SSPX Responds (?) to Traditionis Custodes

[Stone]

One can only find two articles on SSPX websites (and only one of those with actual commentary) on the motu proprio of Pope Francis' Traditionis Custodes of July 16, 2021, reversing Pope Benedict XVI's "permission" for the Tridentine Mass.  

The first article is on the SSPX's Australian and New Zealand website (there is nothing so far on the website of the 'General House' nor the 'District of the USA') which is merely a reprinting of an article from Rorate Caeli, entitled, "Legal Considerations on the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes" - Restrictions demand strict interpretation by Fr. Pierre Laliberté, J.C.L.*.

The only SSPX website with a (brief) commentary on the Pope's new motu proprio is on the French SSPX site, La Porte Latine. Here is the (google-translated) English version of the commentary, which is then simply followed by the actual motu proprio and accompany Letter from Francis.

Pope Francis restricts the use of the traditional mass

Posted on July 17, 2021


No longer speak of "mass according to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite".

By his Motu proprio entitledTraditionis Custodes of July 16, 2021 to which is attached a covering letter to the bishops, Pope Francis has just decided that this distinction invented by Benedict XVI was null and void: only the new mass of Paul VI is entitled of city in the conciliar Church, the traditional mass is only tolerated.


Unity behind the New Mass

What is the status of the Tridentine Mass now? The answer is not given in these documents but what does it matter since the clearly stated objective is its disappearance. It is now permitted under drastic conditions for "those who need time to return to the Roman rite promulgated by Saints [sic] Paul VI and John Paul II  ", that is to say say the new mass.

The means employed to succeed in stifling the Mass of all times are clearly indicated in the  Motu proprio: severe limitation of the times and places of the celebration of the traditional Mass; firm control by the bishops of diocesan priests wishing to celebrate according to the old rite; removal of all protective supervision for Institutes under the former Ecclesia  Dei Commission.


Unity behind Vatican Council II

The Pope thus intends to eradicate any pocket of resistance to the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. It was, he admits bluntly, the goal of the motu proprio of 1988 and 2007; their 
implementation having on the contrary consolidated the positions leading to "doubting the Council", Pope Francis puts an end to the experiment. The groups which will still be authorized to celebrate according to the old rite will have to certify that they “do not exclude the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, of the precepts of the Second Vatican Council and of the Magisterium of the Sovereign Pontiffs ”, Thus adhering to the Council and the post-conciliar magisterium.

The point is brutal for those who believed they could put their trust in authorities still imbued with liberal values, when the Society of Saint Pius X can faithfully rely on the wisdom of its founder warning about the indult of 1984 granting the traditional mass a conditional freedom:  "We cannot place ourselves under an authority whose ideas are liberal and which would condemn us little by little, by force of circumstances, to accept these ideas and their consequences, first of all. the new mass ”.

That's it. A big nothing-burger, as they say. A very short, crisp quote from Archbishop Lefebvre. A summary of the facts of the motu proprio. No defense of the true Mass, no rebuttal, no answer, no plan for how the SSPX will move forward. And all this only if one is able to read French (or at least know how to computer translate) ...

[Stone]

Perhaps it would have been a helpful reminder by the SSPX to their priests and faithful of Pope St. Pius V's bull Quo Primum, which grants in perpetuity, the right of every single Catholic priest to say the Tridentine Mass:

Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches, be they secular or religious, both of men and of women – even of military orders – and of churches or chapels without a specific congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever. [...]

All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure. [...]

Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Would anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

[Stone]

One would have hoped too that the SSPX would reinforce the many great words of Archbishop Lefebvre on the Conciliar machinations:

• On the Reign of Christ the King, which the modernists seek to destroy: 
  “The point of opposition and the reason why there is no possibility of an Agreement [with Modernist Rome] is this; the question is not so much about the Mass, because the Mass is just one consequence of them wanting to get closer to Protestantism, and so they changed the worship, sacraments, catechism, etc. The real fundamental opposition is against the Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ! … 'Oportet Illum Regnare!' … St. Paul tells us 'Our Lord came to reign, He must reign!' They [the Modernists] say: 'NO!' We say: 'YES!' with all its consequences!” (Abp. Lefebvre, Fideliter No. 70, 1993)
  
  
• On the Indult, the subterfuge with which modernist Rome seeks to entrap souls of tradition:
  " ...the religious authorities would only grant this freedom [of the Indult] on condition that the traditional Mass not be celebrated out of contempt for the New Rite. They would require priests to say the New Mass at least once in a while. It is difficult not to descry in the arrangement of the conditions a maneuver destined to put pressure on traditional priests to convince them to celebrate the New Mass. [...] Availing ourselves of the Indult is tantamount to putting ourselves into a state of contradiction because at the same time that Rome gives the Fraternity of St. Peter, for example, or Le Barroux Abbey and other groups authorization to say the Mass of All Time, they also require young priests to sign a profession of faith in which the spirit of the Council must be accepted. It is a contradiction: the spirit of the Council is embodied in the New Mass. How is it possible to desire to preserve the Mass of all time while accepting the spirit that destroys this Mass of All Time? It is completely contradictory.[...] One day, very gently, they will oblige those who have been granted the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Mass of All Time, also to accept the New Mass. And they will tell them that it is simply a matter of squaring themselves with what they have signed, since they signed a statement that they accepted the spirit of the Council and its reforms. You cannot put yourself thus into an unbelievable, irrational contradiction. It is a very uncomfortable situation. This is what has created the difficulty for these groups that have signed it and that currently find themselves in a kind of impasse." (Homily, Friedrichshafen, April 29, 1990)
  

• Or perhaps On the New Mass:
  “And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith… Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion - another religion.” (Sermon, June 29, 1976)
  

But perhaps the SSPX knows they've been slimed by the Conciliar slaver, they know they can only squeak whereas before they roared. They know that these words of Archbishop Lefebvre cannot be repeated by them (with their now-needed permissions for marriages, ordinations, etc.) because they too have willingly placed themselves in an 'adulterous union' with modernist Rome: 

“There will be possibly other manifestations of putting the brakes on by the Vatican; and it is very, very dangerous for us to "rally" ourselves now. No rallying, no rallying to the liberals; no rallying to the ecclesiastics who are governing in the Church now and who are liberals; there is no rallying to these people. From the moment when we rally ourselves, this rallying will be the acceptance of the liberal principles. We cannot do this, even if certain appeasements are given us on the Mass of St. Pius V - certain satisfactions, certain recognitions, certain incardinations, which could even be offered to you eventually... They must give us back everything. They must give up their liberalism, they must come back to the real truth of the Church, to the faith of the Church, to the basic principles of the Church, of this total dependence of society, of families, of individuals on Our Lord Jesus Christ! At that moment when they give us the Mass of all times, very well, then, we are completely in agreement. Then there will be a perfect understanding, we will be able to be recognized, and we will have no more scruples. But as long as one is dealing with people who have made this agreement with the Devil, with liberal ideas, we cannot have any confidence. They will string us along little by little; they will try to catch us in their traps, as long as they have not let go of these false ideas.” (Conference of Archbishop Lefebvre to the priests of the District of France. Dec. 13, 1984)

May Our Lady protect those in the SSPX truly trying to honor Her Son and enlighten them with regards to the present trap they are in...

[70three]

One would have hoped too that the SSPX would reinforce the many great words of Archbishop Lefebvre on the Conciliar machinations:

• On the Reign of Christ the King, which the modernists seek to destroy: 
  “The point of opposition and the reason why there is no possibility of an Agreement [with Modernist Rome] is this; the question is not so much about the Mass, because the Mass is just one consequence of them wanting to get closer to Protestantism, and so they changed the worship, sacraments, catechism, etc. The real fundamental opposition is against the Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ! … 'Oportet Illum Regnare!' … St. Paul tells us 'Our Lord came to reign, He must reign!' They [the Modernists] say: 'NO!' We say: 'YES!' with all its consequences!” (Abp. Lefebvre, Fideliter No. 70, 1993)
  
