(SSPX Frs. Trejo, Rubio, Gomis and the rest, in their Roman splendor.)
[That which follows is excerpted from the article “Master Stroke of Pope Francis, Death Blow for the SSPX” written by Mr. Ignacio Kilmot of the Syllabus blog, and translated for Tradidi by Samuel Loeman, concerning the weak and effeminate nature of the sermons given by SSPX priests on a recent pilgrimage in Rome.
Of course, effeminate sermons (or at least those which avoid any contradiction or repudiation of modernism and the Roman modernists) have been standard fare in SSPX chapels ever since Bishop Fellay forwarded to all SSPX priests (via Cor Unum, the internal newsletter of the SSPX) Archbishop di Noia’s December/2012 letter urging a “new, spiritual approach,” the purpose of which was to assist in the “preparation of minds” for entrance into conciliarism.
The same Archbishop Di Noia admitted shortly after the December/2012 letter (further down in the same link provided above, in an article by John Vennari) that the goal of Rome was to convert the SSPX to conciliar thinking:
“Convincing them will take time, and in this respect we will have to be patient.”
Emasculated sermons are the first step in changing people’s attitudes, and they were reportedly on full display at the recent SSPX Pilgrimage in Rome.  But if, when you read the description of these sermons below, you are saying to yourself, “What’s wrong with those sermons?  They sound just like the ones I receive at my own SSPX chapel,” then I rest my case!
The banal, effeminate sermons delivered by these  SSPX priests provide us a glimpse or preview into the conciliatory spirit the post-accord Society will exude.
They gathered in the one place on Earth which most needed to hear a stout confession of the Catholic faith, and they failed to give it.
The salt has lost its savor.
So much for the lie which pretends that “if only we could get a deal, we would have our foot in the door to preach the true faith to the Romans.”
It was a lie when Dom Gerard justified his betrayal of Archbishop Lefebvre partially based upon that pretext.  It was a lie 10 years later when Campos made the same argument (after having previously condemned Dom Gerard for it).  And it is a lie today when offered by the SSPX (which previously condemned Campos for it).  -SJ]



“We have just witnessed a formal act of surrender of the SSPX to Rome: Rome cedes its temples, and the SSPX returns its … silence.

Rome opens its temples and the Society closes its mouth.

This is not an opinion. This is a fact.

We have seen and heard the sermons of Fathers Trejo, Montagut, Gomis, Rubio, Conte, Cortés and Jimenez. Are they priests or tour guides? Logically, all of them begin their sermon by expressing their gratitude to those who opened their doors for them to celebrate their Masses. Then how could they criticize the Chieftain of all those kind vicars and priests who loaned them such venerable temples? Of course they couldn’t say anything inconvenient. Francis and Bishop Fellay have good relations (so assures us that same Francis). So, in their sermons they give us a tour of the history of these temples and of the saints and martyrs that were there. And they talk over and over again about Eternal Rome. They talk about the past … without drawing any lessons for the present.

Good gracious! Say something of today’s Rome, which Monsignor Lefebvre called the Rome of the antichrist, or Conciliar Rome? Say anything against the modernist heretics? Say anything against Vatican II? Say anything against the statue of Luther in the Vatican? Anything against sodomite masonry installed inside Rome? No. That cannot be. There is no crisis in the Church, there is no Francis. Nothing. Nothing at all. There is only Eternal Rome. The one that they reduced to temples and statues, because they refuse to boldly carry on fighting and speaking out.

Don’t be a party pooper now!

In the Basilica of San Marcos, Fr. Trejo spoke of a “Mark the lion who roars in the desert”. But Fr. Trejo the cat purrs in Rome with an effeminate tenderness. The sermon was totally harmless, pusillanimous, embalmed, coming from the district superior, to conclude the great “triumphant” pilgrimage of the SSPX. No doubt for them this is how to get to Aconcagua [Ed.: Aconcagua is the highest mountain in the Western hemisphere, located in western Argentina, near the Chilean border]. And these priests are at the pinnacle of their careers. Thanks to Francis and bishop Fellay!

As the Colombian “integralist” Alejandro Ordoñez recently told a well-known sodomite journalist: “speaking the people will understand”.

And meanwhile they talk about the martyrs …

At the end of his sermon, Trejo says: “Our message is humble and silent” (sic). Yes, he did not have to say so, but he did and he confesses it: “a silent message” … It looks a lot like the “silence” in Scorsese’s movie, doesn’t it? The martyrs died for not being silent. And that death gave them life. The Society lives by silence. And that life will bring it death.

In his turn, Fr. Gomis also appealed to Monsignor Lefebvre, hiding what does not suit his accordist propositions. I already drew attentioin to Fr. Gomis’s background on this [Syllabus] blog3.

