An Overview -- What is the Society of St. Pius the Tenth (SSPX)?

 The SSPX was founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1970 to train priests to preserve "Catholic traditions," primarily the Tridentine Rite of the Mass which had been swept away in the wake of Vatican II. But is this an organization with which anyone should become involved? Is it under Rome? Is it truly Catholic in its teachings and operations? What do we really know about the Society of St. Pius the Tenth?

The Society was established as a "pious union of the faithful" (not a priestly fraternity as the SSPX claims) ad experimentum (as an experiment), by Bishop Charriere, Bishop of Lausanne, Geneva, and Fribourg, Switzerland, for a period of six years. Click here for more on this. Without permission, Lefebvre established his first seminary in Econe, Switzerland.

 Also known is that:

In the mid-70's, the Society was suppressed after an investigation by Rome, and, Lefebvre was forbidden to perform his priestly functions (also see the section Double-talk and Confusion below);
 as the six year period was not extended, the Society has been operating without a legal mandate since the mid 1970's;

• without permission Lefebvre continued to ordain priests;
• without permission Lefebvre created additional seminaries;
• over the years the Society has established many missions, chapels, and schools for the children of the laity all without papal mandate or approval;
• the Society has accumulated much property over the years and this has continued since Lefebvre's death;
• in May of 1988 Lefebvre signed a protocol to allow for the consecration of a bishop - the day after the signing Lefebvre unexpectedly rejects the protocol he signed;
• in June of 1988 and in defiance of Rome, Lefebvre consecrates four bishops - these four plus Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer (both now deceased) formerly of the diocese of Campos, Brazil, and co-consecrator with Lefebvre, all incurred excommunication;
• the Society, after the consecrations, is now clearly in schism and its patrons can no longer pretend it isn't;
• the Society, especially after Lefebvre's death, drifts more and more toward various heresies such as Jansenism, Manichaeism, and Gallicanism, in its actions and policies;
• the Society adopts rigorous and unwarranted positions with respect to women wearing trousers or pants and has required men at its retreat center in Ridgefield to wear long-sleeved shirts even in summer time;
• at one of the Society schools, girls were told that it was a mortal sin to have any lace on their underwear;
• a student at the Society high school in St. Mary's, Kansas, was kicked out of school simply because he had the picture of a girl, also a student, in his wallet although the two had only written to each other;
• in a sermon, people were told not to vote in elections and that it was wrong for women to drive cars;
• the Society tells people that a television set is a proximate occasion of mortal sin that can never be used without harm to the faith, morals, or a person's mental development;
• the Society condemns natural family planning which the Church has approved;
• the Vice-Rector (Fr. Wolfgang Goettler) of the Society's US seminary has said no one can hold public office in the U. S. and be a good Catholic;
• about 1987 the Society began to openly display an anti-American attitude - condemning the nature and form of our government;
• Masses said under the 1984 Indult, for the use of the Tridentine Rite of Mass, have been called satanic;
• children are told, without distinction, to always obey priests and nuns even if it conflicts with the proper wishes of their parents;
• Society bishops have consecrated a bishop for the diocese of Campos, Brazil without the permission of Rome - another schismatic act;
• the Society, at least since 1993, has been issuing Decrees of Nullity - annulments - in violation of Canon Law;
• the Society leadership has seen fit to associate themselves with the members of the Tridentine Rite Conference (TRC) - organizations and individuals as far ranging as the Feeneyites, who virtually deny the Church's teaching about baptism of desire, to the sede vacantists (chair is vacant), who believe, for a number of reasons, that there is no legitimate pope occupying the chair of Peter, to just plain schismatics who have rejected the authority of the Holy Father;
• many, many priests have left the Society because, as a former Society priest put it, "there's something dysfunctional there"

To further show the anti-Catholic nature of the Society, one example should suffice. In a letter written by a Fr. Terence Finnegan, one of the many priests who have left the Society, to Fr. Franz Schmidberger, then Superior General of the SSPX, he made comments which show the un-Catholic and outlandish dispositions of Bishop Williamson, the rector of the Society's seminary at Winona, Minnesota. These comments centered on the 1991 Tridentine Rite Conference (TRC) sponsored by a Fr. LeBlanc, of Arizona, and a Fr. Wickens of New Jersey.

