The Catacombs

Full Version: Sorrowful Heart of Mary Newsletter - May 2022
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
[Image: b490fb5b-4e23-458c-8c98-1a2d8338c40f.jpg]

Sorrowful Heart of Mary SSPX-MC

View as Webpage

[Download PDF here.]

May 2022

Dear Faithful battling in the Trenches!

April was absorbed in the magnificence of Holy Week and Paschaltide, and may the graces of this Easter time fill your souls with joy and hope in Christ the King, Who conquered death, Satan and the chains of sin! “The Good Shepherd, Who laid down His life for His sheep, has Risen again, Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia!” (Matins antiphon, Easter).

But April also marked a significant event that happened ten years ago in 2012, which cannot be overlooked; the Vatican II Revolution within the Society of St. Pius X! This Revolution was embodied in the General Chapter Statement of July, 2012, the horrendous Doctrinal Declaration of April 5, 2012, the Six Conditions for an Agreement with unconverted Rome and the Letter of Bishop Fellay in response to the three bishops in April 2012.

Since the Faith always comes first and we are obliged to believe and profess the Holy Catholic Faith “without which it is impossible to please God,” we are, consequently, obliged to publicly profess and defend the Faith when it is publicly compromised or attacked. The Truth must always be defended! This is what Our Lord did before Caiphas, this is what St. Sebastian did before Emperor Diocletian, this is what St. John Fisher did before the King, and this is what Abp. Marcel Lefebvre did before the Pope himself, in the wake of the Revolution of Vatican Council II!

After analyzing the Doctrinal Declaration, which has never been officially rejected, condemned or made void by the Society superiors, it is dumbfounding to observe that they, through this document, have officially accepted what Abp. Lefebvre and faithful Catholics have always fought against: the Second Vatican Council, the New Mass, and the New Code of Canon Law.

Here is a summary of the compromises of the Doctrinal Declaration:

In paragraph I, Bp. Fellay and leaders promise fidelity to “the Conciliar Church” and to the Pope, head of both the Catholic Church and Conciliar Church, at the same time.

In paragraph II, they accept submission to the teachings of the Conciliar and post-Conciliar “Magisterium”, according to the doctrine of no. 25 of Lumen Gentium.

In paragraph III, they accept all of the major points of controversy:
  • the collegial authority of the Pope and the bishops (i.e. a “two-headed Church” by collegiality!);
  • the authority of the present “magisterium” and the “Conciliar Church” with all their errors;
  • the “progress” of Tradition according to the neo-modernists;
  • the criteria for interpreting between Tradition and the texts of Vatican II, in general, i.e. the “hermeneutics of continuity” of Pope Benedict XVI; the “hermeneutics of continuity” used as the criteria for interpreting between Tradition and Vatican II, on Ecumenism and Religious Liberty;
  • postponing the doctrinal discussions until later;
  • accepting the “validity” and “legitimacy” of the New Mass and sacraments; and
  • acceptance of the New Code of Canon Law (1983) with no distinctions.

By signing this Doctrinal Declaration, Bp. Fellay and the superiors approving it made serious doctrinal compromises, crumbling down the bastions of Tradition and caving in on every point that was opposed by Abp. Lefebvre! Bp. Fellay confirmed his “new attitude towards Rome” when he signed this as his “new position with respect to the official Church,” as he said in his own words in the Cor Unum, no. 101 of March 2012.

Let us zero in, this time, on the New Code of Canon Law. As Pope John Paul II admitted, when he signed the New Code in 1983, this New Code is the Second Vatican Council put into practice! It puts all the Conciliar errors into “legal” language. Would it not be a contradiction to claim that one rejects the Council and at the same time accepts the very “legislation” that put the Conciliar errors in place? In this sense, the New Code can be more dangerous than the Council itself!

