Our previous post commented upon the staggering new “pastoral guidelines” for SSPX marriages (approved by Pope Francis, as contained in the letter released by Cardinal Muller), which foresees the intrusion of conciliar clergy into SSPX sanctuaries to perform the marriages of Society faithful.
We observed that these new guidelines directly subjected both SSPX clergy and faithful to the governance of the diocesan clergy, making both dependent upon same for the reception and/or conferral of the sacrament of matrimony.
Moreover, we observed that the silence of the SSPX in response to these new guidelines not only seemed to imply consent to be bound by them, but also implicitly admitted doubt on the part of the SSPX itself regarding the validity of marriages heretofore (and subsequently) performed in its chapels (all the while -at least formerly- justifying their jurisdiction to perform them via ecclesia supplet).
We observed that, contrary to the stated purpose of these pastoral guidelines, ostensibly promulgated to instill peace and confidence in the minds of doubting faithful regarding the validity of marriages performed in SSPX chapels, the guidelines, insofar as they represent a Roman reaffirmation of the invalidity of SSPX marriages (seemingly consented to by Menzingen’s silence) actually serve to instill doubt on the matter in the minds of SSPX clergy and faithful, and thereby build a demand for the presence of conciliar clergy to officiate SSPX marriages in the immediate future (which in turn inculcates a desire for accepting a practical accord with unconverted Rome).
And for all these reasons, we concluded that, barring the swift and unambiguous repudiation of these new guidelines by the Society, we could no longer support the marriages of the faithful in SSPX chapels.
Unfortunately, exactly the opposite has happened, per this communique (click link below), in which far from repudiating these humiliating “pastoral guidelines,” Bishop Fellay instead expresses his “deep gratitude” for these new measures:
Consequently, we are forced to reaffirm our conclusions regarding the impermissibility of receiving the sacrament of marriage in SSPX chapels under these conditions, in which both clergy and faithful are directly subjected to diocesan/conciliar authority (and all the dire consequences for the faith which follow from this subjection).
We appeal to all the clergy of the SSPX, and implore them to open their eyes (at long last!) to the substantial mutations and compromises made to and by their Fraternity under the deleterious leadership of Bishop Fellay, and remind them of their duty to resist these disintegrating and assimilating measures.
Furthermore, we remind all the clergy of the SSPX that each and every one of them, has (in light of Menzingen’s consent to be bound by these measures on their behalf), now become personally complicit in rejecting the last will and testament of Archbishop Lefebvre, as expressed on p. 13 of his book Spiritual Journey (published only weeks before his death) in which your founder stated:
“It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith”
Let no SSPX priest think to exonerate himself on the basis of personal objection, when the consent to be bound by these guidelines is officially accepted by his own congregation (whose consent he is presumed to share).
Neither is it any longer possible for SSPX clergy to refuse to recognize the lie of being “accepted as we are.” If until now you have been in denial on this point, such denial is no longer possible.
A final parting thought from your founder (whose voice you have ignored until now), given one year after the episcopal consecrations:
“That is why what can look like a concession is in reality merely a maneuver to separate us from the largest number of faithful possible. This is the perspective in which they seem to be always giving a little more and even going very far. We must absolutely convince our faithful that it is no more than a maneuver, that it is dangerous to put oneself into the hands of Conciliar bishops and Modernist Rome. It is the greatest danger threatening our people. If we have struggled for twenty years to avoid the Conciliar errors, it was not in order, now, to put ourselves in the hands of those professing these errors.”