FSSPX Distances Itself from Monsignor Viganó

[Stone]

An article dedicated to this issue from the Non Possumus blog [machine translated from the Spanish, slightly adapted]:

A FRATERNITY EVERY TIME LESS FRATERNAL, EVERY TIME MORE FRATRICIDAL



Cain and Abel, Mironov

June 25, 2024 [emphasis mine]

Now that Archbishop Viganò has been claimed by the “Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith” (DDF) to be judged in “schis ”, the Neo-FSSPX, far from solidarity with a prelate who has been summoned by the worst enemies of the Church through a Vatican dependency that, far from being interested in defending the faith defends heresy, apostasy, and sodomitic aberration (Doesn't anyone know that their ultimate manager, “Tucho Fernández”, is a notorious depraved promoter of degeneration sexual?), has brought out its haughty disdain for the Archbishop. ¿Is this surprising? Not for us who know well the unfair and suicidal orientation adopted by those who occupied the command posts, after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre.

In effect, the Neo-FSSPX, which no longer has prominent columnists or responsible opinion makers (if there are any of their writings no transcend some limited parish bulletin from somewhere from France), but only with a gray official information site from where, always in a dry style, supposedly ironic and successful, more always carefully cushioned with respect to Rome Modernist, he makes known his position on various topics. In this case, through a short text of just over a page, reflects the hot news without the slightest sign of solidarity or understanding towards the archbishop persecuted by the modernists Romans. Rather take advantage of – once again- detach from Archbishop Viganò, whom he has never been able to swallow for his language so close to that of Archbishop Lefebvre, inopportune of course for any type of compromise, acquiescence, or peaceful coexistence with the Council Church of Francis. Time to speak is over “yes, yes, no, no”. It is dangerous. Especially after the lifting of the “excommunications”, begged by the Neo-FSSPX to become drinkable to the Roman council authorities.

Let's pass to the mentioned article (above). After giving one brief explanation on “What is an extrajudicial criminal trial?”, evidently timely, it goes on to refer “the accusations presented by DDF”. So far, in its informative asepsis, the Neo-FSSPX has delimited fully inform the reader that the aforementioned DDF it is in the hands of people not only incompetent, but themselves they should be tried and expelled from where they have been posted, as usurpers who are. They mention that the DDF body is chaired by “Tucho ” Fernández – whom Viganò takes good care of describe in some of his nauseating background- shines for his absence. Thus, one might believe that things are “normal ” in the Church, when it comes to criminals, spiritual and doctrinal, agents of the Counter-Church and of the counter-nature, they are preparing to avenge an archbishop for having publicly challenged through his complaints, the tyrannical power that he perched such characters in positions of power in the Vatican.

Daring that, of course, cannot be attributed to the new one and FSSPX function, previously attended in the operating room of the plastic surgeon to remove your scars from combat. Can not then but pretend to keep sine macula. That is also what the warnings recently launched by the P. de Jorna, on the occasion of announcing upcoming episcopal neo-consecrations, opening the umbrella long before time.

Or maybe wanting to give the image that they are going to do the same thing that Mons. Lefebvre did, and therefore they will be “persecuted”, when in truth they are the only ones in tradition who have not stopped receiving favors from Francisco.

But if you look closely, the newsletter where the letter appears of the Superior of the District of France is accompanied by images of major projects underway to build expensive and large churches in France, in addition to a long list of benefits. ¿Can allow yourself such a developed congregation to lose its clients, putting your assets at risk? (Excuse us for talking like that, but it is not a secret that for many years the FSSPX was put to the consideration of a business branding company, so that the model and advertise according to how it is done with the big ones trademarks, operation that has been very successful).

Towards the end, the article from the FSSPX news site brings out what would be the sin of Viganò that separates him from them themselves: “Monsignor Viganò makes a clear statement of sedevacantism in its text. In others words, according to him, Pope Francis is not Pope.

¿How do you explain this? Due to a "lack of consent" of the cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, when accessing the supreme power: considering the papacy as something other than what it really is, the 2013 chosen one accepted the papal office without fully consenting to it, and this error derived in the nullity of its acceptance. His pontificate would be, for so much, a troupe." But, como is explained very well in an article by Non Possumus, “this accusation of the Fraternity is false. Archbishop Viganò does not that in his statement. Instead, this is what it says: "The Bergoglio defect of consent (vitium consensus) when accepting his choice is based precisely on the evident alienation of his government and teaching action regarding what any Catholic of any time awaits the Vicar of Christ and Successor of the Prince of the Apostles." AND in the conference than explains in detail about 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 the authority cannot be remedied by those who are subject to she". The Archbishop recognizes that Catholics are subject to Bergoglio's authority. ¿Why? Because - unfortunately- he is Pope. The article of the Neo-FSSPX [assumes] the worst case, ideas about a possible vice of consent in the papal election they bring Bishop Viganò to the sedevacantist posture, but it is totally false that "Monsignor Viganò makes a clear statement of sedevacantism in its text."