 Under this umbrella (the TRC) many individuals, groups and organizations gathered, ostensibly, for the purpose of promoting the Tridentine Rite of the Mass. Besides the Old Catholics and the Feeneyites, this odd assortment included the (Vietnamese Archbishop) Thuc priests, the Father (now Bishop) Kelly priests (this last group originally consisted of nine priests who had been expelled from the SSPX by Lefebvre in 1983) and members of the spurious Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem (OSJ).

 It was the intention of the conference leadership to bestow a recognition, or award, posthumously on Lefebvre and they wanted Bishop Williamson to come and accept it. Williamson apparently agreed to attend for this purpose.

 According to Fr. Finnegan, he has a letter in which Archbishop Lefebvre told "Fr. Laisney (the then U. S. District superior) not to have anything to do with Fr. LeBlanc and his organization, that Fr. LeBlanc was a two-faced man; he used the words literally, 'un homme de double visage.' Yet Bishop Williamson, has been in contact with Fr. Leblanc frequently...as he himself admitted that Fr. Leblanc telephones him frequently, this Fr. LeBlanc who is a source of much evil!" Outraged at the scandal that would be given, objections from priests and laity forced Williamson to back down.

Of Fr. Scott, Fr. Finnegan, had this to say in another letter to Fr. Schmidberger. "The fact is that after this recent crisis of Faith here in America (the TRC), I have lost all confidence in Fr. Scott (District Superior after Fr. Laisney): as a Catholic, as a priest and consequently 'a fortiori' (for a stronger reason) as a District Superior."

This is the same Fr. Scott who is forever throwing out the phrase the "Social Reign of Christ the King." Yet this Fr. Scott was the one who, when the chips were down, failed to call to account Bishop Williamson for wanting to attend this ignominious conference. Fr. Finnegan makes the point well when he says that Fr. Scott "was not concerned that Our Lord Jesus Christ's rights were being violated" in this gathering of "Catholics." This is the same Fr. Scott who had accused this author of lacking fidelity to Archbishop Lefebvre because he had brought to Fr. Scott's attention, in a series of letters, Fr. Scott's own anti-Catholic attitude and that of the Society with respect to the United States and our form of government. Yet Fr. Scott hypocritically sided with the bishop in the matter of attending the TRC. When he was confronted by Fr. Finnegan, Fr. Scott told him it was none of his business.

It is also interesting to note that the leadership of the Society, i.e., Williamson and Scott, will preach against what they call the "false ecumenism" of the "conciliar church," yet they had no hesitancy, until confronted, to practice their own form of "false ecumenism" with those taking shelter under the umbrella of the TRC. The Society leadership continually exhibits a shocking tendency toward hypocrisy.

"Fr. Wickens," according to Fr. Finnegan, "is a priest who is in entire agreement with the Feeneyite error (denying baptism of desire). I have him saying this in his own handwriting. He not only accepts the Feeneyite error, he promotes it himself. Fr. Wickens is also a promoter of the false OSJ in link with the Messineos. Father Wickens is treated as an example for the seminarians (at Winona, MN) to follow."

If, by now, you are thinking that the SSPX is a group reminiscent of a Jim Jones cult, you're right. Those who have been associated with the SSPX for some time (in my case, over ten years) have reached the same conclusion. Two books, Understanding the Cults by Josh McDowell and Don Stewart and Heavenly Deception by Chris Elkins, give us the following characteristics of cults, all of which have been observed in the Society of St. Pius the Tenth to greater or lesser degrees.

Specialized Group This consists of a polarization of people around an ideal which is considered out of the main stream. For the Society, this embodies a historically false notion of 13th century Catholicism and the Tridentine Rite of the Mass. They consider this period a purer time for the Church in its relations with the "state." Comparing apples and oranges, the Society pushes this supposed ideal without explaining just how, politically, they will accomplish it.

The Only Answer Society priests have been heard to say things such as outside of the Society one is outside of the Church. They consider using any rite but the Tridentine, essentially, as the work of the devil - that "their" thoughts and ideals are the only way to be followed for a person to save his soul.

