Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Bishop Schneider: SSPX Personal Prelature Would Redress “Unjust” Suppression

Bishop Athanasius Schneider has given another interview of importance, this time to a French traditional Catholic journal, Présent. In this new interview, Bishop Schneider makes some politely discerning remarks about the currently considered, formal re-integration of the Society of St. Pius X, and then says that the recognition of the SSPX is an act of “rendering justice – belatedly – for the injustice done to the Society [of St. Pius X] in 1975 on the part of the Holy See.”

In the following, I present a translation from these especially important parts of that French interview – as it has been posted by the website Le Forum Catholique – along with the questions posed to Schneider, which are now placed in italics:

The Sovereign Pontiff has now extended the possibility [for the faithful] to confess [in sacramental penance] with priests of the Society of St. Pius X beyond the limits of the Year of Mercy. Does this seem to you to be an important decision?

Yes, of course, and I am very happy about it! This is a very pastoral gesture, very merciful, and in my eyes one of the most important gestures of the pontificate of Pope Francis which helps the process of canonical re-integration of this ecclesiastical reality which has existed for 50 years and which is producing obvious spiritual fruits. Many young families assembled around the Society of St. Pius X love the Church, pray for the pope, as their forebearers have done before them. The Church contains different houses, different spiritualities. Only those ecclesiastics who are hostile toward the Society present it with exaggerated demands. John XXIII as well as Paul VI always insisted upon the pastoral character of the [Second Vatican] Council. If the Society has difficulties in accepting certain documents of Vatican II, one has to place that into the context of the pastoral objective of the Council. The Dogma has not changed. We have the same Faith. Thus, there is no problem to integrate canonically the Society of St. Pius X.

You have been one of the Churchmen sent by the Vatican to visit the seminaries and priories of the Society. Which solution do you think is possible for resolving its controversial position?

The personal prelature is a position that is very fitting for the reality of the Society of St. Pius X and its mission. I am convinced that Monsignor Lefebvre would have accepted voluntarily and with gratitude this proposed official ecclesiastical structure, the recognition of this apostolate by the Church. This would only be an act of rendering justice – quite belatedly – to the unjust suppression of the Society in 1975 on the part of the Holy See. At that time, Monsignor Lefebvre had also presented a [canonical] recourse. The establishment now of a prelature would in some way accept this canonical recourse after a delay of some 40 years. On the other side, the Society must not demand guarantees of 100% which would be entirely unrealistic. We are still on earth, not in Heaven! It [such an inordinate demand] would be a gesture that would reveal a certain lack of confidence in Divine Providence.

h/t Rorate Caeli Twitter

119 thoughts on “Bishop Schneider: SSPX Personal Prelature Would Redress “Unjust” Suppression”

  1. I should like to see the ‘formal correction’ spoken of by Cardinal Burke come before the acceptance of a Personal Prelature. We have waited for a long time for the re-opening to Tradition in Europe & elsewhere of those priestly societies who held fast to the Old Rite, so a little bit longer won’t make much difference. One day it will have to come but not until Modernism is defeated. Our suffering (no TLM, lack of Sacraments, no catechesis etc.) is offered to God for the purpose of reaffirming the One Holy Catholic & Apostolic faith.

    • Could not the reintegration actually help defeat modernism? I worry a bit for the fate of the Society with the acceptance of the personal prelature, but at the same time, if some form of persecution came against them, couldn’t they essentially just revert to the status they have now? They’ve been self-sufficient for these 40 years or so, there’s not any likelihood of that changing anytime soon. The reintegration would simply allow more Catholics to come and enjoy the graces the society offers.

      • They need faculties in order to minister in parishes – that is why we cannot access them as our NO Bishops will not allow them in. If they came to Europe & built churches, schools, etc. on the understanding their private prelature was on a “take us as you find us” basis & then had to revert they would lose them to the Modernist Vatican at a tremendous cost. Best. I feel, to wait a bit longer in the hope that the Dubia will ‘out’ PF & a Traditional pope (Burke, Sarah, Schneider) will be elected. Let’s pray this will be the outcome!