  
• On the Indult, the subterfuge with which modernist Rome seeks to entrap souls of tradition:
  " ...the religious authorities would only grant this freedom [of the Indult] on condition that the traditional Mass not be celebrated out of contempt for the New Rite. They would require priests to say the New Mass at least once in a while. It is difficult not to descry in the arrangement of the conditions a maneuver destined to put pressure on traditional priests to convince them to celebrate the New Mass. [...] Availing ourselves of the Indult is tantamount to putting ourselves into a state of contradiction because at the same time that Rome gives the Fraternity of St. Peter, for example, or Le Barroux Abbey and other groups authorization to say the Mass of All Time, they also require young priests to sign a profession of faith in which the spirit of the Council must be accepted. It is a contradiction: the spirit of the Council is embodied in the New Mass. How is it possible to desire to preserve the Mass of all time while accepting the spirit that destroys this Mass of All Time? It is completely contradictory.[...] One day, very gently, they will oblige those who have been granted the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Mass of All Time, also to accept the New Mass. And they will tell them that it is simply a matter of squaring themselves with what they have signed, since they signed a statement that they accepted the spirit of the Council and its reforms. You cannot put yourself thus into an unbelievable, irrational contradiction. It is a very uncomfortable situation. This is what has created the difficulty for these groups that have signed it and that currently find themselves in a kind of impasse." (Homily, Friedrichshafen, April 29, 1990)
  

• Or perhaps On the New Mass:
  “And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith… Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion - another religion.” (Sermon, June 29, 1976)
  

But perhaps the SSPX knows they've been slimed by the Conciliar slaver, they know they can only squeak whereas before they roared. They know that these words of Archbishop Lefebvre cannot be repeated by them (with their now-needed permissions for marriages, ordinations, etc.) because they too have willingly placed themselves in an 'adulterous union' with modernist Rome: 

“There will be possibly other manifestations of putting the brakes on by the Vatican; and it is very, very dangerous for us to "rally" ourselves now. No rallying, no rallying to the liberals; no rallying to the ecclesiastics who are governing in the Church now and who are liberals; there is no rallying to these people. From the moment when we rally ourselves, this rallying will be the acceptance of the liberal principles. We cannot do this, even if certain appeasements are given us on the Mass of St. Pius V - certain satisfactions, certain recognitions, certain incardinations, which could even be offered to you eventually... They must give us back everything. They must give up their liberalism, they must come back to the real truth of the Church, to the faith of the Church, to the basic principles of the Church, of this total dependence of society, of families, of individuals on Our Lord Jesus Christ! At that moment when they give us the Mass of all times, very well, then, we are completely in agreement. Then there will be a perfect understanding, we will be able to be recognized, and we will have no more scruples. But as long as one is dealing with people who have made this agreement with the Devil, with liberal ideas, we cannot have any confidence. They will string us along little by little; they will try to catch us in their traps, as long as they have not let go of these false ideas.” (Conference of Archbishop Lefebvre to the priests of the District of France. Dec. 13, 1984)

May Our Lady protect those in the SSPX truly trying to honor Her Son and enlighten them with regards to the present trap they are in...

[Marcel]

The SSPX already accepted Vatican ii, it’s New Mass, it’s Sacraments, it’s new Code, etc in the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration. Their in the same position as the FSSP, ICK, and all the other Ecclesia Dei communities.

[Stone]

While this stern reply from the SSPX is not it's official response to Pope Francis' Traditionis Custodes - what is taking so long, we don't know - it is somewhat refreshing to see them attempt to stand up to modernist Rome. 

But is it too little, too late? For example:

• With the Doctrinal Declaration still unretracted which states that the New Mass is legitimately promulgated, as are all the New Sacraments, the New Code of Canon Law what does all this all this chest-pounding from the SSPX really amount to? 
  

• With the SSPX willingly seeking 'permissions' for it's marriages, ordinations, etc. from modernist Rome, how are they that much different from the Ecclesia Dei communities? 
  

• With the SSPX's moving the obligatory date of the Feast of Ascension Thursday to the following Sunday, imitating the Novus Ordo, how different are they then those indult and Ecclesia Dei communities? 
  

