June 23, 2014


I came across a post from Mundabor he wrote in June 2013 and re-posted today entitled: The SSPX, This Blog And You . Very well written, as his posts always are (maybe I'll reach that plateau someday), and though he and I hold the same view of the SSPX, I do not so narrowly define mine. I am full-in, without reserve and without any worry about becoming a SV-wannabee. I've said often that until the SSPX starts preaching heresy, stops praying for the current-reigning Pope and the local Bishops or openly breaks with Rome in some other obvious and public manner, I'm staying put...literally, as I've bought my plots (yes, for her, too) in the cemetery and don't relish wasting the money. 

That being said, his post parallels one I wrote in January 2014. I'd never read his above post until now and re-post mine in the spirit of full disclosure, in case there was any doubt which side of the line my own feet are planted on: 2000 years of Tradition or 50 years of the New Springtime. -dah

I have been an attendee of SSPX Masses for over 20 years now, owing to my deceased parents influence (Thank You, Mom and Dad!) and most of my children attended and graduated from SSPX schools. So, yeah...I support the SSPX. But wait! I also pray for my local Bishop, and still maintain my Fidelity to Rome and to the Pope's authority - am I in schism also? Or just a poor, misguided, confused ultra-uber Traddie who longs and yearns for the Darkness that was pre-Vatican II? Where is that psychiatrist when you need him??? Where are those darn pills...<sigh>

Anyway, back to the matter at hand...

It doesn't take a moral theologian, or even Michael Voris, to make the distinction that VII has been an unmitigated disaster for the Church. Unless you are a low-information Catholic and are content to set in the pew and nod your head up and down occasionally to let the lector-of-the-day know you are paying attention to his/her reading, you will understand the former statement is true by simply reading the Headlines on Pewsitter or Rorate Caeli.  I would dare say that if one produced a reverse-timeline chart of the problems in today's Catholic Church, the ending point would probably fall somewhere between 1962 and 1965, with a couple notable spikes in the 70's and 80's (a meteoric rise in annulments being one of the more notable). Decimation of convents, lack of priestly vocations, decrease in Mass attendance, the increase of cafeteria Catholics...the New Springtime has been wonderful and glorious to behold, has it not? 

Is it any wonder, then, that Rome and most of the Roman Curia have little Love for the SSPX? The Society has produced everything that the New Springtime of VII did not: over-crowding at their seminaries, abundant vocations in their convents, young families with their stair-step kids in the pews, increase in baptisms and weddings, a growing world-wide apostolate, a massive and successful publishing apostolate, increased enrollment in their schools, etc. 

Nope... you will never, ever convince me that the SSPX is in the wrong. What is going on with the SSPX - and probably the FFI as well - is nothing more than heavy-handedness in trying to shore up the fallacy that is VII and force it to work, àla Obamacare.  For Rome to do otherwise would be to jeopardize the Rodney King "can't we all just be friends?" meme of VII that has been so ballyhooed as a success over the last 5 decades. They are locked into a no-win scenario and must be exhausted at the end of each day...

If further convincing is needed that rather than demonizing the SSPX Rome should be assisting them in cultivating their apostolate, this quote by Saint Augustine from the recent Commentary on Mueller statement published by the SSPX USA  should suffice:

And on this point the reader may benefit from the judgment of Saint Augustine: “Often, too, divine providence permits even good men to be driven from the congregation of Christ by the turbulent seditions of carnal men. When for the sake of the peace of the Church they patiently endure that insult or injury, and attempt no novelties in the way of heresy or schism, they will teach men how God is to be served with a true disposition and with great and sincere charity. The intention of such men is to return when the tumult has subsided. But if that is not permitted because the storm continues or because a fiercer one might be stirred up by their return, they hold fast to their purpose to look to the good even of those responsible for the tumults and commotions that drove them out. They form no separate conventicles of their own, but defend to the death and assist by their testimony the faith which they know is preached in the Catholic Church. These the Father who seeth in secret crowns secretly. It appears that this is a rare kind of Christian, but examples are not lacking. Indeed, there are more than can be believed. So divine providence uses all kinds of men as examples for the oversight of souls and for the building up of his spiritual people.” (De vera religione, inAugustine: Earlier Writings, translated by John H. S. Burleigh [Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1953], 231.)

So there...here I was led and here I will stay. However, in the interest of full disclosure, I hereby inform one-and-all that I do attend the local diocesan Church with my two youngest sons twice a month, for that is where their Mother migrated in order to pursue her annulment, and where the priest made them do a "Profession of Faith" which I was informed they were thereafter barred from attending the SSPX Mass with their Father. Go figure...So, twice a month I fulfill my Sunday obligation at a NO Mass (and no, I do not secretly go and sneak in a Latin Mass later on because I believe the NO Mass invalid... or something.)

Deo Gratias!

Copyright 2014 David Heath - All Rights Reserved


  1. What on earth? That 'Profession' is a huge abuse of spiritual authority. It's like they're converting from Jainism or something. The only thing I can think of that's worse is the industrial-strength annulment machine in this country.

    1. Yes, Servo...it certainly surprised me as well. It was and remains an unjust and subjective edict by the pastor at the time. I had thought of ignoring it, but that would have put our kids in the middle of the fight and caused further confusion with them and I would not do that. The greater good for the sake of the kids was to just accept it. Thanks for commenting!


Comments are welcome, just keep them civil and within Catholic Charity. All comments moderated. SEE COMMENTS POLICY ABOVE.