To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, FB Messenger or X.
 |
| The postconciliar synodomy Ape of the Church |
Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller has told the Consistory of Cardinals in Rome today to Do Something. About the Elephant in their Room. They must Do Something, specifically, about the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) which intends to consecrate four new bishops without a papal mandate from Antipope Robert "FtR" Prevost, whom anyone with a grain of sensus fidei knows has no real authority to mandate as much as a bus driver.
The time for the Consistory of Cardinals to Do Anything is long past. One of their princely number is a chap called Víctor Manuel 'Tucho' Fernández, who currently serves as prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. The DDF is the Vatican office responsible for promoting and safeguarding Catholic doctrine (pause here for laughter which won't be forthcoming due to the utter tragedy of the implications, for the Church and for millions of her children consigned by +Fernández, and the hierarchy who indulge him, to a hellish future.)
It's not just soft porn that +Fernández churns out, you know. It's now reported that 30 years ago he wrote something called Romans 9–11: Grace and Predestination, on St Paul and election, grace, and salvation in his Epistle to the Romans. In it, +Fernández is shown to be no better on theology than he is on sex He concludes:
“I firmly believe that everyone will be saved; a belief that is not based on wishful thinking, nor on my compassion for men, but on what I know about God and his concrete plans thanks to his Revelation.”
It would seem regrettable, then, that he wasn't around at the time of the Incarnation, to share his belief with God and save His Son the trouble of being born, living a life of utmost poverty and persecution and dying on the Cross to save us all (+Fernández included) from eternal death, in hell.
But then He wouldn't have needed to found His Church either - the same Church which now pays +Fernández, an heretic proven out of his own mouth - an heretic moreover who gets to decide for the whole Church who is a Catholic and who is not, a hefty stipend to keep him in a lifestyle to which he's only recently become accustomed. Just how Robert "FtR" Prevost can justify that expenditure on +Fernández is never explained, but any Catholic who knows anything about the Lavender Mafia can work it out for themselves.
As for Cardinal Müller - who risibly reaffirms that Rome has never abandoned the path of tradition (more hilarity) - he suggests that the Something To Be Done is the erection of a new Ecclesia Dei apparatus. A Not OK Corral into which all the SSPX priests, religious and sisters he expects to desert can be herded and branded by the Vatican as "in full communion" with the postconciliar Ape of the Church.
It's to be hoped and prayed for that the exodus from the Society so confidently foretold by Trad Inc will not materialise; that any potential postconciliarists will reflect on their future in an organisation which possesses the buildings but not the faith.
Leo has met with Tucho 3 times in less than a week, anxiously planning, no doubt, how to survive the loss of the Society's monies post-excommunication. But men like Leo and Tucho will never run short of the ready.
Questions have always been asked about the Vatican's collaboration with the Communist Party of China, and its acquiescence in the CCP's illicit consecration of its own bishops. Think of the billions of China's potential Christians just asking to be hoovered up and deposited in the Vatican's new world religion. Sounds like the brain child of another of the cardinalate that 'elected' Bergoglio and Prevost - the fiendishly cunning +Pietro Parolin, architect of the secret Vatican deal with the Party in China.
Any priest considering defecting from the Society of St Pius X would do well to think of the Spanish Priest, Fr Francisco Jose Vegara Cerezo, who has just been laicized for pronouncing Pope Benedict XIV's resignation to be invalid. Which it was; which makes Bergoglio/Francis and Prevost/Leo both antipopes who cannot bear to be exposed as such. Opposition to the postconciliar Synodomy will not be brooked.
''All that is necessary to the triumph of evil is the silence of good men" (Alexandr Solzhenitsyn).
 |
Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller has urged the Holy See to issue a formal response to the Society of St. Pius X’s latest challenge to Rome and proposed establishing a new Ecclesia Dei structure to receive members expected to leave the Society following its planned episcopal consecrations on 1 July.
The former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made the proposal on the opening day of the extraordinary Consistory of Cardinals being held at the Vatican June 26-27.
 |
| +Müller and close friends: not a good look for a Prince of the Church |
Müller immediately shakes up the Consistory: "We must respond to the Lefebvrists." He also proposes a new Ecclesia Dei to receive those who break away. The inside story in @ilgiornale.
