Schizophrenic Statememnts by SSPX Members

Schizophrenic Statememnts by SSPX Members

---

"We pray for the pope ... and are in union with Eternal Rome"
Some Schizophrenic Statements by SSPX Members
Who Falsely Claim to be in Union With the Roman Pontiff

---

re: The Claim That THE SOCIETY OF ST PIUS X IS NOT IN SCHISM

A Supplement to the Thread at Catholic Answers Liturgy and Sacraments Forum
- SSPX NOT in Schism Forum

The Catechism of the Council of Trent

In the Catechism of the Council of Trent, p. one can read:

"The Church militant is composed of two classes of persons, the good and the bad, both professing the same faith and partaking of the same Sacraments, yet differing in their manner of life and morality...The Church...includes within her fold the good and the bad...That the Church is composed of the good and the bad we learn from many parables contained in the Gospel...yet the condition of both is very different...Hence there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church's pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics, and excommunicated persons." (Catechism of the Council of Trent For Parish Priests, McHugh and Callan, Marian Publications, 1972, pp.99-101).

Members of the The Society of St Pius X (i.e., including priests and Third Order lay persons) AND ordinary lay persons, who have adhered to the schism of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the four bishops consecrated by him - who incurred automatic excommunication in 1988 - all these are in the "class of persons" above "excluded from the Church's pale." - according to THAT Catechism!
Pope John Paul II Does NOT Agree – They Are NOT in Communion With Him!

The Vicar of Christ at the time (June 1988), Pope John Paul II, who was also the Supreme Law-maker and Law-Interpreter, declared so solemnly in the document "Ecclesia Dei Adflicta"

3. In itself this act was one of disobedience to the Roman pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the Church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience--which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy--constitutes a schismatic act. [Code of Canon Law, 751.] In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the cardinal prefect of the Congregation for Bishops last June 17, Archbishop Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law. [Cf. Code of Canon Law, 1382.]
...
5. c) In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfill the grave duty of remaining united to the vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offense against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church's law. [Cf. Code of Canon Law, 1364.]

Lefebvre & Company were forewarned that excommunication would follow any attempt by him to consecrate bishops without the mandate of the pope and contrary to the pope's express command NOT to perform that act. Consequently, following the consecrations and prior to the pope's Apostolic Letter "Ecclesia Dei Adflicta", the Prefect for the Congregation of Bishops issued the solemn declaration of excommunication:

...
Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of Tulle, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning of 17 June last and the repeated appeals to desist from his intention, has performed a schismatical act by the episcopal consecration of four priests, without pontifical mandate and contrary to the will of the Supreme Pontiff, and has therefore incurred the penalty envisaged by Canon 1364, paragraph 1, and Canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law.
Having taken account of all the juridical effects, I declare that the above-mentioned Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred ipso facto excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.
...
[See full document HERE ]

The above and copious official letters and documentation - such as the THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF LEGISLATIVE TEXTS On The Excommunication of Followers of Archbishop Lefebvre - consistently state that adhering to the SSPX is to place oneself in danger of incurring excommunication for the crime of schism.
Just As Consistently the SSPX and Their Apologists Claim To Know Better Than the Pope and His Dicasteries

This Is the Schizophrenic SSPX "Get Stuffed" Syndrome! [For want of a better description!]For more detail on this "attitude", see:

• Catholic Answers False Traditionalists and the Indult Mass

This "attitude" has been translated by Members of the SSPX in, for example, the following ways:

1. Denial of the Catholic Church since Vatican II;

   "Mr Pickford says: 'Father Violette establishes his belief that what he holds as true religion is other than what the Catholic Church holds as true religion.' I distinguish; what I hold as the true religion is other than (he actually means "what", F.J.L.) the Catholic Church held up to Pius XII (sic.!!!); I deny, the Catholic Church since Vatican II; I concede."(!!!) [Fr Jean Violette, Letter to F.J.Loughnan, January 21, 1995. See also his Letter to Faithful of March 1, 1995], and
   "...how many people are still letting themselves be deceived by what remains of the appearance and structure of the Church?"
   "Even if in theory they still profess the same Creed, in practice they are far from it. In many seminaries, as in the majority of churches still operating, it is the abomination of desolation and a mockery of the truth which have replaced the Holy of Holies... if only it were an exaggeration to say so!"
   "From time to time we are rebuked for not appealing to Rome against such injustice. But it would be a waste of time. Rome would merely reply, 'Nobody can sit in judgement on the Holy See.'"
   "Rome may scare us with all the threats of excommunication it likes, but we shall continue to cry out...for the right to receive the substantial food of grace through sacraments not doubtfully valid..."
   (Bishop Bernard Fellay, The Superior General's Letter No. 54 to Friends and Benefactors, Menzingen, 19 March 1998).