Omnipotent The Society considers itself to have knowledge others do not have and presumes to speak for God and without the blessing of the Church. The Society alone, one is told, has all the answers and is the final determiner of what is or is not morally correct.

Emotional Cult members are generally emotional, hence the SSPX plays to the natural feeling of many people for a more edifying and uplifting rite and its associated liturgies. They play to the emotional appeal the more venerable Tridentine Rite inspires in people.

Exterior Orientation As viewed by many on the outside it appears the Society is performing a worthy function for Catholic faithful - typical of cults. But the lie is put to this by the many priests and laity who have fled from the Society before and since the 1988 episcopal consecrations and even more so since Archbishop Lefebvre died.

Control It is said that within cults many tests are run to see how much control can be exerted on followers. Even small changes will be made for no apparent reason, just to see how well the leadership can control the followers. One means the Society uses is to restrict the reading material of its patrons to the point of telling them that they cannot read from patently Catholic reading material unless the Society has previously given it their blessing.

Godmen The Society's authority is self-contrived, and, as such, they presume to speak for God. They've attempted to build a facade of legitimacy through articles and sermons about what they call supplied jurisdiction. Using this ruse they twist Canon Law to the point where everything they wish to do can be done without permission of the local ordinaries or Rome because it is a matter of "necessity." Necessity - in true liberal/modernist fashion they reserve unto themselves the right to determine, finally, what is right and wrong, what is Catholic or un-Catholic.

Double-talk and Confusion The Society leadership does not shrink from saying one thing while meaning another. They speak of obedience, unity, submission, and authority to their patrons, but they would never consider placing the SSPX under obedience to Rome. We have but to remember that at another time of crisis in the Church, Pope Clement XIV, in 1773, unjustly suppressed the Jesuits. It wasn't until forty-one years later (1814) that the order was reestablished. But did the Jesuits go off and start their own seminaries and chapels? Did they refuse obedience to the Pope? As good sons of the Church, they showed their confidence in the promises of Christ, to be with His Church until the end of time, by faithfully and obediently submitting to the authority of the Pope and closing up shop.

Always Changing In cults it will usually be found that their values, precepts, rules, methods, ideas, plans, and even mores can change over time - characteristics noted by those who have fled the Society.

Strong Leadership Central leaders consider themselves unique and with a special relationship to God. We know this is true of the Society because on October 18th, 1992 Fr. Scott, SSPX District Superior in the U.S., told a meeting in Chicago that they, the Society clergy, are an elite.

Dependence Development Cult followers have it pounded into them that they must pursue and live up to cult beliefs, lifestyle and behavior - so much so is this inculcated, that, for the follower, leaving the cult becomes virtually unthinkable.

Fear of the Future Because of this dependence and the fact that the followers now believe that only the SSPX has the answers, as in other cults, followers fear being separated from the cult to the extent that they will change their own beliefs to stay with the cult. Cult members will even fight vigorously to defend their abandoning of formerly, strongly held beliefs. Those who patronize the Society know that where Peter is, there is the Church. Nevertheless, they obey the Society rather than Rome.

Spy Network That the Society uses its followers to spy on one another is now irrefutable. This was seen in the Chicago mission of the Society after the District Superior, Fr. Scott, forced out the majority of the laymen who were most instrumental in developing and maintaining this mission since 1982. Fr. Scott's replacements kept watch on, and, even followed people around the church to see what they were doing (getting a drink of water, going to the bathroom, checking the bulletin board, etc.). People have testified to the same use of informants at the Society's College and Academy (grade school/high school) in the town of St. Mary's, Kansas. As with other cults, the Society does not discourage such spying, but, rather, uses it to maintain a "Big Brother" element of fear lest someone deviate from cult thinking.

The SSPX - Catholic? Hardly! Out of loyalty to Holy Mother Church and the Papacy, Catholics have a duty to avoid this group as best they can. Anything less is an insult to Our Lord.

Link to the webpage

OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE SEMINARY

http://fsspvocations.blogspot.com/

VATICANO:VÍTIMAS DE ABUSOS SEXUAIS MANIFESTAM-SE

A 31 de Outubro

As vítimas de abusos sexuais por parte de sacerdotes vão-se manifestar em frente ao Vaticano no próximo dia 31 de Outubro, anunciou este sábado o porta-voz do Instituto António Provolo para crianças com deficiência.