Now Well, although Viganò may not always be as clear as Mons. Lefebvre, and without having to adopt a sedevacantist position, right it is, however, in the duty to respectfully consider the position of one who has shown himself to be serious and consistent in his actions and statements, what is Monsignor Viganò? ¿Is there not the right to allow great doubt, perplexity and questioning that the Archbishop Viganò believed he could solve the way he has (“defect of consent”), to explain the behavior no longer anomalous, heretical, scandalous or solvent of Bergoglio, but its modus operandi that goes much further than the previous popes councilors?

As one of the many examples, recently the Dicastery for the Promotion of Christian Unity has proposed to “review the form of the papacy and its exercise of authority at the service of the ecclesial communion”, in a reflection “made together”, between all Christian denominations: “Has the time has come to take new steps in the ecumenical dialogues”, and “put on agree on an acceptable exercise of a unity ministry for the whole Church”.

So Francisco is taking accelerated steps to finish both with the Catholic [Latin] Mass and the papacy, in order to install the [up]coming version of the Conciliar church: the Synodal Church.

It is true that, as the Neo-FSSPX article ends, “Monsignor Lefebvre and the Fraternity that he founded [did not] want to venture into this point” (questioning of the legitimacy of the authority of the pope), but it is also true that no other pontiff ever ventured as much as Francisco does now, in a series of measurements, gestures, and words that tend to completely destroy every Catholic vestige in the Church.

It is true, Archbishop Lefebvre was not afraid of harsh words, [though he] believed [then] necessary and fair, and today I would not stop saying if not everything, practically the same as Bishop Viganò. So e.g., when Mons. Lefebvre wrote his letter to the four consecrated future bishops, on 29 August 1987, he did not hesitate to say that “the See of Peter and the positions of authority in Rome are occupied by antichrists”, and than “ the destruction of the Reign of Our Lord continues rapidly within his Mystical Body on this earth, especially for the corruption of the Holy Mass, demonstration splendid of the triumph of Our Lord on the cross”.

Bergoglio goes beyond the corruption of the Mass and tries directly make it disappear. ¿Is there a conditional FSSPX response to  that? Oh, we will be told that you are going to consecrate new bishops. ¿Perhaps from Huonder style? In 1987 - almost forty years ago! - Mons. Lefebvre said (in the quoted letter) that “this Modernist and liberal Rome continues its destructive work of the Reign of Our Lord”. In change now, in the dark times of “Fiducia supplicans”, timidly says the superior of France P. de Jorna: “Not having the ecclesial situation has improved since 1988, we have to think about give helpers [to the current three bishops], who one day will become their substitutes”. With a calculated language harmless, avoid in your letter any reference to modernism and liberalism of the Vatican authorities, I dare not even mention the Second Vatican Council. ¿How, then, could [there be] any allusion to Bergoglian Iscariotism? Nothing of that. Once you raised the “excommunications”, were they going to risk being newly excommunicated?

Let's meditate, to finish, these words of a saint: “St. Chrysostom asks: "What is the cause for the primitive Church Christians being so good and so fervent, and today are they so lukewarm and reluctant?" And he answers, "that the cause is because then they went out to fight the demon naked, stripping themselves of their assets and estates; but now they come out very dressed in benefits, estates and honor: and those garments hinder and impede them a lot. For this we leave wealth, and get rid of all things of the world, so that free and unraveled we can better fight the devil, and follow Christ. The most naked fighter strongly fights: the swimmer strips off his clothes to pass the river; the walker leaving the load and burden walks more uprightly.” (San Alonso Rodríguez, “Treatise on perfection and virtues Christian”).

- F.M.


N.B.: To reflect: “No, we would say that the good God wants to make us atone for our adherence to the goods of the earth and force us to practice poverty, put that we don't want it voluntarily? The best spirits have thought that the atrocious cataclysm that swept from France so many teaching congregations was for many a providential punishment of this unfortunate mania to bury large sums in huge constructions that had multiplied to excess during the last twenty years” (“Pourquoi notre ministère est stérile pu peu fructueux ”, par un prêtre, 1905).

Perhaps it is worth noting that, e.g., while the FSSPX in the USA was carrying out large ("pharaonic") and multiple building works, and sumptuously publicizing its exponential growth, the superior of that same district was engaged in the sexual predation of minors, a matter to which he himself confessed and for which he has just been sentenced to two years in prison in France. Has the punishment for the Neo FSSPX come to an end, or is it still to come?