        • They would not need to build many new buildings, there are plenty of empty or mostly empty ones that they could easily occupy. And, there are Bishops who would immediately request their services and more would do so as they proved fruitful over time. Furthermore, if they own them as a personal prelature, the State would side with them if they were forced to revert to their current status.

          This isn’t a real problem. I think the real problem lies in what Bishop Schneider referred to as 100% guarantee, of which I am not certain to what he means, though I think he means that if the SSPX believes there won’t be difficulties and problems with certain ecclesiastics given the circumstances we are in.

          • That really is not the case in this part of Spain (Malaga Diocese) where TLM was refused & will continue to be unless mandated, or the SSPX & other Traditional Orders receive their faculties direct from Rome. This was the case when I requested their presence some time ago & as priests are very wary of their Bishop they won’t rock the boat.

            While closed churches seem to be a problem in the USA, we could do with bigger churches to minister to the growing communities around us IF those communities were properly evangelised, which they are not. Due to lack of catechesis Holy Matrimony has been relegated to cohabitation & Baptism also as a result. Homilies on such matters are not given so even the baptised but faith-ignorant do not want the commitment that Matrimony entails & because of the lack of jobs due to NWO ideology of the EU most young men wouldn’t be able to support families. When a child inadvertently arrives the mother (& her parents usually) are left with it to rear. It all goes back to VII, so even getting rid of the Modernists we would still have to tackle the outcome of that Council & revert to Tradition which was upheld by all previous Pontificates prior to VII.

            It’s a shocker, but the first step to sorting things out is for the four Cardinals & their supporters (with more signatures) to now issue the formal correction so as not to give any more time for PF & minions to throw more confusion into the pile. We must take back Christ’s Church with the greatest speed possible.

          • I don’t disagree with the need for the dubia and it’s ramifications to be dealt with post haste. At this point, the likelihood of the SSPX reintegrating prior to the response of the Cardinals is slim anyway, I think that we are rapidly approaching zero hour. However, if they did, they would immediately give their voice in favor of the Cardinals dubia.

            By the way another has joined the fray: Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes:

          • I read of Cardinal Cordes adding his weight to the Dubia. This is indeed welcome, but we really need in situ Cardinals & Bishops coming out in favour of clarification of a Papal Exhortation that was written prior to the start of the Synod on the Family thereby falsifying the outcome of that Synod. As we know, many invitees to that Synod were retired Modernists & enablers of the abusers of children. Also those aligned to Liberalism in all its guises whilst canonists, theologians & other high ranking prelates who should have been there were deliberately overlooked by PF. Bishop Fellay gave us to understand in his last interview that there were about fifty members of the Curia who supported the SSPX so why aren’t they coming forth? If the formal correction is made they will need to make the difference in numbers for it to succeed. It is getting more & more likely there will be a full-blown schism coming down the tracks.

          • Archbishop Lefebvre insisted on a doctrinal agreement before any regularization.

            Please see my post below to Sam A. Thank you, Father.

          • If/when the SSPX is regularized, perhaps Father your Society of the Most Sorrowful Mother could find refuge under their wing, if not under a diocese.

          • So you are saying the Society of the Most Sorrowful Mother was a Priestly Institute and not just an Association ?

          • I did not comment on whether or not they were a Priestly Institute or an Association. But if you’re asking, I believe they were/or still are the latter. Word is they have been looking for a new diocese.

      • This is NOT the time for regularization. The Church needs to resolve the crisis re the dubia and AL first. Then there needs to be a doctrinal agreement on the issues that concern the Society.

        • If the doctrinal clarification wanted is a recognition that the Society (or even anyone else) is not obliged to assent to certain propositions in the Vatican II documents, that’s within the realm of possibility.

          If the doctrinal clarification wanted is a repudiation of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo, y’all might have to wait a few generations or more.

          And I say that as someone with little use for either.