Here is what Abp. Lefebvre said numerous times about the perversity of the New Code:
  • "So what are we supposed to think about this? Well, it’s that this [New] Canon Law is unacceptable.”  (Spiritual Conference given at Écône, 99B, March 14, 1983).
  • The New Code no longer asks a married Protestant / Catholic couple to sign a commitment to baptize the children Catholic. It is a serious violation of the Faith, a serious violation of the Faith!... In the New Code of Canon Law there are two supreme powers of the Church: there is the power of the Pope, who has the supreme power, and then the Pope with the bishops...that has never been seen in the is thus to limit the power of the Pope. So, the explanatory note [nota praevia] of the Council, practically, has no effect under the New Canon Law.” (Spiritual Conference given at Écône, 100A, May 20, 1983).
  • The Apostolic Constitution introducing the New Canon Law explicitly says on page 11 of the Vatican Edition: ‘The work, namely the Code, is in perfect accord with the nature of the Church, especially as been proposed by the Second Vatican Council. Moreover, this New Code can be conceived as an effort to expose this doctrine, i.e., Conciliar Ecclesiology, in canonical language.’ ...It is the authority of the Pope and the Bishops that is going to suffer; the distinction between the clergy and the laity will also diminish; the absolute and necessary character of the Catholic Faith will also be extenuated to the profit of heresy and schism; and the fundamental realities of sin and grace will be worn down.” (Letter to Friends & Benefactors, no. 24, March 1983).
  • However, when one reads this New Code of Canon Law one discovers an entirely new concept of the Church...This is the definition of the Church (New Code canon 204): ‘The faithful are those who, inasmuch as they are incorporated into Christ by baptism are constituted as the people of God, and who for this reason, having been made partakers in their manner in the priestly, prophetic and royal functions of Christ, are called to exercise the mission that God entrusted to the Church to accomplish in the world.’...There is no longer any clergy. What, then, happens to the clergy?...It is consequently easy to understand that this is the ruin of the priesthood and the laicization of the Church!...This is precisely what Luther and the Protestants did, laicizing the priesthood. It is consequently very know that the New Code of Canon Law [Canon 844] permits a priest to give Communion to a Protestant . It is what they call ‘Eucharistic hospitality.’ These are [given to] Protestants who remain Protestant and do not convert! This is directly opposed to the Faith!” (Conference at Turin, Italy March 24, 1984).
  • We find this doctrine already suggested in the Council document Lumen Gentium, according to which, the college of Bishops, together with the Pope, exercise supreme power in the Church in a habitual and constant manner. This is not a change for the better; this doctrine of double supremacy is contrary to the teaching and Magisterium of the Church. It is contrary to the definitions of Vatican Council I and to Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical Satis Cognitum.” (Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Angelus Press, 1985, ch.13, p.95).
  • Our cry of alarm was rendered more urgent by the errors in the New Code of Canon Law, not to say its heresies...” (Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Angelus Press, 1985, ch. 21, p. 150).
Therefore, by accepting the New Code of Canon Law as it is, with no distinctions as presented in the Doctrinal Declaration, the leaders of the Conciliar-SSPX implicitly accept all its errors and deviations concerning:
  • a Protestant concept of the Church defined now as “the People of God”;
  • two supreme universal powers in the Church (Christ established a monarchical
  • structure for His Church, not democratic);
  • the error of Collegiality at all levels;
  • a laicization of the Church (i.e. more and more “active participation” of the laity);
  • Ecumenical practices, such as giving Holy Communion to heretics, called
  • “Eucharistic hospitality.”
  • new causes for nullity of marriages;
  • easy granting of annulments in Marriage Tribunals;
  • new regulations in contracting marriages;
  • suppression of the Major Order of Subdiaconate, minor orders (Porter, Lector,
  • Exorcist and Acolyte) and tonsure;
  • new “canonizations”;
  • relaxing of disciplinary laws;
  • etc., etc.

As it stands with the SSPX’s acceptance of the New Code of Canon Law as expressed in the Doctrinal Declaration of 2012, this is one of the greatest practical obstacles for the Society in defending Tradition and fighting Conciliar errors. How well Abp. Lefebvre understood the wily deceits of Modernist Rome! This last quote is the Archbishop speaking about the religious communities that had surrendered to Vatican II, sadly this would now include the Conciliar-SSPX:

When they say they didn’t compromise, it’s not true. They abandon the possibility of opposing Rome. They can’t say anything anymore. They must be silent, given the favors they have been granted. It is now impossible for them to denounce the errors of the Conciliar Church. They are slowly adhering to them, if only by the Profession of Faith requested by Cardinal Ratzinger. I think Dom Gerard is about to publish a ‘little’ book written by one of his monks, trying to justify Religious Liberty [of the Council] (N.B: In fact, the book written by Fr. Basile of La Barroux took 2,960 pages to try to reconcile the irreconcilable!)...From the point of view of ideas, they change very slowly, and end up accepting the Council’s false ideas, because Rome had granted some favors for Tradition. This is a very dangerous situation. They have practically abandoned the fight for the Faith. They cannot attack Rome anymore!” (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre, Fideliter, 79, p. 5-6).

There is much talk that Fr. Pagliarani, the reigning Superior General, is steering things back to the old SSPX. His skirting the vac*#***#ion question as being exclusively “a medical and political issue,” when they do, in fact, directly involve abortions which are violently performed while the children are still alive(!), is not a good sign. Let him condemn the Doctrinal Declaration of April 5, 2012 in no uncertain terms and then,maybe, we can hold hopes of the Conciliar-SSPX finally dropping the “Conciliar” in the Conciliar-SSPX!

Persevere in the Catholic Resistance! Great will be your crown in Heaven if we persevere, and greater still, the shining bruises and scars, earned in this Battle for the Holy Faith! ...Fight on, little flock!

In Christ the King,

Fr. David Hewko