“Será uma manifestação internacional à frente do Vaticano para denunciar, mais uma vez, os numerosos abusos que os menores sofreram por parte de sacerdotes e que ainda não tinham sido conhecidos”, declarou Marco Lodo Rizzini.

Vários empregados do Intituto Católico António Provolo de Verona foram acusados de ter abusado sexualmente de 67 crianças na década de 1950 e em 1984. Para Marco Lodo Rizinni, “a hora de se saber a verdade chegou. Há pessoas cuja vida foi literalmente detruída. Há quem tenha vivido 50 anos com um peso enorme pelo que sofreram”.

Entretanto, várias associações norte-americanas de vítimas de abusos sexuais cometidos por membros da Igreja já convidaram os seus associados a participar na manifestação.

http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/ultima-hora/vaticano-vitimas-de-abusos-sexuais-manifestam-se

CORREIO DA MANHÃ 25-09-2010

PRÊTRE UKRAINIEN EXCOMMUNGUÉ PAR ROME

Lisez l´histoire...

L'ABBÉ LAGUÉRIE ATTAQUE MGR TISSIER DE MALLERAIS

Read the story...

MGR WILLIAMSON ET RAMON ANGLÉS

Mgr Williamson et l’abbé Ramon Anglès ont aidé les ralliés à discréditer la FSSPX aux États-Unis

Comment Mgr Williamson, l’évêque à la Rose de la FSSPX, et son protégé l’abbé Ramon Anglès ont aidé les ralliés à discréditer la FSSPX aux États-Unis : déjà des provocations destinées à compromettre la FSSPX ? « Anglès GO HOME » placardé sur les portes des chapelles de la FSSPX dans le Kansas.

 L’abbé Anglès est actuellement à Dublin, supérieur de District de la FSSPX pour l’Irlande, et membre du Chapitre général de la FSSPX. Au printemps 2006, Mgr Williamson en faisait sa promotion, comme son candidat « idéal » au poste de supérieur général de la FSSPX, avant les élections de juillet 2006.

En juin 2008, VM a révélé que l’abbé Anglès a interdit de sacrements une paroissienne qui avait porté secours à l’abbé Babinet (FSSPX). Le présent VM vise à faire connaître aux catholiques traditionnels français et européens les responsabilités de Mgr Williamson et de son adjoint l’abbé Ramon Anglès dans le profond discrédit actuel de la Fraternité Saint Pie X aux États-Unis. "Mais l’abbé Anglès pousse la critique plus loin. Il semble que le bon gouvernement trouve sa réalisation dans la dictature antisémite de l’Allemagne Nazie. Dans une aberrante inversion du bien et du mal, le meurtrier des masses, l’adorateur du diable, Adolf Hitler est métamorphosé en un type de Roi Chrétien. L’abbé Anglès a un appartement rempli d’attirail Nazi qu’il montre à des garçons favorisés. Il leur montre les dagues de cérémonie portées par les officiers du Troisième Reich. Il est fier de la Mercedes de collection que possède sa famille, qui fut un jour la propriété d’Adolf Hitler. Un étudiant de l’académie fut invité par l’abbé Anglès il y a deux ans. Dans sa chambre du campus, Anglès lui offrit une pizza et lui montra un film de propagande Nazie, Le Triomphe de la Volonté. Il refit passer le film, s’arrêtant à certains moments, commentant avec ferveur et lisant la pile de transcriptions des discours d' Hitler qu’il avait à côté de lui. Leni Riefenstahl, la productrice du film et chef de la propagande du Troisième Reich vit encore et réside en Amérique du Sud. L’abbé Anglès lui rend souvent visite (il en parle à ses étudiants), et se vante de cette intimité." Thomas W. Cage.

Tout catholique sensé, doit désormais se poser clairement les questions : .1) Qui est le Britannique ex(?)-Anglican, fils d’un pasteur Anglican, Richard Nelson Williamson ? .2) D’où sort-il ? .3) Pourquoi a-t-il rejoint le séminaire d’Écône en 1972 ? Pourquoi Mgr Fellay n’a-t-il toujours pas expulsé hors de la FSSPX, comme le lui intiment les lois de l’Église, l’ancien Anglican, Mgr. Williamson -‘Cunctator’à la Rose ? Pourquoi n’a-t-il pas expulsé son suppôt, l’abbé Anglès ?