Leo XIV had asked the cardinals to speak candidly. Some took him at his word. As we can reveal, although the agenda made no mention of the imminent schism involving the Lefebvrists, one cardinal took it upon himself, on the very first day of the Consistory to point out the elephant in the room: the Society of St. Pius X’s open challenge to Rome.
The intervention
On the eve of the Consistory, the fraternity founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre threw down another gauntlet to the Pope and the cardinals by sending them a profession of faith that, in effect, accuses Rome of having departed from the perennial tradition and magisterium of the Church.
Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, urged that this j’accuse be firmly rejected.
He proposed that a formal response to the Lefebvrists be prepared, reaffirming that Rome has never abandoned the path of tradition, contrary to their claims. His intervention was all the more significant given that he formerly headed the dicastery responsible for matters arising from precisely this rupture.
A new Ecclesia Dei
The cardinal also addressed the implications of one of the scenarios we reported in recent days: should the Society of St. Pius X formally enter into schism following the episcopal consecration of new bishops without a pontifical mandate, many Lefebvrists are expected to seek reconciliation with Rome.
He therefore stressed the need to prepare for their reception, proposing a structure modeled on the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, established in 1988 by St. John Paul II to welcome those who wished to return to full communion with Rome after Archbishop Lefebvre’s illicit episcopal consecrations.
Preparing to receive those who leave the Society has become an important concern, and one that is already under consideration by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. Among members of the Society there is growing anxiety over the prospect of excommunication which, unlike thirty-eight years ago, might not be limited to the bishops performing and receiving the illicit consecrations.
If the penalty were confined to the bishops alone, for example, Fr. Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X and the principal advocate of its hard-line position, would not be affected.
At present, however, there is no certainty regarding the precise response that will come from the former Holy Office. Nevertheless, it is expected that a number of priests, religious, and sisters will leave the schismatic body and seek restoration to full communion with Rome.
Liturgy
Thanks to the work carried out at the time by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, the Church today includes institutes that celebrate the traditional liturgy while remaining in full communion with Rome and accepting the Second Vatican Council. Ecclesia Dei was suppressed by Pope Francis in 2019.
In 2021, further restrictions on celebrations of the traditional liturgy were introduced through Traditionis Custodes. Today, however, a more tolerant approach appears to be gaining ground within the College of Cardinals. This is due in part to the fact that, as Vatican correspondent Diane Montagna revealed about a year ago, the majority of bishops consulted before the decree was issued had opposed the proposed restrictions.
Müller’s intervention, like the others, was met without comment. Yet, according to sources, after the session concluded several cardinals from across the theological spectrum appeared to agree with his remarks and expressed appreciation for the frankness of the German prelate, widely regarded as one of the most authoritative figures in the College by virtue of both his scholarship and his ecclesiastical career.https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/cardinal-muller-shakes-up-the-consistory
 |
| The error of hyperpapalism explained |
Any measures taken against the SSPX and its ministry of the sacraments would be null and void. Not because nobody else has the faith, but because it is the main force in the Church today that embodies every aspect of Catholic doctrine without dissimulation: preventing that is the intention behind potential censures (and confirming latae sententiae penalties), and one that invalidates them.
The crisis is the Church is not an episode of Pope Francis’ papacy. Instead, as Bishop Athanasius Schneider said recently,
“ … since Vatican II, the popes up to Leo have unfortunately made certain affirmations, thanks be to God, not definitive, but ambiguous and difficult to reconcile with the clarity of the entire two thousand year tradition of the Church”.
The SSPXX exists because it cannot accept the conciliar orientation that is at odds with the magisterium of all time. The Ecclesia Dei movement, on the other hand, exists on the explicit condition that those benefiting from it will endorse every point of Vatican II, the entirety of its texts as interpreted by the post-conciliar Popes.
In practice, followers of the Ecclesia Dei movement pick and choose when it comes to the conciliar Popes. They have no choice; Pope John Paul II, who gave them their existence, led the scandalous gatherings at Assisi (for example) which they cannot profess approving. But picking and choosing is dangerous for traditional Catholicism.