   
   
2. Refusal of association or solidarity with non-SSPX Catholics;

   "...the fact that I refuse to cooperate with the Ecclesia Dei people...the Society of St Peter or Dom Gerard...I want nothing to do with them either...the Ecclesia Dei movement here in Australia...they must also agree that the new mass is good...and most of them accept the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre..." [Fr Jean Violette, Letter to F.J.Loughnan, Jan. 21, 1995], and
   Quotations from Archbishop Lefebvre of unstated date: Regarding '"..our enemies on the other side...'celebrating the Tridentine Mass...THEY ARE BETRAYING US...they are doing the devil's work.' " [Fr Jean Violette, Letter to Faithful, October 7, 1994], and
   As to "conservative" Catholics: "...to associate in friendship or solidarity with them is implicitly to betray the Catholic Faith..." [Fr Jean Violette, Letter to Faithful, November 1, 1994]. and
   "I am denying what Mr Davies says you can't: that the New Mass is an official Mass of the Catholic Church."
   " [Fr James Peek, Holy Cross Seminary Letter To Friends and Benefactors, July 3, 1996, p.2.] In addition to the description of Masses, offered by priests under the terms of the Indult, as being "INSULT MASSES", other terms have been used by some SSPX priests such as describing attendees as being "INDULTERS" ("INDULTEROUS"?). Furthermore, some reports allege that the Indult Mass itself has been branded as being invalid!, and
   "Thou shalt not commit indultery." [Bishop Richard Williamson, Hampton Conference, December 4, 1989.]

   
   
3. Forbids its adherents from attending Diocesan or Indult Masses

   In a move which indicates an ongoing hardening of attitude against the Roman Catholic Church, the U.S. District Superior of the schismatic Society of St. Pius X, Fr. Peter Scott, has forbidden persons who attend SSPX chapels to attend any traditional Latin Mass which is in communion with Pope John Paul II. Writing in the May issue of Regina Coeli, Scott, who is known even with the Society for his distempered reactions to anyone who questions his authority, and for overburdening the consciences of the people who attend his chapels, said it was "crucial" for the "sanctification" of families that they not attend the Indult Mass. He writes:
   

   "Remember that if you cannot get to a true (sic) Catholic Mass celebrated by a good (sic) traditional priest, you should not attend the New Mass or the Indult Mass, and this even if it is the only traditional Mass available".
   [ http://sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id49.html ]

   
   
4. Disobedience to legitimate orders.

   Fr. Todd Angele refused to say the Oremus, Flectamus genua and Levate "for the Jews" on Good Fridays - violating Pius XII's Reform of the Holy Week Liturgy, which was agreed by Fr Violette as being a "legitimate reform done by a legitimate pope... and...a legitimate superior must be obeyed." (Letter of March 19, 1996 to Max Longford).

   
   
5. Accusations that The New Mass is not lawful; not acceptable to God; it is an adulterous union with bastard fruits; it is intrinsically evil - the abomination of desolation.