Gomis mentions Monsignor Lefebvre and his “Spiritual Journey”, when he speaks of the Romans, that one can not be a Catholic without being Roman, etc. Very well. But Gomis takes great care not to mention Monsignor Lefebvre when he speaks of Conciliar Rome, being in opposition to Eternal Rome. And all those criticisms that in the same text the Archbishop raised against the modernist authorities. Or those immortal words that have now been erased from the memory of today’s Society: “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.

They will persecute you in my name,” recalls the pretentious and pompous Fr. Cortes, defending a congregation that preferred to stop being persecuted (which is no longer persecuted by those who persecuted the Society of Monsignor Lefebvre, as Menzingen herself says4), to pursue favors from the enemies of the Catholic Faith. Hollow words that reverberate through the walls of the Basilica of San Sebastian and that leave through the door to get lost in the Roman heat, while the “chic” people of the city then go to the same temple in order to celebrate their duly performed marriages, between Roman lust and pomp.

Take care of your priests, esteem your priories,” demands this priest. It would be better to turn this around, that these priests would take care of their faithful and esteem them enough to be able to give their lives for them, or even more so, to open their mouths in order to preach valiantly in continuity with Christ, the Apostles and their great Founder. Because Christ came to serve, and here it seems that the Society wants to be served.

And then there is Fr. Conte (another effeminate) who came out saying “Faith is here in the heart”. Of course, it’s no longer in the head, which reminds us of that other quote of Gomez Dávila: “When a Catholic puts up a better fight against vices than against heresy, there is little Christianity that remains in his head.

And so we can follow the same pattern in any of these elaborate tourist sermons.

Meanwhile, faithful Catholics groan and pray that God may put an end to this calamitous papacy, and that He may once and for all rid us of this type of Nero who is occupying the chair of Peter. And at the same time they do their best to resist the assaults of the modern world against faith, morality and the family, and to resists the priests of the Soceity, who instead of calling us to arms and to courageous and virile resistance convey the insincerity and lukewarmness of a congregation that has already lowered its arms, and who organize campaigns of visits that, to top it all off, should prepare in the faithful a spirit amenable to an agreement with Rome, which appears to be inevitable.

And one might ask: why did they go to Rome? Were they not to give glory to God? Have they no zeal for His glory? Do not they love Christ? And if they love Christ, do they not hate everything that is odious to Christ? Are they not there in order to fight for Christ the King? Is Rome not the best place to proclaim the whole truth at the top of one’s voice? Is not there where the first Christians were martyred the ideal place to shout to the modernists who occupy Rome what Monsignor Lefebvre said: “We adhere with our whole heart, and with our whole soul to Catholic Rome, the Guardian of the Catholic Faith and of those traditions necessary for the maintenance of that Faith, to Eternal Rome, Mistress of Wisdom and Truth. Because of this adherence we refuse and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies, such as were clearly manifested during the Second Vatican Council, and after the Council in all the resulting reforms”? Did anyone over there remember these words of the founder of the Society ?

But that we must fight the ideas presently fashionable in Rome, coming from the Pope’s own mouth, .. is clear, clear, for all they do is repeat the opposite of what the Popes said and solemnly stated for 150 years. We must choose, as I said to Pope Paul VI: “We have to choose between you and the Council on one side, and your predecessors on the other; either [we are] with your predecessors who stated the Church’s teaching, or with the novelties of Vatican II.

And we must not waver for one moment either in not being with those who are in the process of betraying us… “After all, we must be charitable, we must be kind, we must not be divisive”… They are shaking hands with the Church’s destroyers. They are shaking hands with people holding modernist and liberal ideas condemned by the Church. So they are doing the devil’s work…They are in an impossible situation. Impossible. One cannot both shake hands with modernists and keep following Tradition…That is what killed Christendom in all of Europe… It was the Liberals, it was those who reached out a hand to people who did not share their Catholic principles.

We must choose.. We too have chosen to be Counter-revolutionary, … to be against the modern errors, to stay with Catholic Truth, to defend Catholic truth…This fight between the Church and the liberals and modernism is the fight over Vatican II… The more one analyzes the documents of Vatican II, and the more one analyzes their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, the more one realizes that what is at stake is not merely superficial errors, … but rather a wholesale perversion of the mind… A wholly different version of Revelation, of Faith, of philosophy!

What can you do with people like that? What do we have in common with people like that? Nothing!…it is not our fight, it is Our Lord’s fight, which the Church has carried on…So we cannot waver. Either we are for the Church, or we are against the Church and for the new Conciliar Church which has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, or less and less to do with it.5

Effeminate, petulant, stupid, deceptive, servile, proud, fatuous, cowardly, obsessive, Pharisaic. Those are the priests that Bishop Fellay wants and those are the ones that form the Neo-SSPX.”