The fact that a modernist like Peter Kwasniewski (who asserts that the Pope receives his jurisdiction from the assembled Church instead of Christ) can operate like a fish in water in these circles is proof of that.
The Conciliar Popes periodically scandalise Catholics and deny them clear doctrine on things about which all Catholics must be absolutely firm: other religions and Churches are not means to salvation; the Old Testament Covenant is null and void; Our Lord is King of all human societies and the Church should openly work towards all of them acknowledging this; for two generations, the Popes have not even enforced their own rules concerning the celebration of the Mass (this is quite apart from the doctrinal defects of the Novus Ordo text) – since Paul VI’s bloody-mindedness set the Church on its present course, it has been on autopilot.
SSPX – Most Roman of all
In practice, only the SSPX truly observes what Father Pagliarani said in his Declaration of Faith,
“The Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ, is the sole possessor of supreme authority over the whole Church. He alone directly confers on the other members of the Catholic hierarchy jurisdiction over souls”.
On this point, the SSPX shows its indispensability in the Church’s recovery: it is the main defender of the papacy as established by Our Lord, the papacy that governs and teaches and which is the foundation of the Church on earth.
Noisy spokesmen for the Ecclesia Dei movement in English-speaking countries, like Kwasniewski, deny that bishops derive ordinary jurisdiction immediately from the Pope’s jurisdiction, as traditional magisterium has always taught. This sets the stage for a chaotic democratic Church of bishops and laity playing at parliamentary politics in Protestant fashion – a “high church” synodal way.
Kwasniewski, Sebastian Morello and Tim Flanders reject ordinary infallible papal magisterium (see High Church Modernism and the Loss of Faith), confusing it with ordinary non-infallible papal magisterium.
The result is that they now question or reject a huge body of pre-conciliar teaching (Kwasniewski says it’s all “up for grabs”). But according to Kwasniewski’s high church modernism, even Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae and John Paul II’s decree on the priesthood being reserved to men, are not infallible and would be potentially reformable.
Papal infallibility itself and Vatican I are questioned by Kwasniewski (he has incessantly plugged the heretical Virgilius/Kwasniewski Manifesto that seeks to overturn Vatican I and reduces the papacy to chairman of a committee of clergy who hire and fire the Pope).
Tim Flanders recently denied Ordinary Infallible papal Magisterium, affirming instead:
“ .. the Extraordinary and Universal Ordinary Magisterium (of all bishops) are the definitive criteria for including or excluding ordinary magisterium, not vice versa”
High church modernists are committed to this new doctrine because it means pre-Vatican II Ordinary Infallible papal teaching cannot be used as a basis to reject post-conciliar innovations. Secondly, it allows them to question all pre-conciliar Ordinary Infallible papal teaching; they have simply abolished this category. (For clear teaching on the three types of papal magisterium see “Clear ideas on the Pope’s infallible magisterium”.)
For Flanders and Kwasniewski, the conciliar Church has “gifted” laymen with the right to “self-refute” magisterium. Without that annoyingly precise and abundant Ordinary Infallible papal magisterium of the ages to guide us, it’s a free for all for modernists, high and low.
The Vatican won’t move on from the carnage
Pope Leo’s statement at Gastel Gandolfo that the core of the issue with the Society of Saint Pius X was several “points” in Vatican II documents, was a clear assessment, which some lay Ecclesia Dei spokesmen ignore by insisting that it’s all about ritualism.
The Vatican has been unwilling to show that these texts do not contradict previous teaching and simply asserts, as Pope Leo said: “sorry, but we’ve got to move on”; can’t stop to uphold non-binding Vatican II texts in the light of tradition, and asserts that traditional Catholics are rejecting “fundamental elements of the Church” by questioning those texts.
Unfortunately the Pope slipped back into the familiar Novus Ordo parish priest mode: an impassible repetition of “the Council says so. Next question”.
But this won’t work. The Church isn’t stabilising. It’s continuing to degrade quickly. The Pope will never renounce the faith, but this doesn’t prevent the Church’s continuing institutional decline. There is no cut off point, no end to the haemorrhage in sight as long as he refuses to “move on” from the letter and spirit of those “points” of Vatican II.