• With the SSPX's approval and promotion of Fr. Paul Robinson's book which advances the ideas of evolution, how different are they from the modernist Conciliar Church? 
  

• With the SSPX's allowances for taking the Covid vaccine despite it's links to abortion, to the murder of an unborn child and the subsequent manipulation of that child's tissues and organs in a lab, how different are they from the same modernists they decry below who allow for the same travesty? 
  

Let us continue to pray for all the good souls and priests still in the SSPX, that with this latest machination by Pope Francis to destroy the remaining vestiges of Tradition, their eyes are opened to the dangerous road the SSPX is on... 

One last point: It is a little worrisome that this article by the SSPX news team keeps propping up Summorum Pontificum - it is mentioned six times in this article (it is nearly the only reference point utilized by the Ecclesia Dei communities and the indult groups!) and only once is Quo Primum mentioned below. This is interesting because Summorum Pontificum insists, as does Pope Francis' motu proprio, that the Novus Ordo Missae is the official Missae of the Conciliar Church and that all priests who are 'allowed' to say the Tridentine Mass, must accept Vatican II! Is this not a questionable focal point for the SSPX!? 

Last, last point: While it is laudable that this article by the SSPX news team mentions adherence to Archbishop Lefebvre, one would imagine that some pertinent words of his would be included. Some words against the modernists in Rome pulling these strings, some mention of how we must avoid the New Mass, some reference to the importance of not making any concessions or deals until Rome is converted...  It's almost as if he is a mascot, a silent mascot.

From Summorum Pontificum to Traditionis Custodes, or From the Reserve to the Zoo

JULY 19, 2021
SOURCE: FSSPX.NEWS (slightly adapted)


What follows is an article giving initial thoughts prepared by the FSSPX.News team.  An official statement will be released from the General House of the Society of Saint Pius X in due course.

On July 16, 2021, Pope Francis issued a motu proprio whose title could be a harbinger of hope: Traditionis custodes, “Guardians of Tradition.” Knowing that he is addressing the bishops, one might begin to dream: might Tradition be recovering its rights within the Church?

On the contrary. This new motu proprio undertakes an elimination. It illustrates the precariousness of the current magisterium and signals the expiration date of Benedict XVI’s Summorum pontificum, which has not even celebrated its fifteenth anniversary.

Everything, or just about everything in Summorum pontificum, is scattered, abandoned, or destroyed. The purpose, moreover, is clearly stated in the letter which accompanies this liquidation.

The pope lists two principles “on how to proceed in dioceses”:

on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II, and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the 'holy People of God.' 

A scheduled extinction

While Francis defends an endangered animal or plant species, he decides and promulgates the extinction of those who are attached to the immemorial rite of the Holy Mass. This species no longer has the right to live: it must disappear. And all means will be used to achieve this result.

And first, a strict reduction in freedom. Until now, the locations reserved for the ancient rite had a certain latitude of movement, a bit like reservations. Today we have switched to the zoo regime: cages, narrowly circumscribed and demarcated. Their number is strictly monitored, and once installed, it will be forbidden to provide any more.

The guardians - or should we say the jailers? - are none other than the bishops themselves.

All this is specified in article 3, §2: “The bishop of the diocese… . is to designate one or more locations where the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes).”

The internal regulations of these jails are strictly controlled (article 3, §3): “The bishop … is to establish at the designated locations the days on which eucharistic celebrations are permitted using the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint John XXIII in 1962.”

This control extends to the least little detail (ibidem): “In these celebrations the readings are proclaimed in the vernacular language, using translations of the Sacred Scripture approved for liturgical use by the respective Episcopal Conferences.” No question of using Dom Lefebvre’s translation [or the Douay Rheims] or an old lectionary.

Euthanasia is envisioned for the specimens judged unsuitable for palliative care (article 3, §5): “The bishop is … to proceed suitably to verify that the parishes canonically erected for the benefit of these faithful are effective for their spiritual growth, and to determine whether or not to retain them.”