   (Regarding 'The corruption of the Holy Mass' spoken of by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988)..."in the majority of churches still operating, it is the abomination of desolation and a mockery of the truth which have replaced the Holy of Holies..." (Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St Pius X, Letter To Friends And Benefactors, 25 March 1998 - reproduced in the Holy Cross Seminary Letter To Friends And Benefactors, 1st April 1998), and
   Regarding the New Mass: "...it is in itself a danger to the faith and is intrinsically evil...I am denying what Mr Davies says you can't: that the New Mass is an official Mass of the Catholic Church"; that is, he positively affirms that the New Mass is NOT an official Mass of the Catholic Church. (Fr James Peek, Holy Cross Seminary Bulletin, July 3, 1996 and Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter of the SSPX No. 56, Sep.-Dec. 1996.), and
   "For Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX the new mass is intrinsically evil and therefore to be totally rejected." (Fr. Jean Violette, Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter of the SSPX No. 56, Sep.-Dec. 1996.), and
   "...when I said the Novus Ordo is intrinsically evil...what is meant is that the New Mass, as it was published in 1969, objectively, taken in itself, regardless of the priest, and not only the abuses which followed, is bad, is evil." (Fr Jean Violette, Letter to Faithful, October 1996), and
   "Even if in theory they still profess the same Creed, in practice they are far from it. In many seminaries, as in the majority of churches still operating, it is the abomination of desolation and a mockery of the truth which have replaced the Holy of Holies... if only it were an exaggeration to say so!" (Bishop Bernard Fellay, The Superior General's Letter No. 54 to Friends and Benefactors, 19 March 1998), and
   "Personally, I don't believe in discussions which would not deal with the heart of the matter: with Vatican II, with the new Mass, intrinsically evil as we always said in Tradition, with the new code of Canon Law, which introduces the new Vatican II ecclesiology in the legislation of the Church." [Abbe Benoit de Jorna, Superior of the St. Pius X Seminary in Econe, Interview with Giovanni Pelli, May 15, 2001], and
   "After 20 years of pontificate, John Paul II has not changed. He still is the pope of Assisi. The new ecumenism born of Vatican II is his guiding idea. ... Personally, I think that he wants to integrate us, in this pluralistic church. This integration would be our disintegration." [Abbe Benoit de Jorna, Superior of the St. Pius X Seminary in Econe, Interview with Giovanni Pelli, May 15, 2001].

   
   
6. All other Sacraments are suspected as being per sea invalid and unlawfull; bastard rites; bastard sacraments; bastard priests.

   "All these (pre Pope John XXIII) Popes have resisted the union of the Church with the revolution; it is an adulterous union and from such a union only bastards can come. The rite of the new mass is a bastard rite, the sacraments are bastard sacraments. We no longer know if they are sacraments which give grace or do not give it. The priests coming out of the seminaries are bastard priests, who do not know what they are. They are unaware that they are made to go up to the altar, to offer the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ and to give Jesus Christ to souls." ("An Open Letter To Confused Catholics", by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Fowler Wright Books Ltd for The Society of St Pius X, p. 116, 1986.)

   
   
7. The pope, the bishops in union with him and the vast majority of Catholics who worship God in a way other than the way employed by the Society are deemed to be in a new religion.

   "Instead of signing useless petitions all those who want the traditional mass should join our ranks and show Rome a united front and boycott the new mass, the new clergy, in fine, this new religion...
   
   "One of the conditions for the granting of the 'favour' is that the new mass be recognised as being as good as the traditional Mass..."
   
   "THIS INDULT IS AN INSULT. IT IS NOT FOR US...we do not accept the new mass as lawful...an adulterous union with its bastard fruits...we want the concubine gone...we hope and pray...for the condemnation and total disappearance of the new mass...the traditional mass...IS THE ONLY FORM OF WORSHIP ACCEPTABLE TO GOD. The new mass is not.
   (Fr Jean Violette, Letter to Faithful, August 27, 1994), and
   
   "Mr Pickford says: 'The Pope, the bishops in union with him and the vast majority of Catholics who worship God in a way other than the way employed by the Society are deemed (by the SSPX) to be in a new religion.' Yes absolutely!...
   [Fr Jean Violette, Letter to F.J.Loughnan, January 21, 1995, and Letter to Faithful, Mar. 1, 1995], and
   
   "Not accepting them (the New Mass and post-conciliar orientations) is not being in schism with the Catholic Church but with the 'Conciliar Church', which itself, breaking more and more with Catholicism, is becoming more and more schismatic."
   (Fr. James Peek, Holy Cross Seminary Newsletter of July 3, 1996 and Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter of the SSPX No. 56, Sep.-Dec. 1996.)
   

   
   
8. Pope John Paul II a bad pope.

   Pope John Paul II is not only deplorably deficient in his teaching but is an absolute scandal....he is not a great Pope; worse, he is a bad Pope. (Fr James Peek, Holy Cross Seminary Bulletin, July 3, 1996 and Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter of the SSPX No. 56, Sep.-Dec. 1996).