Without a strong voice saying ‘no’ to this direction, one that is able to forge new generations who will do the same, ending the crisis becomes much more difficult, with all that entails for souls. The Society’s new bishops are necessary, and a great grace for the Church.
Why the SSPX is necessary - Pax OrbisBy Vinicius. Vinicius is a Melbourne-based historian-researcher focussing on early modernity as the Christian Western alternative to ideological, Enlightenment modernity.
 |
| How do you know when the church is in crisis? When a material heretic is placed in charge of the Doctrine of the Faith |
Every day, reasons pile up for why I will keep standing on my little soapbox, warning everyone to flee from the Synodal Church and the filthy religion it represents and promotes.
The Vatican continues its purge of those who have woken up to the fact that the Synodal Church is an enemy of Christ and Catholicism. First came reports that Rome might also designate ordinary Catholic folk who attend SSPX Masses as schismatics, and on June 24 the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith announced that Father Francisco José Vegara Cerezo had been dismissed from the clerical state.
The priest, who belonged to the Diocese of Orihuela-Alicante in southeastern Spain, was subject to disciplinary proceedings initiated in 2024 after he publicly (and correctly) claimed that Pope Francis was guilty of heresy and rejected his legitimacy as pope. The Diocese of Orihuela-Alicante confirmed the outcome to the local publication Religión Confidencial.
But this is where it gets interesting and bizarre. The very next day, a report appeared in the media about a theological article written in 1995 by “Cardinal Porn,” a.k.a. Víctor Manuel Fernández, who currently serves as prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office responsible for promoting and safeguarding Catholic doctrine.
The article, written 30 years ago and titled Romans 9–11: Grace and Predestination, examined St. Paul’s teaching on election, grace, and salvation in the Epistle to the Romans.
The damning evidence appears in Fernández’s concluding statement:
“I firmly believe that everyone will be saved; a belief that is not based on wishful thinking, nor on my compassion for men, but on what I know about God and his concrete plans thanks to his Revelation.”
Hardly surprising in the context that he is the henchman of two of the greatest heretics in the history of the Church, Bergoglio and Prevost, but still shocking that this is the man in charge of deciding who gets to be Catholic and who does not.
The Catholic Church teaches that God desires the salvation of all men and offers sufficient grace for salvation to all. At the same time, the Church teaches the reality of hell and the possibility of eternal separation from God for those who freely reject grace and die unrepentant.
The catechisms of the Catholic Church teaches that God predestines no one to hell, but it also affirms the existence of eternal punishment and the necessity of conversion and perseverance in grace.
In his article, Fernández argued that Romans chapters 9 through 11 should be interpreted in a way that modifies or reconsiders aspects of the traditional theological understanding of predestination, particularly as developed by St. Augustine.
Augustine’s teaching on grace exercised a major influence on later Catholic theology and was reflected in the teaching of the Second Council of Orange in 529. It also shaped the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas and later scholastic writers.
Fernández clearly gives greater emphasis to divine mercy than to traditional Catholic teaching on judgment, reprobation, and eternal punishment.
Some commentators asked whether the views expressed in the article remain those of Cardinal Fernández today and, if so, how they relate to the Church’s traditional teaching on grace, predestination, judgment, and salvation.
But over here at Radical Fidelity, where God has given us senses and healthy intelligence, we can answer that question: his actions tell us he still holds heretical positions like these and worse.
Besides being tragically ridiculous, this statement from the Pornographer-in-Chief’s 1995 “theological” essay makes a mockery of Christ and His Passion.
The pervert Tucho needs to explain to us: if his statement is true, why did Christ have to die for our sins?
Like something out of a surrealist fantasy, Fernández now holds the Church’s highest doctrinal office after the “pope.” As I have said before, the whole synodal circus is so ridiculous and illegitimate that, if I had to pitch it to a publisher as a fictional novel, it would be rejected on the grounds of being completely implausible.
Yet, they want to insult faithful folks’ intelligence by expecting us to believe these clowns are the Catholic Church and its hierarchy.
Our Lady, Co-redemptrix, pray for us…
Our Lady, Mediatrix of all Graces, pray for us…
Viva Christo Rey!https://radicalfidelity.substack.com/p/30-year-old-document-resurfaces-to
Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on your Church
