06-26-2024, 02:00 PM
Short commentary on the above SSPX article/reaction by the Non Possumus blog [machine translated from the Spanish, slightly reformatted]:
The first thing that impacts this Neo-FSSPX article is the coldness - which seems derogatory - regarding a prelate who is risking everything in his war against Roman antichrists. Also very shocking is the subtle and implicit defense made by the [SSPX] of the current pope, minimizing his devastating and devastating action in this passage: "Monsignor Viganò ... defends himself in various ways, invoking the doctrinal wanderings of the current pontificate"... ¿The "doctrinal wanderings" of the current pontificate? According to the dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy of Language, that word means "Vicissitudes, adventures, trances." It is truly incredible that the FSSPX thus bleaches this monstrous and horrifying pontificate.
The Neo-FSSPX behaves with Archbishop Viganò in the manner of the brother of the prodigal son, as evidenced by these words of Fr. Gleize, the favorite theologian of Ménzingen: He (Archbishop Viganò) takes note of what is happening in the Church, but for us it is not something new... for us, priests of the Fraternity, it is touching and naive because we have been doing this for 50 years. So we are happy about it, of course! But it's like the youngest in the family finally realizing that the world is evil. He's a very zealous neophyte. They (Msgr. Schneider and Msgr. Viganò) speak loud and clear, they lament, they are sometimes harsher than us, but what do they do? Lefebvre left something behind him, not words, not wind. These are voices that are welcome in the Church, but they are only words of outcasts (source).
Archbishop Viganò and the Neo-FSSPX are like two ships that are very close to each other, only this is because they are going "in opposite directions: Viganò is on a rapid path towards Tradition, while the FSSPX is practically committed to mitigated conciliarism" (date of this article). What FSSPX wants is "the canonical recognition [from the] modernists, then the conversion of Bishop Viganò to Tradition will simply be described by Menzingen as inappropriate" (idem), contrary to what happened with Monsignor Lazo in the times when the Fraternity remained faithful. And that is why Monsignor Huonder's approach was also seen as something convenient and very opportune by the leadership of the Fraternity. The cases of Bishop Lazo (hosted liberal), Msgr. Huonder (hosted "right" liberal) and Msgr. Viganò (rejected liberal), clearly prove the deviation of the congregation.
But let's continue: as we have repeatedly denounced in this blog, the Fraternity [SSPX] has normally chosen to ignore Bishop Viganò. This time, however, since the facts are of the utmost gravity, it was necessary to say something, but what? Well highlight the worst (real or supposed) of him: Attention: Viganò is a sedevacantist! Taking a step further than the brother of the prodigal son, the FSSPX adds its voice to those of those who persecute Bishop Viganò when he accuses him of being a sedevacantist: "Monsignor Viganò makes a clear statement of sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is not Pope. ¿How do you explain this? Due to a "consent vice" of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, when accessing the supreme power: considering the papacy as something different from what it really is, the elected of 2013 accepted the papal office without fully consenting to it, and this error led to the nullity of its acceptance. His pontificate would therefore be a troupe." But this accusation of the Fraternity is false.
Archbishop Viganò does not do that in his statement. Instead, this is what it says: "Bergoglio's default consent (vitium consensus) by accepting your choice, it is based precisely on the evident alienation of its action of government and teaching regarding what any Catholic of any time expects from the Vicar of Christ and Successor of the Prince of the Apostles." And in the conference which explains in detail the possible vice of consent in the papal election (vitium consensus), ends by saying this another (min. 33:50): "This situation is humanly incurable because ... the corruption of authority cannot be remedied by those who are subject to it". In other words, the Archbishop recognizes that Catholics are subject to the authority of Bergoglio. ¿Why? Because - unfortunately - he is the pope. The Neo-FSSPX article is then unfair and misleading. In the worst case, ideas about a possible vice of consent in the papal election bring Bishop Viganò closer to the sedevacantist position, but it is totally false that "Monsignor Viganò makes a clear statement of sedevacantism in his text."
FSSPX's attitude towards Archbishop Viganó, which ranges from ignoring to attacking him, is a clear consequence of the liberal drift of the congregation. "In the early 1990's, an archbishop on the way to integral traditionalism would have been the greatest news of Tradition. We would have read about it on every FSSPX website and blog. We would have heard sermons on it in chapels around the world. It would have been received as a tremendous stimulus and a miracle of grace. That's how Monsignor Lazo converted to Tradition, but... Viganò is a persona non grata at the FSSPX." (del article cited above).
It is clear, once again, that for the Neo-FSSPX, the courageous Archbishop Viganò is a dangerous leper, for any rapprochement with that enemy of Bergoglio can destroy hopes of "normalization". He is a leper, yes, or - worse than that - another uncomfortable John the Baptist who must be removed from the middle, or - worse still - another who is better left in the hands of those who subject him to an unjust judgment to crucify him...
Nihil novum sub sole ( nothing new under the sun ).
