While many are focusing on the rupture between the Bishops' survey and Traditionis Custodes, they are missing the deeper point revealed in Diane Montagna's documents.
Thanks to Archbishop Lefebvre, we in tradition knew this from the git-go. Too bad the typical NO Catholic is being played. But God is not mocked. He will use their duplicitous use of the TLM to restore His church.
Could you write a piece or dirt me to something that talks the SSPX and their use of the 1962 missal instead of the pre-1955? Bugnini had a hand in that as well. If I came to accept that the SSPX was the preserved remnant accepting the 'updated' missal seems like a small but still important concession to the Conciliar Church that produced the Novus Ordo. If I have to accept 1962 I might as well attend a diocesan tlm.
I am afraid I can't help you if you are saying that a 1962 Mass by a valid priest who rejects Vatican II is comparable to a liturgy said by a priest whose orders are subject to doubt.
This is an excellent piece I will be sharing with many family and friends. I discovered the traditional Mass and faith at the same time through the FSSP, and when I did I immediately experienced a change in all aspects of my life - I believed differently, I prayed and worshiped differently, I lived differently. This is a rupture I knew to be true internally, even though for a time I remained within the structures of the conciliar synodal church, I knew I did not belong but it took some time, and the light of the Holy Ghost, to not be afraid of being branded with a scarlet S of sedevacantist. Thank you for this excellent article pointing out the more important part of Monatagna’s reporting, and for all of the other excellent articles and essays
Thanks for this Kevin. I hope they find it helpful.
Like I said in the piece, the indults, MPs and the Ecclesia Dei groups have done good, for which we can be grateful. We don't need this analysis to take away from that or pretend it didn't happen: but we do need to look the reality in the face.
It is extremely difficult to make those who attend a permitted TLM to understand and accept your points that I totally agree with. This I think stems from two main lines of reasoning. First, they want to remain in "communion" with the Church and are not convinced or unwilling to believe that the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church at least in part. This is predicated on the universal teaching pre-VII that there is no salvation outside of the Church and one must be within the visible Church. The second is that they hope against hope that, even though they agree with your points, somehow, someway when enough Catholics both priests and laity are exposed to the TLM and the contrast with the NO they will choose pre-VII Catholicism and right the ship so to speak. Unfortunately they do not recognize the insidious nature of Modernism and its ability to render this strategy null and void. Nor are they willing to admit that only a miniscule fraction of Catholics are attracted to the TLM and the overwhelming majority are in favor of the NO and liberalization of the Church.
Yes. Regarding your last point though, I think most Catholics will go along with what they are told. When there is a true pope who returns things, there will be casualties but perhaps not as many as might be feared.
But unfortunately, you guys don’t deal adequately with the “more catholic than the pope problem.” One needs to be a very obstreperous and autistic asshole to continue to insist on Counterreformationary Catholicism when six popes have come and gone without doing anything to correct the errors of Vatican II. I know people don’t like to hear this, but this 75 year history of heresy and apostasy inevitably leads to a question of whether the Papacy and the Catholic Church were ever infallible to begin with.
The Church is infallible. Nestorius, Donatus, and Arius were not.
The current heresy of modernism has left us with usurpers grabbing hold of the structures of the Church. There is a vacuum and I for one pray daily for a Catholic Pope who can kick modernism to the curb and restore the beauty of ALL the sacraments that VII polluted.
The most momentous statement in all of this seems to have escaped everyone:
The CDF’s “Overall Assessment” states that:
“Some bishops note that it is necessary to protect the stable groups to prevent departures from the Church toward schismatic communities or the SSPX.”
Did you catch that? Schismatic communities OR the SSPX? Evidently, the CDF no longer views the SSPX as a schismatic community. How might that be? It was in 2015 that the Catholic Church in Argentina officially recognized the SSPX as Catholic. That same day, both Vatican and SSPX issued independent (but obviously coordinated) communiques, stressing that this was merely an expedient solution to SSPX visa issues in that country, offered by Rome in charity, but not having any bearing upon the Society’s canonical status.
But what was not explained was how the Society could be Catholic in Argentina (for whatever reason), but schismatic everywhere else. That same year, Francis gave the SSPX faculties to hear confessions, and within a couple more years, all the rest of the sacraments…to a group allegedly not in “full communion” with Rome?
I have a vague memory of Fr. Pfluger gleefully declaring to concerned sspxers “Don’t be surprised if one day you wake up, and you are in Rome.” An under the table agreement like this is precisely how it could (and possibly did) happen.
+Ganswein (ie., BXVI’s personal secretary and biographer) bluntly stated the only reason Benedict promulgated SP was to lure people away from Lefebvre’s/SSPX.