   
   
9. Mortal sin for this priest to say the New Mass.

   "Our rejection of the Novus Ordo must be absolute... attend it?...only (as) for attending non-catholic functions ...(a) sin...if he is aware of (it's) nocivity ... If I were ever to say the New Mass, know that I would be committing a mortal sin..." (Fr James Peek, Holy Cross Seminary Bulletin, Sept. 18, 1996).

   
   
10. Jews are the most active artisans for antichrist.

    Fr. Todd Angele to Hampton Choir April 1, 1994: Oremus, etc. would be omitted "as the Jews had mockingly knelt before Our Lord." To Max Longford, June 3, 1996: re failure to comply with Pius XII's Reform of the Holy Week Liturgy: "I wouldn't genuflect for the Jews", and
    "The extermination of Jews by the Nazis could only be the doing of an anti-Christian regime. The Church for its part has at all times forbidden and condemned the killing of Jews even when 'their grave defects rendered them odious to the nations among which they were established.'
    "...All this makes us think that the Jews are the most active artisans for the coming of antichrist." (Bishop Tissier de Malleraise, "Catholic", May 1997, under the title, "The Jews in Latter Times").

    
    
11. Implication - there were NO Catholic schools available for the education of Catholic children prior to the availability of the SSPX St Thomas College at Tynong.

    "Now that a Catholic school is available I don't see how those who prefer public schools for their children can be excused from sin." (Fr Jean Violette, Letter to Faithful, May 1998).

    
    
12. Vicious Statements on the Novus Ordo Missae, Sacraments and Vatican Council II by SSPX Officials

Evidence of the Lefebvrist Schism is legion... John Beaumont presented a summary of the evidence on the schism in "THE VANISHING SCHISM REVISITED: WILL THE REAL CARDINAL LARA PLEASE STAND UP (AGAIN)?" Fidelity Magazine Here are some extracts:

"Here are some of the acts of disobedience to the Pope, or to those under him, perpetrated by this organization, to which many more could be added:

1. " The SSPX establishes seminaries, churches, chapels and priories throughout the world, without any reference to the local ordinaries in whose dioceses it carries out these acts.
   
2. " It ordains priests without the dismissorial letters required by canon law.
   
3. ". It hears confessions and celebrates marriages without jurisdiction.
   
4. " It gives holy communion to persons who are well known sede-vacantists.
   
5. " It refused Pope Paul Vi's command to close the seminary at Econe and to wind up the SSPX.
   
6. " It carries out confirmations in other bishops' dioceses contrary to the Council of Trent.
   
7. " It purports to accept John Paul II as Pope, and yet rejects parts of the 1983 Code of Canon Law promulgated by him in his capacity as supreme legislator.
   
8. " Finally in 1988, the SSPX consecrated four bishops, knowing that this was against the express will of the Pope, and, then, in 1991, proceeded to consecrate a further bishop in a diocese (Campos in Brazil) where, as the SSPX itself recognizes, there is already a valid bishop."

And,
"Further EVIDENCE OF THE LEFEBVRIST SCHISM "To end on a positive note, the one thing that should be emphasized in this whole sorry affair is the extent of the real evidence for the Lefebvrist schism. All in all we have the following items of evidence:

1. "The decision of the Pope that there is a schism.
   
2. "The decision of the Catholic Church to the same effect.
   
3. "The teaching of Cardinal Castillo Lara former President of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, again, that there is a schism.
   
4. "The teaching of Pope Pius XII that an episcopal consecration against the will of the Pope is an offense against divine law as well as against human law (Apostolorum Principis [1958]).
   
5. "As a matter of canon law the act of 30th June 1988 fits the definition of schism contained in the Code of Canon Law. It is not any of us who decide this. The Church in Ecclesia Dei Adflicta does so. Canon law can only be interpreted by the law-maker (Canon 16).
   
6. "Vatican I in Pastor Aeternus requires Catholics to obey decisions of the Holy See in matters of this kind.
   
7. "The Society of St. Pius X is unable to cite from 2000 years of Tradition any pope doctor or council to justify episcopal consecration against the express will of the Pope.
   