•[1] Dossier Ecclesia Dei Fidelity (en français) – 1992 – Télécharger en PDF

•ANNEXE A - FIDELITY ARTICLE – La Fraternité Saint Pie X est malade (l’article qui mit le feu aux poudres, Oct 1992) par Thomas W. Case (Octobre 1992)

•ANNEXE B - LETTERS -- Fidelity Magazine -- December, 1992 - Ces lettres ont été écrites en réponse à l’article de Fidelity publié en Octobre 1992 sous le titre "La Fraternité St. Pie X tombe malade." Parmi ces lettres se trouvent les réponses des abbés Ramon Anglès, Principal du Collège et de l’Académie Sainte Marie et Peter Scott, Supérieur du District des États-Unis pour la Fraternité St. Pie X. Entre Mr Case et d’autres fidèles répondent point par point à ces lettres, en apportant des faits supplémentaires.

Publication du 26 février 2009

http://www.virgo-maria.org/D-Mgr-Williamson-leurre/index_mgr_williamson_leurre.htm

CARDEAL DE MADRID APELA À GREVE GERAL

Espanha: Manifestações contra a crise

Igreja apoia greve geral

O cardeal de Madrid, António María Rouco Varela, fez ontem um apelo aos católicos para que se juntem à greve geral do próximo dia 29. A fim de poderem tornar-se bem visíveis entre a multidão, sugeriu que ostentem "um qualquer distintivo de cor branca".

"É o momento de nos implicarmos na política", afirma o arcebispo num documento firmado pelo Conselho de Laicos, que dirige. A ideia é conseguir "uma regeneração democrática", pois, frisa o prelado, vencer a crise implica "regressar ao caminho que se seguia antes da crise".

O Conselho de Laicos assegurou, em nota de clarificação, que o comunicado não espelha a posição de Rouco Varela nem do arcebispado, e sim a "dos laicos agrupados".

No entanto, dado o passado de críticas ao governo de José Rodríguez Zapatero, nomeadamente aquando da liberalização do aborto, poucos acreditam que o cardeal não seja o mentor da iniciativa.

CORREIO DA MANHÃ 25-09-2010

Por:F. J. Gonçalves

http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/internacional/mundo/igreja-apoia-greve-geral

LES NEUF DISSIDENTS AMÉRICANS

Lisez toute l'histoire ici...

FÁTIMA APPARITIONS: THE FILM

http://www.the13thday.com/

ORDINATION AND SAME SEX ATTRACTION

Every bishop possesses the sacred duty of discerning the suitability of candidates for holy orders. St. Paul’s advice to Timothy is fitting for all bishops, especially today: “Do not lay hands too readily on anyone” (1 Tim. 5: 22). The church’s life and the way it manifests itself as the sacrament of salvation for the entire world leans inextricably on the shoulders of her priests. The supernatural “health,” one could say, of the church depends heavily on the fitness of candidates for ordination.

In the aftermath of the scandal of clerical sexual abuse of minors, the church and society have focused partly on the role of homosexuality. The question has arisen as to whether or not it is advisable for a bishop to admit a man with predominantly homosexual tendencies, or what some call “same sex attraction” (S.S.A.), to the seminary and/or present him for holy orders.

Thanks to a recent Circular Letter in 1997 from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments concerning the suitability of candidates for holy orders, some guidance and assistance from the Holy See have already been given in order to tackle the thorny and difficult issue of suitability.

The letter says that a vocation is based on “a moral certitude that is founded upon positive reasons regarding the suitability of the candidate.” Next, it mentions the fundamental reason not to admit a candidate to holy orders. The document says: “Admission may not take place if there exists a prudent doubt regarding the candidate’s suitability (Canon 1052 §3 with Canon 1030). By ‘prudent doubt’ is meant a doubt founded upon facts that are objective and duly verified.” Later, the congregation advises that it would seem “more appropriate to dismiss a doubtful candidate” than to lament the sadness and scandal of a cleric abandoning the ministry.