The reserve is abolished as a whole, since the Ecclesia Dei Commission disappears (article 6): “Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life, erected by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, fall under the competence of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.”.


Migrants prohibited

While the pope does not stop caring for all types of migrants, the prisons he installs are strictly forbidden from all intrusion.

To be sure that wildcat reservations are not set up, the pope forbids any extensions of the prison

(article 3, §6): “The bishop (...) will take care not to authorize the constitution of new groups.”

This measure is akin to sterilization: it is forbidden to reproduce and perpetuate these savages of the past who must disappear.

This sterilization also concerns priests who will be ordained in the future (article 4): “Priests ordained after the publication of this Motu proprio, who intend to celebrate with the Missale Romanum of 1962, must make a formal request to the diocesan bishop who will consult the Apostolic See before granting the authorization.”

Regarding priests who already have authorization, they henceforth need a renewal of their “celebratory” pass, which is apparently a temporary visa (article 5): “Priests who already celebrate according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 should request from the diocesan bishop the authorization to continue to enjoy this faculty.”

Thus, if it is a question of restraining, reducing, or even destroying groups, the bishops have carte blanche, but if it there is a need to grant authorization, the pope does not trust them: it is necessary to go through Rome.

While dozens of priests, often supported by their bishops, have defied the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith by “blessing” homosexual couples, without any Roman reaction, except a veiled approval by Francis through his message to Fr. Martin, future priests will be closely watched if they are thinking about celebrating according to the Mass of St. Pius V.

Obviously, it is easier to conceal your lack of authority by terrorizing the faithful who will not resist, than to mitigate the German schism, believing there is nothing more urgent than striking this part of the flock.


Vaccination against “Lefebvrism”

The great fear of contamination by the Lefebvrist virus is exorcised by the obligatory Vatican II vaccine – from the Moderno laboratory, (article 3, §1):  The bishop “is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs.”

And anything that could be a source of potential infection is eliminated without pity

(article 8): “Previous norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that do not conform to the provisions of the present Motu Proprio are abrogated.”

Carried away by his enthusiasm, the pope almost comes to the point of saying that it is the Old Mass which is a dangerous virus that must be defended against. Thus, in Article 1 he specifies: “The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”

If the Novus ordo is the soul expression of lex orandi, how is the Tridentine Mass to be qualified? Is it in a state of liturgical or canonical weightlessness? Does it not even have a right to a place beside the Dominican Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, or the Lyonnais Rite in the Latin Church?

This is what seems to emerge from what the pope says in the letter accompanying the motu proprio. Without seeming to suspect the paralogism he is committing, he writes: “I take comfort in this decision from the fact that, after the Council of Trent, St. Pius V also abrogated all the rites that could not claim a proven antiquity, establishing for the whole Latin Church a single Missale Romanum. For four centuries this Missale Romanum, promulgated by St. Pius V was thus the principal expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite, and functioned to maintain the unity of the Church.”

The logical conclusion which flows from this comparison is that this rite must be maintained. Especially as the bull Quo primum of St. Pius V protects it from all attacks.

This was confirmed by the commission of cardinals convened by John Paul II, who said almost unanimously (8 out of 9) that a bishop could not prevent a priest from celebrating it, after unanimously stating that it had never been forbidden.

And this is what Pope Benedict XVI accepted and endorsed in Summorum pontificum.

But for Francis, the ancient rites maintained by St. Pius V, including the Tridentine Mass, seem to have no unifying value. The new rite alone, with its fifty years of existence, infinite variations, and innumerable abuses, is capable of giving liturgical unity to the Church. The misunderstanding is glaring.

Returning to his idea of eliminating the species, the pope writes to the bishops: “It is up to you to proceed in such a way as to return to a unitary form of celebration, and to determine case by case the reality of the groups which celebrate with this Missale Romanum.”


A law clearly opposed to the common good

The general impression that emerges from these documents – the motu proprio and the accompanying letter from the pope - gives the impression of sectarianism coupled with an overt abuse of power.