    • “I should like to see the ‘formal correction’ spoken of by Cardinal Burke come before the acceptance of a Personal Prelature.” Let’s take what action can be taken now. Cardinal Burke, issue the formal act of correction NOW!

  2. Dont trust these characters in Rome!Not yet.Look at the state of Francis and his destructive influence and disregard of the Magisterium!When he is done for-please God ,then,maybe,but not until then.It is a trap.God Bless.

    • I’ve heard before that rapprochement with Rome would be a trap. Can you elaborate why you think it a trap? If the Society were hypothetically trapped, why wouldn’t they simply separate as they do today?

      • The SSPX has plenty of vocations, churches and chapels *not under diocesan control* and dedicated laity (especially young people) who generously support the priests who serve them with their time, talents and treasure (I.e. $$) which does not go into diocesan or Vatican coffers.

        The NO seminaries (with a few exceptions) are either closed or have few vocations, most parishes struggle to make ends meet (unless they merge into bigger parishes) and the young people don’t go to church.

        If your neighbor had a good paying job, nice house, plenty of time to spend with his family while you were struggling by to make ends meet, would you be envious or charitable? I don’t know about you, but I think that most people would admit to feelings of jealousy.

        If – God FORBID – the SSPX was regularized with no doctrinal agreement – the modernists would start infiltrating the SSPX seminaries, convents and monasteries. They would control all the churches and chapels administered by the SSPX.

        People who fled to the SSPX because they wanted the Catholic Faith “whole and entire”, who want the TLM and the Social Kingship of Christ, who want their children to have the Faith of their forefathers – where would they go?

        As I’ve posted previously, the SSPX needs to be VERY CAREFUL in dealing with Rome. Imho, this should wait until the next pontificate – definitely not now.

        • Thanks for that response. I can see the analogy but the Church isn’t your neighbors house–it’s your house and it’s being ransacked. How about this analogy from The Lord of the Rings: the SSPX is like the expelled Riders of Rohan. The men of Rohan are now backed into Helms Deep with enemies on every side. At the last minute the Rohirrim come back and help save the day. It’s pretty dark and grim now. I pray that is God sending in the SSPX. May God’s will be done and I hope that it is reintegration soon!

          • I’ve never read Tolkien nor seen the movies, but I get the picture.

            I still think that the SSPX should wait. If the Cardinals issue a formal correction to PF, then all bets are off the table.

            Have to go now. Good night!

        • You know, there’s nothing to stop modernists from trying to infiltrate the Society seminaries right now. Nothing except the seminaries’ vigilance – and no human vigilance is completely faultless.

          And if you’ve read AA-1025, you know it wouldn’t be the first time they’ve successfully infiltrated orthodox seminaries in the modern age.

          Of course that goes for FSSP, IBP, ICRSS et al. seminaries, too – and I have no idea whether they’ve tried. All I can say is that I haven’t seen any evidence of it yet.

          All I’m saying is that not having a canonical status is no sure guarantee, either.

        • We need another pope – a Traditional one – before any move to bring back the Old Rite, full Sacraments, Devotions,Catechesis & Evangelisation can be achieved. A Traditional pope will see eye to eye with the Traditional Orders. Modernism must first be defeated & can only be from within the present CC. Those who throw in the towel & leave are leaving the foot of the Cross.

          • Agreed, but the only way that will happen is when the Third Secret of Fatima is revealed (I.e. the exact words of Our Lady, not the Vision).

            If possible, please get The Keys of This Blood by Malachi Martin. The chapter titled The Judas Complex is alone worth the price of the book. You could find it on the internet.

          • The consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary & the full revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima must & will be done, but by the next Traditional pope. I cannot see the Modernists fulfilling Our Lady’s requests, but she did say it would be carried out by the pope when all seemed lost & Her Triumph would follow.

            I shall look up The Judas Complex – it sounds an interesting read.

        • I may be wrong, but I don’t think that’s how it works. I think they keep property in their own name. I’ve heard this of other religious orders and believe the same of dioceses.