✠ ✠ ✠
The first thing that impacts this Neo-FSSPX article is the coldness - which seems derogatory - regarding a prelate who is risking everything in his war against Roman antichrists. Also very shocking is the subtle and implicit defense made by the [SSPX] of the current pope, minimizing his devastating and devastating action in this passage: "Monsignor Viganò ... defends himself in various ways, invoking the doctrinal wanderings of the current pontificate"... ¿The "doctrinal wanderings" of the current pontificate? According to the dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy of Language, that word means "Vicissitudes, adventures, trances." It is truly incredible that the FSSPX thus bleaches this monstrous and horrifying pontificate.
The Neo-FSSPX behaves with Archbishop Viganò in the manner of the brother of the prodigal son, as evidenced by these words of Fr. Gleize, the favorite theologian of Ménzingen: He (Archbishop Viganò) takes note of what is happening in the Church, but for us it is not something new... for us, priests of the Fraternity, it is touching and naive because we have been doing this for 50 years. So we are happy about it, of course! But it's like the youngest in the family finally realizing that the world is evil. He's a very zealous neophyte. They (Msgr. Schneider and Msgr. Viganò) speak loud and clear, they lament, they are sometimes harsher than us, but what do they do? Lefebvre left something behind him, not words, not wind. These are voices that are welcome in the Church, but they are only words of outcasts (source).
Archbishop Viganò and the Neo-FSSPX are like two ships that are very close to each other, only this is because they are going "in opposite directions: Viganò is on a rapid path towards Tradition, while the FSSPX is practically committed to mitigated conciliarism" (date of this article). What FSSPX wants is "the canonical recognition [from the] modernists, then the conversion of Bishop Viganò to Tradition will simply be described by Menzingen as inappropriate" (idem), contrary to what happened with Monsignor Lazo in the times when the Fraternity remained faithful. And that is why Monsignor Huonder's approach was also seen as something convenient and very opportune by the leadership of the Fraternity. The cases of Bishop Lazo (hosted liberal), Msgr. Huonder (hosted "right" liberal) and Msgr. Viganò (rejected liberal), clearly prove the deviation of the congregation.
But let's continue: as we have repeatedly denounced in this blog, the Fraternity [SSPX] has normally chosen to ignore Bishop Viganò. This time, however, since the facts are of the utmost gravity, it was necessary to say something, but what? Well highlight the worst (real or supposed) of him: Attention: Viganò is a sedevacantist! Taking a step further than the brother of the prodigal son, the FSSPX adds its voice to those of those who persecute Bishop Viganò when he accuses him of being a sedevacantist: "Monsignor Viganò makes a clear statement of sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is not Pope. ¿How do you explain this? Due to a "consent vice" of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, when accessing the supreme power: considering the papacy as something different from what it really is, the elected of 2013 accepted the papal office without fully consenting to it, and this error led to the nullity of its acceptance. His pontificate would therefore be a troupe." But this accusation of the Fraternity is false.
Archbishop Viganò does not do that in his statement. Instead, this is what it says: "Bergoglio's default consent (vitium consensus) by accepting your choice, it is based precisely on the evident alienation of its action of government and teaching regarding what any Catholic of any time expects from the Vicar of Christ and Successor of the Prince of the Apostles." And in the conference which explains in detail the possible vice of consent in the papal election (vitium consensus), ends by saying this another (min. 33:50): "This situation is humanly incurable because ... the corruption of authority cannot be remedied by those who are subject to it". In other words, the Archbishop recognizes that Catholics are subject to the authority of Bergoglio. ¿Why? Because - unfortunately - he is the pope. The Neo-FSSPX article is then unfair and misleading. In the worst case, ideas about a possible vice of consent in the papal election bring Bishop Viganò closer to the sedevacantist position, but it is totally false that "Monsignor Viganò makes a clear statement of sedevacantism in his text."
FSSPX's attitude towards Archbishop Viganó, which ranges from ignoring to attacking him, is a clear consequence of the liberal drift of the congregation. "In the early 1990's, an archbishop on the way to integral traditionalism would have been the greatest news of Tradition. We would have read about it on every FSSPX website and blog. We would have heard sermons on it in chapels around the world. It would have been received as a tremendous stimulus and a miracle of grace. That's how Monsignor Lazo converted to Tradition, but... Viganò is a persona non grata at the FSSPX." (del article cited above).
It is clear, once again, that for the Neo-FSSPX, the courageous Archbishop Viganò is a dangerous leper, for any rapprochement with that enemy of Bergoglio can destroy hopes of "normalization". He is a leper, yes, or - worse than that - another uncomfortable John the Baptist who must be removed from the middle, or - worse still - another who is better left in the hands of those who subject him to an unjust judgment to crucify him...
Nihil novum sub sole ( nothing new under the sun ).
"So let us be confident, let us not be unprepared, let us not be outflanked, let us be wise, vigilant, fighting against those who are trying to tear the faith out of our souls and morality out of our hearts, so that we may remain Catholics, remain united to the Blessed Virgin Mary, remain united to the Roman Catholic Church, remain faithful children of the Church."- Abp. Lefebvre