May Bishop Tissier de Mallerais rest in peace (RIP). May he now intercede for the cause of Catholic Tradition. The man was a saint. One of the priests ordained by the Archbishop to be an auxiliary bishop for the Society, to ordain, confirm, consecrate churches, and publicly preach and teach the Faith. Canon law (which is ultimately the law of the Pope), allows a bishop to consecrate another bishop without papal mandate, during a state of emergency, even if that bishop might be subjectively mistaken. When said bishop is made, under those circumstances, he receives the apostolic mandate from the Church immediately, and is a legitimate Successor to the Apostles.
My wife and a group of traditional Catholic women once escorted His Excellency around the Philippines on one of his apostolic visits to confirm, preach, and teach. There is a funny story about that trip, which shows the childlike quality of this saintly man. It is a hot and humid climate, and on that day particularly hot and humid. They pulled over to a sari sari store to get him some food. He smiled and said in his French accent "No, no, please just bring me Pepsi." They all laughed, as he sat in the shade downing bottles of cold, sugary cola, which he probably needed to treat the serious dehydration that comes with the near constant sweating that comes with travelling around the RP.
I once heard one of his conferences at the Angelus Press conference giving one of the most impassioned, theological analyses of the problem of the Novus Ordo Missae. He said that one of the great contributions of Lefebvre, who he also passionately characterized at this conference as a saint (he wrote THE biography of the Archbishop), was to be a heroic bishop and Confessor of the Faith, specifically defending heroically more than any other bishop since the Council the doctrinal nature of the Mass as a PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE.
.jpg)
Jesus Christ on the Cross, in His Bloody Sacrifice
Working through an Ordained Priest at the Altar
Through the words of Consecration
And the Element of Bread and Wine
To Literally Transform them mystically Into
His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity
And THEN offering that Bloody Sacrifice
In an UNBLOODY way, Under the Appearance of Bread and
Wine
Upwards in the Vertical Dimension,
To God the Father
SECONDARILY as a Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving
And SECONDARILY as a Memorial of the Last Supper
But PRIMARILY as a Propitiatory Sacrifice
Which Means to Forgive Sins, and Ultimately SAVE SOULS
(My own description, see traditional catechisms, Council of Trent)
Out of all four of the SSPX bishops, in my opinion, he was the most holy, humble, and authentically zealous in his preaching.
The world is composed of North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Not counting the Arctic circle or Antarctica, or a few little regions I'm forgetting. Right now there are only TWO remaining Society bishops, and they are up there in years.
On one hand, I sympathize with these bishops being exhausted by decades of intense international travel. I cannot image. On the other hand, I can appreciate the idea of avoiding setting up what might mistakenly be viewed as a parallel hierarchy, or a parallel church, especially in ongoing relations with Rome. So perhaps the Society just needs four bishops, one for the Americas, one for Asia, one for Europe/Africa (I'm thinking there's not a lot of SSPX chapels in Africa to warrant their own bishop, though that would be cool too).
This is just one man with a blog, but here are my thoughts: perhaps Bishop Fellay can serve Europe/Africa, Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta South America, and two new bishops, one for North America, one for Asia/Australia. We were talking about this tonight.
The Okie Trad also hereby nominates Fr. Rutledge, prior of St. Mary's in Kansas, for North America. Fr. Rutledge is relatively young, I think in his 40's, looks very healthy, is very balanced in his temperament and personal approach (I've interacted with him in St. Mary's, and once as SSPX chapel treasurer). He seems extraordinarily focused and talented. He was instrumental in building the new Immaculata church in St. Mary's, but I think also the new seminary. He seems solid as a large rock of granite.
And, the Okie Trad hereby nominates for the Asia district Fr. Onoda, SSPX. Fr. Onoda is incredibly respected for his holiness, humility, charity, childlike personality (which I think reflects his Japanese temperament--see his recent YT interview on his contacts with the seer of Our Lady of Akita), zeal for the Faith, zeal for the fight for Catholic Tradition, love of the Society, and pastoral zeal for souls imparted to his care. He seems very diplomatic to the Catholics and clergy attached to the Novus Ordo, and very balanced in his traditionalism.
But, how will Rome respond? This is my view. It is all like a Tug of War. On one end are the modernists in the Vatican since the Council. On the other end are the traditionalists, especially the SSPX and FSSP, and all Ecclesia Dei groups (I still use the term). The modernists keep pulling to the right traditionalists towards their direction, to re-merge back into the Novus Ordo liturgy and practical new religion (the religion of "Catholic" modernism/liberalism).