The traditional Mass belonging to the most intimate part of the common good in the Church. Restricting it, pushing it into ghettos, and ultimately planning its demise, can have no legitimacy. This law is not a law of the Church, because, as St. Thomas says, a law against the common good is no valid law.

There is also, in the ins and outs, an obvious tinge of the resentment manifested by certain angry proponents of the liturgical reform against the traditional mass. The bankruptcy of this reform is underlined, as in a chiaroscuro, by the success of Tradition and the Tridentine Mass.

That’s why they cannot take it. No doubt imagining that its total disappearance will make the faithful return to churches emptied of the sacred. Tragic mistake. The magnificent development of this celebration worthy of God only underscores their poverty: it is not the cause of the desertification produced by the new rite.

The fact remains that this motu proprio, which will sooner or later end in the oblivion of the history of the Church, is not good news in itself: it marks an abrupt end in the reappropriation of its Tradition by the Church, and it will delay the end of the crisis which has already been going on for more than sixty years.

As for the Society of Saint Pius X, it finds there a new reason for loyalty to its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and admiration for his foresight, his prudence, and his faith.

While the traditional Mass is in the process of being phased out and the promises made to the Ecclesia Dei societies are so well kept, it finds in the freedom left to it by its iron bishop, the possibility of continuing to fight for the faith and the reign of Christ the King.

[Stone]

Fr. Pagliarani, the Superior General of the SSPX, just put this letter out yesterday, published in English today (July 23, 2021). Overall, it is a good letter but there is a great emphasis on the Mass alone, the treasure of the Tridentine Mass, it's exalted rank. And every bit of that is true. 

However, it is quite important to remember that it is not the Mass alone that divides traditional Catholics from the Conciliar Church. The New Mass, the Novus Ordo Missae, is a product of the Revolution at Vatican II but it is not the Revolution itself. 

By the SSPX focusing solely on the Old Mass vs. the New Mass, the fundamental issues, the crux of the matter, the heart of the problem is ignore - the false Doctrine emanating from Vatican II, the founding of a New Faith, a New Religion:

“I never… I don’t accept the Council! Because you are destroying the Catholic State in the name of the Council! It is sure! It is evident!…This Council gives the same rights to error as to Truth! That is impossible…This new faith, it is a New Religion. It is a Protestant Religion. That is a fact! How is it possible that the Pope gives the authorization to this change? How it is possible that the pope can sign this constitution (on liturgical change)? It is a deep mystery…If I take the position of the Council, I am betraying my Mother Church.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, conference, 1976)

Fr. Pagliarani follows Pope Francis' lead in the motu proprio by focusing on the Mass and the differences between the two Masses. Perhaps this is because the SSPX has already formally accepted Vatican II, has accepted the 'legitimate promulgation' of the New Mass, has accepted the New Code of Canon Law of Vatican II, etc. in the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration that the SSPX cannot in all honesty discuss much more than the Mass. While individual SSPX priests may still preach as the old SSPX did, may preach against the errors of Vatican II, we haven't really heard such words from the SSPX hierarchy since 2012.

May Our Lady preserve the good intentioned souls in Tradition everywhere, that they realize where the true battle lies, that it is not just about the Mass. It is about the Catholic Faith, the Faith that was trampled upon during and after Vatican II. Many Catholics down the centuries  were deprived of the true Mass but kept their Faith. 

✠ ✠ ✠

Letter from Father Pagliarani about the motu proprio “Traditionis custodes”

JULY 23, 2021

SOURCE: FSSPX SPIRITUALITY

Letter from the Superior General of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X, in light of the publication of the motu proprio “Traditionis custodes”

THIS MASS, OUR MASS, MUST REALLY BE FOR US LIKE THE PEARL OF GREAT PRICE IN THE GOSPEL, FOR WHICH WE ARE READY TO RENOUNCE EVERYTHING, FOR WHICH WE ARE READY TO SELL EVERYTHING.