  3. Some followers and even sympathizers with the Society are obviously wary of any deal.

    But I think it is hard to argue with His Excellency’s basic point, at least in the abstract: A formal canonical structure as described so far by Bp. Fellay would certainly be some kind of redress for the injustices the Society has faced within the Church since 1974.

    Of course, we don’t don’t know what the final offer will be, if there will be strings attached, so it’s hard to evaluate in the concrete. If it “accepts us as we are,” as the Society likes to say, it’s hard to think they should not take the deal. If you don’t trust Fellay to do so even under those circumstances, then you shouldn’t trust him in any leadership position whatsoever, full stop – and you might as well be heading to your nearest Resistance chapel.

  4. Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t really have a problem with being excommunicated from Modernist Rome.

    Bp. Schneider doesn’t address the obvious contradiction: Why would any traditional group want to reconcile with the most notorious Modernist Pope in the history of the Church? I think that Bp. Schneider doesn’t understand Archbishop Lefebvre’s views, or perhaps he has not taken the time to study them closely or accurately. It was Tradition that was excommunicated, along with the SSPX. Archbishop Lefebvre, for the most part, believed that reconciliation could happen only when Rome converted back to Tradition. We’re a long way from that happening. Perhaps, too, Bp. Schnieder is associated with GREC. I hope not.

      • GREC was a series of semi-secret meetings, held in Paris I think, from the years 1998-2010. The leaders in these meetings were from the FSSP, SSPX, French bishops, a woman named Madame Perol, and other
        laypersons. One of the main participants was a Fr. Michel LeLong. He wrote a letter, which is included in a book that he wrote of these meetings. Here is what he wrote:

        “I am profoundly attached to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, and I am trying to make them understood by those of our brother Catholics who have followed Archbishop Lefebvre and his successors. Some friends and I have set up a working group in Paris which is trying to prepare the day when all traditionalists will be able to find their place once more in the Church, in obedience to the Holy Father and under the authority of the bishops […] It is on this spirit of total fidelity to the Sovereign Pontiff and to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, that in the name of many French Catholics, I take the liberty of asking your Eminence, if, in a gesture of charity towards our brothers, the Holy Father could lift the excommunications which had been pronounced against the bishops who were irregularly consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre.”

        The main goal of GREC was to reconcile the SSPX by getting them to accept a doctrinal agreement, with the ultimate goal of getting them to accept the Council. That’s why the excommunications were lifted.

        More here:

        • So, then what is the problem with the SSPX receiving a personal prelature? Obviously, Fr. Bisig et al. had a problem with being excommunicated over the illicit ordination of Bishops. And for what it’s worth, I think Mons Lefebvre did as well, though in the end he did what he thought he had to do. Fr. Bisig still holds Mons Lefebvre in high regard as well as the SSPX, even though there has been unfortunate acrimony since they left the SSPX based on the illicit ordination of Bishops.

          • The SSPX and the FSSP are not the same. Do you understand why Archbishop Lefebvre believed he was correct to consecrate the Four Bishops? I mean, do you understand his reasoning?

          • Was it because he thought it’s a nicer ceremony than the 1968 rite of Paul VI?

            Or did he have serious doubts about the validity of the new rite?

          • Yes, he was worried about that. Also, he began to realize that the priests that he was ordaining when they finished seminary wouldn’t have a place to go after they were ordained. He knew of very few dioceses that would take them, in order to celebrate the traditional Mass and sacraments. The TLM was becoming a rare thing.
            He also began to be persecuted and received “visitations” from Rome after he began speaking out strongly against the Council. He saw the situation as dire. While the TLM is far more widely celebrated now as compared to then, it’s not just about the Mass. It’s about doctrine too, of course.

          • Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated the four bishops because no bishop would ordain priests for the SSPX. Co-consecrator Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer died exactly one month after the Archbishop, so if he didn’t act, the SSPX would have folded, and there no priest would be saying the Latin Mass today. (In 1988 it was just the SSPX and a few other elderly priests who said the TLM.) The FSSP was established the month following the consecration by SSPX priests who disagreed with the Archbishop’s decision. While both orders say the same Mass and offer the same sacraments, the major differences are:

            -The SSPX operates independently from diocesan structures, owns (or leases) all of their property, keeps their own donation money for their own needs. Their operational structure is like the major religious orders (Jesuits, Benedictines, Franciscans, etc.) although the major orders are now Novus Ordo.

            -The FSSP works for the diocesan bishop. Under their by-laws they only set-up shop in a diocese with the explicit permission of the local ordinary, and he sets the terms and conditions of their presence. (Originally the FSSP were invited into dioceses to “rival” an SSPX chapel, which by all Christian charity is wrong.) Before Summorum Pontificum the bishops often limited the FSSP to a Sunday Mass at 5PM at a run-down parish, and no other sacraments could be administered. Today many FSSP parishes are part of the diocese, and are required to collect “second collections” and participate in the annual diocesan pledge drive.

          • A pretty good summary. I would add that the FSSP cannot speak out against the Council, or scandals that occur in the conciliar church at all. In a way that’s alright. As long as they stay quiet and behave themselves, they usually do pretty well in the dioceses. And they are very good at what they are allowed to do…which is to offer the traditional sacraments and work for the sanctification of souls. I agree that they do rival, in some cases intentionally so, the SSPX chapels that are located in the same city or county.

            I worry that if the SSPX reconciles, then the FSSP may be negatively affected in that they will no longer be needed as a rival to take trads away from the SSPX. A diocese may not want two traditional groups to choose from for Mass. I could be wrong.

            The SSPX has also addressed, in the past, scandals and other problems in the conciliar church, such as the Council, loss of Catholic faith, decrease in vocations, etc. They could do so because they were not worried about retribution from Rome or local bishops. They do this more infrequently now than they did before. They don’t speak out like they used to.

    • Tradition cannot be excommunicated. It is part & parcel of the CC same as Deposit of Faith & Magisterium. Traditional Catholics have felt the Modernist ideology that emanated from VII most keenly, but it is from within the CC that this heresy of all heresies will be defeated. The Orthodox, Protestants & now Sedevacantists made the wrong decision to cut themselves off from the vine. We will get through these times if we trust in Our Lord & do as Our Blessed Lady asks – penance, penance, penance & pray the Rosary. The Centenary of Her apparitions at Fatima is next May & Her Triumph is at hand. Keep the True Faith & show patience in adversity.

      • Nice post Ana, You made a great point that I needed to see: “Cutting oneself off is not the right way, standing and fighting is the right choice”
        Thank you, and hoping that everything is good with you.

      • “Tradition cannot be excommunicated.”

        And yet it was. It was not the SSPX who cut themselves off. They have always believed in everything the Holy Catholic Church teaches. They also believe that have supplied jurisdiction, supplied by canon law during a Crisis, in order to provide the sacraments. Archbishop Lefebvre believed that the Crisis was at the point where he had to do something to ensure that the Traditional sacraments would not disappear in the Church.

        It is the modernist sect who occupies Rome that have cut themselves off from Tradition. Archbishop Lefebvre saw this firsthand in being one of the primary Council fathers. He was very much involved in the Council, in trying to maintain the Catholic faith. He appealed to Paul Vl several times to change the errors that the Council was proposing. He was successful in getting only some of the errors eliminated. With due respect, Bp. Schneider was still a boy when the Vll Council convened. He was not there. He did not see the extreme difficulty of trying to stand up for the Catholic faith at the Council, as Archbishop Lefebvre (and others) did.