8. "The Society of St. Pius X and its apologists have to misquote a canonist in order to defend their case. In addition as we have shown in 'Schism, Obedience and the Society of St. Pius X,' the SSPX even has to rewrite the Catholic definitions of schism and obedience to justify its position.
   
9. "What more evidence do these people want? Our own experience has shown us that even an ex cathedra definition by the Pope, or a direct revelation from Our Lord Himself, would not move some of them. Some would no doubt say, 'But, Cardinal Lara says. . . ' Has it now come to such a stage that, for traditionalists, a schism is decided by the authoritative voice of a Davies, a Scott, or a Williamson? Heaven preserve us from such a break with Tradition. Whatever qualities and merits these people have, it is obvious that not one of them knows what the primacy of Peter is all about."

More Lies and Deceptions

• Brochure: "Is The Society Of St Pius X Schismatic? Excommunicated? Rome Says NO. Can Anyone Go To Their Latin Masses? YES."
  
  
• Capponi, Count Neri: "St. Pius X cannot any longer claim to be acting in a state of necessity as foreseen by canon 1323, 4 ."
  
  
• Honolulu: The status of the SSPX was not an issue in this case.
  
  
• Murray, Fr. Gerald: "...very strong letter to the SSPX pointing out the outright errors."
  
  
• Lefebvre Signed "Dignitatis Humanae" (the Declaration on Religious Liberty) and Gaudium et spes - per Fr. Brian Harrison, O.S.
  
  
• Fr. Violette's response from the "Glossy brochure" - "Is The Society of St Pius X Schismatic..."
  

Finally - SSPX Adherents Pervert the English Language Relative to the words of Cardinal Hoyos on schism, for example:

1. "pbm" gives an extract from Cardinal Hoyos in Message #15 in the thread SSPX NOT in Schism
   :

   "#1CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately Monsignor Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration and hence the situation of separation came about, even if it was NOT a formal schism."

The first thing to notice is that Cardinal Hoyos acknowledged that there IS a schism - by saying "the situation of separation came about" - for, in fact and in deed, a "separation" actually means a "schism" - see any good dictionary for the meaning of "separation"!
Secondly, In saying that "even if it was not a formal schism" - it is important to note the use of the two qualifiers "IF and "FORMAL". "IF" takes nothing away from acknowledging that there IS a separation = schism, and the qualifying "FORMAL" is, simply a speculation. Thirdly, the actual definition of schism is given in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, can. 751:

Schism is the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff OR from communion with the members of the church subject to him."

That "OR" is frequently and conveniently omitted by SSPX adherents from the definition - but, is equally important! ARE SSPX adherents "in communion" with the members when they are not in communion with their local ordinary, who IS in communion with the pope? Are they in communion with the members when they refuse to attend and receive the Eucharist at their local Indult Mass OR the local "Novus Ordo"? The answer is a big "NO"!
Traditionalists / Traditionalism

"Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living."
Jaroslav Pelikan
"How can history, that is, words and deeds which are dead and gone, act as an effectual living decider of quarrels between living men?"
[Ven. John H. Newman (c. 1878)] - quoted by I. Shawn McElhinney
One of the truly sad things about the SSPX schism is that while its current adherents believe they are Catholic, barring a miraculous return to communion with Rome, their grandchildren will know that they are not.
Pete Vere
"One must risk to be sounding arrogant in order to preach the truth."
Apolonio Latar March 1, 2003

NB The Society lies concerning Cardinal Lara, Fr. Gerald Murray, etc (as outlined in the Society's brochure) is detailed in John Beaumont's file and his and John Walsh's prior file, "The Story of the Vanishing Schism: The Strange Case of Cardinal Lara" The Catholic Church no more "needs" the SSPX (nor any other schismatic group) than it "needed" the "Reformers" and the "Reformed" churches! What IS needed is for SSPX types to return to the fold of Holy Mother Church and for them to make their presence felt within the Church.
Sean Ó Lachtnáin

---

Cheat Sheet On The Society of St Pius X and Other Integrists Un-official Home Page
What's New? at Sean Ó Lachtnáin's Home Page
Sean Ó Lachtnáin's Home Page