregularity. The status of the post-conciliar Church is imperfect, nor is our status the ideal. http://www.dici.org/en/documents/interview-with-father-pfluger/
There’s more.

Remember in the SAME caption the sspx.org website has listed in links to the other serious topics: State of Necessity, Supplied Jurisdiction, and Authority speaks.

Here is the one on the State of Necessity; quite excellent representing the old-sspx: http://sspx.org/en/state-necessity

Though Bishop Fellay in his new-post 2012-sspx wants us to believe there is [still] a 'state of necessity' for him to "negotiate" as legitimate its action throughout the world while claiming he can reconcile to it at the same time, it is obvious his terms of this understanding had changed to an "air" of state of necessity. That is, they now brand the 'state of necessity' without a cause and without an explanation other than the evil of the times. To marry the errors in reconciliation renders the 'necessity' to stay away obsolete.

And on Supplied Jurisdiction http://sspx.org/en/supplied-jurisdiction-traditional-priests

And, Authority speaks: http://sspx.org/en/what-canonical-status-sspx

Here’s more all standing for the old-sspx:
But how is all of this so when Bishop Fellay now stated in his "Doctrinal Declaration" of 2012 he accepts what had separated them as being a “State of Necessity”? Seen here http://cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/sspx-doctrinal-declaration-is-it-official-policy.2727/

Why now all the “nostalgia” on their media website with the “old” when they clearly broke from those principles? Because Fr. Rostand said it is now for them “A matter of prudence”. (sic)

This is the reason the Catholic Resistance was born anew in fight since 2012; the neo-sspx is openly squandering the faith in principle and in practice wanting to be equal with the new religion of Baal.


_________________________________________

Remember too the good work exposing the SSPX here – “Is This Operation Suicide?” https://isthisoperationsuicide.wordpress.com/

_________________________________________

All in God's time. Victory is His to where those who obfuscate His name and His Church will be confounded.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Here are some Original Documents from Rome displaying the continued legal existence and authority of the SSPX foundation as a true branch of the Catholic Church, here: What is the Real Canonical Status of the SSPX…

It is so clear to see for what Bishop Fellay is doing today compromising the sspx into conciliarism is a farce and a betrayal!

The Documents and maintained position of the old-sspx, 1970 to [2012], are indisputable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top