The V2 sirens have been seducing Tradionalists into their city of man and ghettoizing them until such time as they will raze the ghettos. So why Oh why did SSPX become a mistress of the two-headed monster, RatzBoglio? My only conclusion is that the 'spirit' of V2 has found too many friends in the Society's influencers.
An anecdote: When the local SSPX pastor announced that Fr. Settimo (a conciliar refugee to the SSPX who was never conditionally ordained in the traditional rite) was being transferred to our SSPX priory, I notified the man in charge of altar boy training/scheduling that my boys would no longer be serving Mass, and that we would be leaving the chapel. His response was that I was one of the few who dug into such issues. That spoke volumes to me: These people are busy with other interests, and can’t be bothered with such things. Just like after Vatican II. So, questionably valid priests? Contradicting Lefebvre? Etc? No time for worrying about that, apparently. And so they end up succumbing to the revolution, even while deludedly thinking themselves to still be traditional.
Those who attend a TLM indult mass ARE accepting the VII reform bc thats what it is - the Church treating it as if Latin language is some kind of secret sauce that we want on our burger.
I attend only the pre-1955 rite of the Mass. A missionary priest from OH comes 1x/month in my area, but weekly in other parts of Texas.
Consider BXVIs letter to Bishops calling for "mutual enrichment". Note how Montagna's report cites Bishops wanting seminarians trained in both forms as well
Regarding the 'strategy of containment and neutralisation', Bergoglio singled out US Catholics as the biggest 'problem' regarding 'Restorationism' aka Catholicism: There are many ‘restorers’ in the US who do not accept Vatican II.
Bergoglio chose as his successor-in-fraud an American to deal with the Restorationists such as Taylor 'I submit to Leo fraudeenth' Marshall.
Somewhat frustrating to have been screaming this all over the internet for the last 15 years, only to have it break today as if it were new news (reminds me of Jim Carey in “Dumb and Dumber” leaving the bar, joyously exclaiming “We landed on the moon!”), but people break free of the Matrix at different times, as actual grace reaches them ex opere operantis, according to their disposition, so it bears continual repeating.
Excellent article. Thanks!
Thank you!
I've become a legend in my own mind.
Outstanding. Thank you again for your excellent work in defence of the Catholic faith.
Thanks to Archbishop Lefebvre, we in tradition knew this from the git-go. Too bad the typical NO Catholic is being played. But God is not mocked. He will use their duplicitous use of the TLM to restore His church.
I agree. I think both strategies have their advantages and shortcomings for the Modernists. Personally, I benefitted from SP.
Could you write a piece or dirt me to something that talks the SSPX and their use of the 1962 missal instead of the pre-1955? Bugnini had a hand in that as well. If I came to accept that the SSPX was the preserved remnant accepting the 'updated' missal seems like a small but still important concession to the Conciliar Church that produced the Novus Ordo. If I have to accept 1962 I might as well attend a diocesan tlm.
I am afraid I can't help you if you are saying that a 1962 Mass by a valid priest who rejects Vatican II is comparable to a liturgy said by a priest whose orders are subject to doubt.
Someone once commented that these days the SSPX, for the sake of honesty, should be renamed SSJXXIII.
This is their argument: https://fsspx.uk/en/matters-arising-why-does-society-use-missal-1962-35683
I can destroy that argument (and demonstrate how even the SSPX themselves don’t abide by the principle they are citing), but this is not the place.
This is an excellent piece I will be sharing with many family and friends. I discovered the traditional Mass and faith at the same time through the FSSP, and when I did I immediately experienced a change in all aspects of my life - I believed differently, I prayed and worshiped differently, I lived differently. This is a rupture I knew to be true internally, even though for a time I remained within the structures of the conciliar synodal church, I knew I did not belong but it took some time, and the light of the Holy Ghost, to not be afraid of being branded with a scarlet S of sedevacantist. Thank you for this excellent article pointing out the more important part of Monatagna’s reporting, and for all of the other excellent articles and essays
Thanks for this Kevin. I hope they find it helpful.
Like I said in the piece, the indults, MPs and the Ecclesia Dei groups have done good, for which we can be grateful. We don't need this analysis to take away from that or pretend it didn't happen: but we do need to look the reality in the face.
Correct.
Many thanks.
It is extremely difficult to make those who attend a permitted TLM to understand and accept your points that I totally agree with. This I think stems from two main lines of reasoning. First, they want to remain in "communion" with the Church and are not convinced or unwilling to believe that the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church at least in part. This is predicated on the universal teaching pre-VII that there is no salvation outside of the Church and one must be within the visible Church. The second is that they hope against hope that, even though they agree with your points, somehow, someway when enough Catholics both priests and laity are exposed to the TLM and the contrast with the NO they will choose pre-VII Catholicism and right the ship so to speak. Unfortunately they do not recognize the insidious nature of Modernism and its ability to render this strategy null and void. Nor are they willing to admit that only a miniscule fraction of Catholics are attracted to the TLM and the overwhelming majority are in favor of the NO and liberalization of the Church.