        • I have lived as an adult prior to VII & know the history very well. As I have said on many occasions, I am still waiting for these dark times to pass (which they will) & for the return to Tradition, which of itself cannot be ‘excommunicated’ as it forms the basis of the Catholic faith along with the Magisterium & Deposit of Faith (Revelation/Scriptures). I have also called the present incumbents ‘usurpers’ which is what they are & were placed in seminaries during the ’30s & ’40s by Bella Dodd to annihilate the Catholic faith. Their time is coming to an end. They are old men in a hurry but they have been exposed. Even social media are now getting the message that they don’t represent us Catholics. In fact, the NWO has received a great set-back recently with Trump’s election in the USA, the Italian & Austrian election results & we are now facing more elections in France & Germany soon. People have become fed-up with Modernism & with Our Lady of Fatima’s centenary just around the corner we have every hope Her Triumph will be close at hand.

          The only Person to avenge the wrongs committed by recent Pontificates is God Himself. We, the laity, have no power in such matters but we must trust in His promise that the Gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church.

          • I think I understand what you’re saying. Tradition cannot be excommunicated from the Church. But the church is now occupied by Modernists who have excommunicated Tradition (well, for the most part). That doesn’t mean that the gates of Hell have prevailed against the Church. The Church still exists, though she is somewhat eclipsed. Bishop Tissier de Mallerias has described it as thus (I’m paraphrasing): The modernist sect that is in control is like a parasite which derives it’s life-substance by feeding off its host. (The ‘host’ being the true Catholic Church and faith). The parasite is not the host, but there is still a sort of transfer of substance from host to parasite, so there are still a few elements of the True Church in the conciliar church.

            The views I’m trying to elucidate are that of Archbishop Lefebvre (and Bp. Teissier de Mallerais), even though I may be getting a few things a bit wrong. I understand that you have a different view, as do many others here. That’s fine. But since the subject here is the SSPX, I feel that its s good thing to try to stress the late Archbishop Lefebvre’s position on ‘reconciliation with Rome.’

            By standing firm in Tradition, Archbishop Lefebvre was not taking vengeance, but rather he was serving Our Lord and His Church to the best of his ability. That’s all that we can do as well.

            The Crisis could last for quite some time yet. We don’t really know.

        • Bp. Schneider was an infant in the Soviet Union during V2, so his family had to practice Catholicism in secret.

          Regarding supplied jurisdiction, any traditional priest (regardless of affiliation) has supplied jurisdiction. The parish I travel to 30 miles away from my place is not my parish (not in my residential diocese either), but the priest has supplied jurisdiction because my residential parish doesn’t have a TLM.

    • I don’t think it’s accurate or fair to say Abp. Lefebvre didn’t have a problem being excommunicated. A pious man like Abp. Lefebvre had to make that painful decision and follow his conscience and one shouldn’t make light of it.

      • Especially given the repeated efforts he made to achieve some kind of canonical recognition from 1975-1988. In the end, it was a price he was willing to pay, but for a priest of his background and formation, the reality of excommunication couldn’t be something he could be indifferent to.

      • You’re right. My apologies. It was a difficult decision for the Archbishop. But eventually he didn’t have a problem with it, as he knew it was the price to pay for staying true to our Lord and His Holy Catholic Church.

    • Why would any traditional group want to reconcile with the most notorious Modernist Pope in the history of the Church?

      Well, there are plenty of Ecclesia Dei societies you could ask.

    • The “excommunications” were bogus to begin with because one cannot be kicked out of the Church for upholding dogma. (Yes, the Tridentine Mass is dogma. Pope St. Pius V said so in Quo Primum.)

  5. Indeed, it is high time that the SSPX is given their due. They fully recognize the Roman Pontiff and are Catholic and they should be recognized as such, whereas many other ‘Catholic’ entities, such as the Neocatechumenal Way, are anything but Catholic and should be denounced as the heretics that they are, along with several Cardinals, Bishops and Priests.

  6. I agree with Ana Milan this is not the time for SSPX to have any formal agreement with Rome given PF is in charge. Benedict XVI was honest on this issue and made it clear in his letter to the Bishops on the issue of SSPX, he said the difference between Rome and SSPX is not discipline but doctrines. So unless Rome comes back to Christ and adhere to the doctrines handed down by the Apostles and Popes before Vatican II SSPX should not be making any compromises. Let’s deal with PF’s AL first.