Dear members and friends of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X,

The motu proprio Traditionis custodes and the letter that accompanied it have caused a profound upheaval in the so-called traditionalist movement. We can point out, quite logically, that the era of the hermeneutics of continuity, with its equivocations, illusions and impossible efforts, is radically over – swept aside with a wave of a sleeve. These clear-cut measures do not directly affect the Society of Saint Pius X. However, they must be an occasion for us to reflect deeply on the situation. To do so, it is necessary to step back and ask ourselves a question that is both old and new: Why is the Tridentine Mass still the apple of discord after fifty years?

First of all, we must remember that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the continuation in time of the most bitter struggle that has ever existed: the battle between the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan. This combat culminated at Calvary in the triumph of Our Blessed Lord. It was for this struggle and it was for this victory that he became incarnate. Since Our Lord’s victory was through the Cross and through His Precious Blood, it is understandable that its perpetuation will also be marked by conflicts and contradictions. Every Catholic is called to this combat. Our Lord reminded us of this when He said that He came “to bring the sword upon the earth” (Matt. 10:34). It is not surprising that the Mass, which perfectly expresses Our Lord’s definitive victory over sin through His atoning Sacrifice, is itself a sign of contradiction.

But why has the Mass become a sign of contradiction within the Church itself? The answer is simple and increasingly clear. After fifty years, the various elements that confirm the answer have become obvious to all well informed Catholics: the Tridentine Mass expresses and conveys a conception of Christian life – and consequently, a conception of the Catholic Church – that is absolutely incompatible with the ecclesiology that emerged from the Second Vatican Council. The problem is not simply liturgical, aesthetic or purely technical. The problem is simultaneously doctrinal, moral, spiritual, ecclesiological and liturgical. In a nutshell, it is a problem that affects all aspects of the Church’s life, without exception. It is a question of faith.

On one side is the Mass of All Times. It is the standard of a Church that defies the world and is certain of victory, for its battle is nothing less that the continuation of the battle that Our Blessed Lord waged to destroy sin and to destroy the kingdom of Satan. It is by the Mass and through the Mass that Our Lord enlists Catholic souls into His ranks, by sharing with them both His Cross and His victory. From all this follows a fundamentally militant conception of Christian life that is characterised by two elements: a spirit of sacrifice and an unwavering supernatural hope.

On the other side stands the Mass of Paul VI. It is an authentic expression of a Church that wants to live in harmony with the world and that lends an ear to the world’s demands. It represents a Church that, in the final analysis, no longer needs to fight against the world because it no longer has anything to reproach the world. Here is a Church that no longer has anything to teach the world because it listens to the powers of the world. It is a Church that no longer needs the Sacrifice of Our Blessed Lord because, having lost the notion of sin, it no longer has anything for which to atone. Here is a Church that no longer has the mission of restoring the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, because it wants to make its contribution to the creation on this earth of a better world that is freer, more egalitarian and more eco-responsible – and all this with purely human means. This humanist mission that the men of the Church have given themselves must necessarily be matched by a liturgy that is equally humanist and emptied of any notion of sacredness.

This battle that has been waged for the past fifty years, which has just seen a highly significant event on July 16th, is not a simple war between two rites: it is indeed a war between two different and opposing conceptions of the Catholic Church and of Christian life – conceptions that are absolutely irreducible and incompatible with each other. In paraphrasing Saint Augustin, one could say that the two Masses have built two cities: the Mass of All Times has built a Christian city; the New Mass seeks to build a humanist and secular city.

Since Almighty God has allowed all this, it is certainly for a greater good. Firstly for ourselves, who have the undeserved good fortune of knowing the Tridentine Mass and who can benefit from it! We possess a treasure with a value we do not always appreciate, and which we perhaps preserve too much out of simple habit. When something precious is attacked or scorned, we begin to appreciate better its true value. May this “shock”, provoked by the harshness of the official texts of July 16th, serve to renew, deepen and rediscover our attachment to the Tridentine Mass! This Mass – our Mass – must really be for us like the pearl of great price in the Gospel, for which we are ready to renounce everything, for which we are ready to sell everything. He who is not prepared to shed his blood for this Mass is not worthy to celebrate it! He who is not prepared to give up everything to protect it is not worthy to attend it!