Yes. Regarding your last point though, I think most Catholics will go along with what they are told. When there is a true pope who returns things, there will be casualties but perhaps not as many as might be feared.
But unfortunately, you guys don’t deal adequately with the “more catholic than the pope problem.” One needs to be a very obstreperous and autistic asshole to continue to insist on Counterreformationary Catholicism when six popes have come and gone without doing anything to correct the errors of Vatican II. I know people don’t like to hear this, but this 75 year history of heresy and apostasy inevitably leads to a question of whether the Papacy and the Catholic Church were ever infallible to begin with.
They do nothing of the kind. It is heretical to even suggest that. The reality is that these men have not been true popes.
The Church is infallible. Nestorius, Donatus, and Arius were not.
The current heresy of modernism has left us with usurpers grabbing hold of the structures of the Church. There is a vacuum and I for one pray daily for a Catholic Pope who can kick modernism to the curb and restore the beauty of ALL the sacraments that VII polluted.
The most momentous statement in all of this seems to have escaped everyone:
The CDF’s “Overall Assessment” states that:
“Some bishops note that it is necessary to protect the stable groups to prevent departures from the Church toward schismatic communities or the SSPX.”
Did you catch that? Schismatic communities OR the SSPX? Evidently, the CDF no longer views the SSPX as a schismatic community. How might that be? It was in 2015 that the Catholic Church in Argentina officially recognized the SSPX as Catholic. That same day, both Vatican and SSPX issued independent (but obviously coordinated) communiques, stressing that this was merely an expedient solution to SSPX visa issues in that country, offered by Rome in charity, but not having any bearing upon the Society’s canonical status.
But what was not explained was how the Society could be Catholic in Argentina (for whatever reason), but schismatic everywhere else. That same year, Francis gave the SSPX faculties to hear confessions, and within a couple more years, all the rest of the sacraments…to a group allegedly not in “full communion” with Rome?
I have a vague memory of Fr. Pfluger gleefully declaring to concerned sspxers “Don’t be surprised if one day you wake up, and you are in Rome.” An under the table agreement like this is precisely how it could (and possibly did) happen.
+Ganswein (ie., BXVI’s personal secretary and biographer) bluntly stated the only reason Benedict promulgated SP was to lure people away from Lefebvre’s/SSPX.
The V2 sirens have been seducing Tradionalists into their city of man and ghettoizing them until such time as they will raze the ghettos. So why Oh why did SSPX become a mistress of the two-headed monster, RatzBoglio? My only conclusion is that the 'spirit' of V2 has found too many friends in the Society's influencers.
An anecdote: When the local SSPX pastor announced that Fr. Settimo (a conciliar refugee to the SSPX who was never conditionally ordained in the traditional rite) was being transferred to our SSPX priory, I notified the man in charge of altar boy training/scheduling that my boys would no longer be serving Mass, and that we would be leaving the chapel. His response was that I was one of the few who dug into such issues. That spoke volumes to me: These people are busy with other interests, and can’t be bothered with such things. Just like after Vatican II. So, questionably valid priests? Contradicting Lefebvre? Etc? No time for worrying about that, apparently. And so they end up succumbing to the revolution, even while deludedly thinking themselves to still be traditional.
Those who attend a TLM indult mass ARE accepting the VII reform bc thats what it is - the Church treating it as if Latin language is some kind of secret sauce that we want on our burger.
I attend only the pre-1955 rite of the Mass. A missionary priest from OH comes 1x/month in my area, but weekly in other parts of Texas.
They're out there if you look for them.
Sgg.org
Consider BXVIs letter to Bishops calling for "mutual enrichment". Note how Montagna's report cites Bishops wanting seminarians trained in both forms as well
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:5ca21601-6c7b-40a3-b4d6-a23b4db28169
Regarding the 'strategy of containment and neutralisation', Bergoglio singled out US Catholics as the biggest 'problem' regarding 'Restorationism' aka Catholicism: There are many ‘restorers’ in the US who do not accept Vatican II.
Bergoglio chose as his successor-in-fraud an American to deal with the Restorationists such as Taylor 'I submit to Leo fraudeenth' Marshall.
Somewhat frustrating to have been screaming this all over the internet for the last 15 years, only to have it break today as if it were new news (reminds me of Jim Carey in “Dumb and Dumber” leaving the bar, joyously exclaiming “We landed on the moon!”), but people break free of the Matrix at different times, as actual grace reaches them ex opere operantis, according to their disposition, so it bears continual repeating.
https://ordodei.net/2025/07/02/the-catholic-burden-in-an-age-of-infidelity-by-fr-hansen/