In other words, the congregation seems to suggest that even if there is only a “prudent doubt,” based on objective facts, about the suitability of any candidate, the best and safest course of action is not to admit him to holy orders. The church does not ask for certitude that a man does not have a vocation but simply that a doubt has arisen through a prudent examination of evidence. Even though there may be a lack of certitude but a definite prudent doubt, a proper ecclesiastical authority should judge the candidate to be unsuitable.

What about a candidate with S.S.A.? Does it introduce a prudent doubt about suitability resulting in not admitting an applicant to a formation program or not issuing the call to holy orders?

In order to determine the existence of a “prudent doubt,” it would be helpful to clarify the meaning of the term “homosexuality.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes it as “an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex.” Some may experience a wide range of intensity or different types of attractions to persons of the same sex, as some experts propose. Although, in the context of determining suitability for ordination, it would seem appropriate to limit the definition of the term “homosexuality” to describe those with exclusive or predominant tendencies, because a “prudent doubt” can be better verified objectively based on the clear presence of the disorder. With this clear information, a bishop can then make his decision concerning suitability.

Some have described S.S.A. as a sexual “orientation.” At first glance, this description may seem to have some merit. The sexual attraction of someone with S.S.A. is “toward” persons of the same sex, and this “tending toward” could easily be described as an “orientation.” However, to classify homosexuality as an “orientation” may obfuscate the serious disorder that exists and the distortion that has been introduced into a biblically inspired Christian anthropology.

Genesis speaks of God creating an image of himself by making man “male and female.” In this dual and complementary relationship of persons, man finds within himself or can, in a certain sense, “read” in his body and in the body of a person of the opposite sex, a tendency to “leave his father and mother” and “cling” to the other (Gen. 2: 24). The sexual orientation, the “tending toward” another of the opposite sex, is “written” in man’s created constitution. It is part of what Pope John Paul II calls the “nuptial meaning of the body.” Any other tendency to “cling” to another (be it to persons of the same sex, children, beasts, objects) is an aberration of the divine economy in which God reveals himself by creating an image of himself in the orientation of male to female and female to male.

The “orientation” of those who have another attraction, other than the divinely constituted one, is not a true “orientation.” It would be better described as a “disorientation.” It is fundamentally flawed in its disordered attraction because it can never “image” God and never contribute to the good of the person or society. This is why the Catholic Church teaches that the disorientation of homosexuality is “objectively disordered.” Homosexuality may be an inclination, tendency or condition but it is fundamentally “dis-orienting” in that it tends toward a corrupt end. The attraction as such is not a sin. Only when one chooses to pursue the attraction in thought or deed does the disordered inclination become a disordered, and therefore sinful, choice.

Nevertheless, homosexual tendencies are aberrations that can and should be addressed by both the individual and by competent experts with the aid of behavioral sciences as well as by spiritual means, including prayer, the sacraments and spiritual direction. According to some experts, S.S.A. can be treated and even prevented with some degree of success. But does it introduce a “prudent doubt” when determining suitability for ordination?

There are a number of significant negative aspects to S.S.A. that contribute to a “prudent doubt” with regard to the suitability of a candidate for holy orders.

First and foremost among them is the possible simultaneous manifestation of other serious problems such as substance abuse, sexual addiction and depression. With more than one serious disorder, a candidate may find it difficult to respond to the demands of formation, and the seminary or religious house may struggle to accommodate the extra needs involved in the healing process of the individual.

Likewise, there is an increased possibility that persons with S.S.A. may be more familiar with certain patterns and techniques of deception and repression, either conscious or subconscious, which were learned in trying to deal with their tendencies in a largely heterosexual environment. After years of hiding or of being confused about their abnormal attractions, it is possible that duplicitous or pretentious behaviors could appear. These kinds of personal defects make the moral formation of the candidate much more difficult and can negatively affect the formation of the other candidates.

Another aspect that would contribute to a “prudent doubt” concerning a candidate with S.S.A. is a question about his adherence to church teaching. There are many men and women with S.S.A. who uphold and defend the church’s teaching on homosexuality. But if someone with S.S.A. is insecure about dealing straightforwardly with his disordered attractions or has some doubts about their disordered character, he may tend to possess a distorted and erroneous view of human sexuality. Thus, there exists the risk that such an individual will struggle with or even deny the clear teaching of the church regarding his disordered inclinations and any acts that might flow from these tendencies.