The tactic of the Vatican modernist trying to pull us in their direction is bait and switch, ever more since 2013. The rumor is the Vatican will give formal permission for new SSPX bishops (the bait), which would be interesting since supposedly they have no "legitimate canonical status," so how could the Vatican allow new bishops, when those bishops would be functioning without canonical approval, which would indicate even more regularization of the Society. Yet, recall in 1988, Cardinal Ratzinger did in fact act wrongly in the Lefebvre negotiations, truth be told (I believe Ratzinger later as pope admitted to this with sincerity). It was a bait and switch dynamic, in the negotiations.
Lefebvre was convinced the Crisis in the Church equated to a "state of necessity" to consecrate auxiliary bishops (to ordain, in order to preserve the traditional priesthood), and was ready to do so with or without the Vatican's approval. On the other hand, he exhausted himself trying to work out an agreement. Bishop Tissier describes that period in great detail in his book. It really was a bait and switch situation. Give bishops, OR punish by ostracizing the Society as a schismatic devil. That is what unfolded in 1988 and since.
But that is in fact still the dynamic. Bait and switch. For the SSPX, my concern would be to allow bishops, but only if the Society accepts a doctrinal agreement that is unilateral, agreeable only to the Vatican, but which would require the Society to compromise its positions.
One position is the necessity of publicly opposing the spirit of Vatican II, not only as invented by liberals after the Council, but which came out of the Council after it was highjacked by the liberals, both in its historical event and historical causality on the universal Church post-1965, but in the ETHOS of the documents itself.
That ETHOS was the theological system of the modernists and progressives who re-wrote the documents, and manipulated (unjustly) the internal discussions of the Council. They ended up taking over the Council. This goes beyond conspiracy theory, but is the historical record.
So the Vatican could pressure the Society to accept something it cannot in exchange for permission to consecrate bishops, under the veiled threat of that dictatorial establishment in the Vatican synonymous with this current pontificate. Sign what we want you to sign, agree to compromise, and allow bishops. If not, then consecrate new bishops, and finally excommunicate in total the entire Society (including the lay faithful).
THAT is my concern.
The bait and switch applies also to the FSSP, Institute, etc. Psychologically manipulative tactics, such as gaslighting, victim-blaming, and blame-shifting, under threat of ostracization. Which is very painful in all its forms.
All of a sudden, treat the FSSP etc as something new, to be "learned about," but in reality investigated to see how pervasive within their ranks are "radical traditionalists" like those schismatic weirdos (sarcasm) over at the SSPX, or those who appreciate them.
Bait and switch. Hey guys, we think you're great, so here's the deal, you guys need to learn to say, and to say, the Novus Ordo, and to morph the TLM in the direction of it. If you do, then great, you can continue to exist. Start shifting towards us. Make some changes obviously under the subtle threat that IF YOU DON'T. then we can do to you what we did to the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. A subtle tug of war, drawing the traditionalist towards what they want. And what the modernists want is to draw us into, and eventually convert to, modernism.
FSSP priests, if you haven't, please read what Archbishop Lefebvre wrote, in his interventions regarding the Council and New Mass, and his interventions with the Vatican. Please consider what is at stake. Is it just Mass in Latin with Gregorian chant, and a vibrant parish? Or ultimately preserving the Catholic Faith, and the true Mass, come hell or high water. Let the chips fall where they may. If it comes to a Traditionis Custodis 2.0 "Final Solution" crackdown on not only the diocesan TLM (n Tulsa diocese, that's at Sts. Peter and Paul, and Holy Cross-Wagoner), but on the FSSP etc, then let the chips fall where they may.
I think that is the ongoing approach of the Society. Draw a line in the sand. Or rather look very closely at the sand, and see where the Church itself has already drawn the line, in terms of religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, liturgy, Church relations with the State and society, and the doctrinal nature of the Mass.
I am pro-SSPX, and I am pro-FSSP, but there are differences, and if you were to ask me in the corner of the church parking lot my opinion, or read this blog, I would describe the key differences, and explain why I generally side with the Society position on those key issues.
That said, the modernists in the Vatican know if you put all of the SSPX priests (700), and FSSP priests (368), in one room, practically speaking they are the SAME. They represent the Remnant.
They represent you and me. And you and me are the Remnant Church.
I myself prepare for more persecution, ostrracization, hardship, etc at the hands of the modernists in power. So be it. Blessed are the persecuted. We WILL NOT compromise. Not one jot or tittle. Not ONE IOTA, of the Faith.
Come hell or high water.
Which to me means not playing the game of Tug and War. Drop the rope and walk away. Remain Catholic. Remain inside the Church. Do not leave the Church for radical forms of sedevacantism (see my last post), Eastern Orthodoxy, or laxity. Rise above the crows like an eagle. Beware more than ever of the crows trying to pull us down, while focusing on flying to heavenly heights.
And that is all I have to say about that (for now).
Happy Fall weather.
Back to silent mode for a while (unless something compels me to write again).