  7. Did anyone notice the wisdom of what His Excellency just did? Francis perhaps thinks that such a gesture towards the SSPX will appease Burke and the others supportive of the Dubia. His Excellency is counting on this. But even after getting the SSPX regularised, they are not going to compromise on the dogmata of Holy Matrimony. Sneider is very wise and astute. You should draw your conclusions from his end game; I doubt Pope Francis even sees it.

  8. The SSPX has nothing to gain by reuniting with Rome especially during this unstable situation in the church. They would be wise to stick with their mandate in preserving our precious teachings and traditions.

  9. The job of SSPX is as a haven for orthodox Catholics. It should be most outspoken in it’s condemnation of the abuses of Vatican II and the ungodly performance of Pope Francis as he sets about diabolically undermining the teaching of Jesus Christ. How could SSPX do this if they came under the authority of the Pope?

  10. Comrades, the Politburo wants to see Bergoglio skewered via a public correction by the Catholics still remaining among the Cardinalate and Episcopate before we get to the stage of a Prelature. Who knows how Comrade Excrement will react against Tradition once he’s been publicly humiliated as a heretic?

    • This is an interesting statement. I get the satire, but the meaning is also cause for thought.

      All speculation of course, but in the event that Pope Francis is actually corrected, his response will indeed be very interesting and if the past is any indication of the future, vitriol will be the foundation of it.

      And that says nothing of how he might react if he were actually condemned as a heretic which I do not believe will occur at least while he is living. As Edward Pentin has said, his sources in the Vatican indicate that even those who disagree with the Pope {and they are not few} in the curial bureaucracy are simply going to wait out this pontificate {AKA wait until PF dies} and hope for betterment in the next conclave.

      A risky business to be sure.

      • “They also serve who only stand & wait” – John Milton.

        While this is certainly true of the laity, the Curia has the power & duty to rebuke PF on countless issues pertaining to Catholic dogma which he has dragged into a ditch. It is they who has lumbered us with this excuse of a pope yet they won’t take any responsibility in curtailing his appointment, as the St. Gallen Mafia did with Pope Emeritus Benedict for their own purposes.

  11. No personal prelature offer until the Dubia is either answered or settled! The church of the spirit of VII and the NO aberration Mass; and the multiple heresies brought about and allowed to flourish since 1962 cannot coexist together. 99.999999999 percent of the Truth is not good enough when so many our bishops including the pope continue to teach 1% absolute poison.

    Let Bishop Schneider and the prelates who support the Dubia take it to its ultimate end- two warnings for Francis, then call an imperfect Council to make the declaratory sentence. Then, elect a new pope, if that is God’s Will.

  12. Since there is a photo of Archbishop Lefebvre attached to this article, I think it appropriate to show how Archbishop eventually arrived at the decision that it was futile to negotiate with Rome. Here is a short youtube video of the late Archbishop….. “Rome is in apostasy.” The ‘youtube’ icon on the lower right corner of the video screen will have to be clicked in order to view the video.

  13. Must bring to your attention the fact that Archbishop Julián Barrio of Compostela has recently ordained a ‘couple’ of sodomite priests despite the recent Congregation for the Clergy ruling barring homosexuals from ordination.

    El Arzobispo de Santiago ordenó sacerdotes a dos homosexuales sabiendo que eran pareja @ &

    I wonder will this receive the same reaction from the Vatican as Archbishop Lefebvre received (excommunication) for consecrating bishops under duress consequent on outcome of VII? I shall optimistically (?) watch out for all concerned (& there are more) to be duly dealt with.

    Please issue the formal correction NOW!

  14. PF may answer the Dubai or he may not. Should he choose not to his agenda is furthered because of the confusion he has created . NO Catholics will believe that
    divorced and remarried (in a state of mortal sin) may receive Holy Communion.
    Should PF choose to answer the Dubia his answer most likely would be unintelligible.
    And again NO Catholics will think sacrilegious communions are OK. Unfortunately, it’s a win win for PF.


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...