This should be our first reaction to these events that have just shaken the Catholic Church. Our reaction, as Catholic priests and as Catholic laity, must be profound and more far-reaching than all those feeble and sometimes hopeless commentaries.

Our Blessed Lord certainly has another objective in mind in allowing this new attack on the Tridentine Mass. No one can doubt that in recent years many priests and faithful have discovered this Mass, and that through it they have encountered a new spiritual and moral horizon, which has opened the door to the sanctification of their souls. The latest measures taken against the Mass will force these souls to draw all the consequences of what they have discovered: they must now choose – with all the elements of discernment that are at their disposal – what is necessary for every well-informed Catholic conscience. Many souls will find themselves faced with an important choice that will affect their faith, because – and let us say it once more – the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the supreme expression of a doctrinal and moral universe. It is therefore a question of choosing the Catholic faith in its entirety and through it, choosing Our Lord Jesus Christ, with His Cross, His Sacrifice and His universal kingship. It is a matter of choosing His Precious Blood, of imitating the Crucified One and of following Him to the end, by a complete, rigorous and coherent fidelity.

The Society of Saint Pius X has the duty to assist all those souls who are currently in dismay and are confused. Firstly, we have the duty to offer them the certitude that the Tridentine Mass can never disappear from the face of the earth. This is an absolutely necessary sign of hope. Moreover, each of us, whether priest or faithful, must extend a warm helping hand to them, for he who has no desire to share the riches he enjoys is, in all truth, unworthy of possessing them. Only in this way will we truly love souls and show our love for the Church. For every soul that we win to Our Blessed Lord’s Cross, and to the immense love that He manifested through His Sacrifice, will be a soul truly won to His Church and to the charity that animates His Church, which must be ours, especially at this present time.

It is to Our Lady of Sorrows that we entrust these intentions. It is to her that we address our prayers, since no one has penetrated deeper than Our Blessed Lady, the mystery of the Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of His victory on the Cross. There is no one greater than Mary who has been so intimately associated with His sufferings and His triumph. It is in her hands that Our Blessed Lord has placed the whole Catholic Church. It is therefore to her that the most precious thing in the Catholic Church has been entrusted: the Testament of Our Lord Jesus Christ – the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Menzingen, July 22nd, 2021.
Feast of Saint Mary Magdalen.
Don Davide Pagliarani, Superior General.

[Beth Cline]

Does Fr. Pagliarani's letter leave anyone else wondering exactly WHY "these clear-cut measures do not directly affect the Society of Saint Pius X" , as he stated in his first paragraph? Why did he fail to explain this great detail so necessary to understand how the SSPX plans to navigate through this? 

Have they decided to disobey Pope Francis? 
Have they already been granted permission from the Novus Ordo to continue offering the true Mass? 
Are they simply going to continue as they are until pressed on the matter by the Novus Ordo? 

Honestly, I'm still asking the same questions I was asking before I read it.
Did I miss something...?

---

Also, can we really take his praise of the Traditional Mass seriously after they degraded it by their praise of Pope Benedict's Summorum Pontificum in 2007 and their claiming the Novus Ordo Mass was "legitimately promulgated" in their 2012 SSPX Doctrinal Declaration?

[Stone]

Does Fr. Pagliarani's letter leave anyone else wondering exactly WHY "these clear-cut measures do not directly affect the Society of Saint Pius X" , as he stated in his first paragraph? Why did he fail to explain this great detail so necessary to understand how the SSPX plans to navigate through this? 

Have they decided to disobey Pope Francis? 
Have they already been granted permission from the Novus Ordo to continue offering the true Mass? 
Are they simply going to continue as they are until pressed on the matter by the Novus Ordo? 

Honestly, I'm still asking the same questions I was asking before I read it.
Did I miss something...?

---

Also, can we really take his praise of the Traditional Mass seriously after they degraded it by their praise of Pope Benedict's Summorum Pontificum in 2007 and their claiming the Novus Ordo Mass was "legitimately promulgated" in their 2012 SSPX Doctrinal Declaration?

Well said! More left unsaid than said.