Part of the distortion of S.S.A. is the tendency to view the other person of the same sex as a possible sexual “partner” or even to reduce the other (also a temptation for heterosexuals) to a sexual object. In such a clearly male environment as the seminary and the priesthood, the temptation is ever-present for those with the disorder. This temptation could present very difficult circumstances and the overwhelming presentation of the object of their attraction (men), which is naturally part of an all-male and intensely close community, could make their efforts to live chastely or to be healed of their disorder very difficult.

Furthermore, as has been the unfortunate experience in some seminaries and dioceses, cliques may form based on the disordered attractions. This could hamper the healing process that might be possible for some, because the effeminate affective manners and a certain “acceptability” of the disorder are often promoted in such groups. Also these cliques can confuse young heterosexual men in the growth of their understanding of manhood and in developing skills and virtues to live a celibate life, because they can often see modeled in members of these cliques a disordered view of human sexuality and of proper masculine behavior.

Another question for determining suitability for a candidate with S.S.A. is whether the individual can live celibacy. Celibacy is a vocational choice to which one is bound by a vow or promise to live chastely for the sake of the kingdom of God by foregoing the good of marriage and family life. It is a sign of one’s identification with Christ, one’s availability for service to the church and of the spousal union between Christ and the church in the kingdom of God.

People with homosexual tendencies can live certain aspects of celibacy, but their commitment is significantly different from that of heterosexuals because it compromises two fundamental dimensions of celibacy.

On the one hand, celibacy involves a sacrifice of a good for a greater good. It sacrifices ordered and good inclinations toward spouse and family for the sake of the kingdom. For someone with S.S.A., an act of binding oneself by a vow or promise to abstain from something that one is already bound to avoid by the natural law (attractions toward someone of the same sex) seems superfluous. To avoid doing something (heterosexual acts) that one does not have an inclination to do is not a sacrifice. The struggle to live chastely may be extremely difficult for someone with homosexual tendencies, and these struggles would truly be meritorious and virtuous as acts of chastity, but not necessarily of celibacy.

Likewise, the spousal dimension of celibacy seems unclear for those with S.S.A.. Celibacy is a way of living the spousal character of Christ’s relationship with his bride, the church. Through the celibate life, the priest redirects his sexual attraction to the opposite sex toward another “body,” the church, which is a “bride” in a complementary spousal relationship. He exercises a spiritual fatherhood and lives a supernatural spousal relationship as a sign to the church of Christ’s love for her. Someone afflicted with S.S.A. cannot redirect his inclination toward a complementary “other” in a spousal relationship, because homosexuality has disordered his sexual attraction toward the opposite sex. It then becomes difficult to be genuinely a sign of Christ’s spousal love for the church.

If it can be said that a man with homosexual tendencies can live a celibate life, at the very least it is lacking some important elements due to S.S.A., and it could be another reason to conclude that there exists a prudent doubt as to his suitability for holy orders.

It would seem that if there are firmly established facts, both from an objective psychological evaluation and an examination in the external forum of past and present behavior and choices, that a man does indeed suffer from S.S.A. as an “exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” (Catechism, No. 2357), then he should not be admitted to holy orders, and his presence in the seminary would not only give him false hope but it may, in fact, hinder the needed therapy and healing that might come from appropriate psychological and spiritual care. It may be that a man could be healed of such a disorder and then he could be considered for admission to the seminary and possibly to Holy Orders, but not while being afflicted with the disorder.

The Pauline exhortation not to “lay hands too readily on anyone” is a heavy responsibility for any bishop; but if a candidate’s suitability is scrutinized with prudence, the act of “laying on of hands” will bear abundant fruit in the lives of those who will be touched by the ministry of a priest.

The Rev. Andrew R. Baker, a priest of the Diocese of Allentown, Pa., is on the staff of the Congregation for Bishops in Rome.

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2513

 

Andrew R. Baker | SEPTEMBER 30, 2002

THE GOOD SHEPHERD INSTITUTE: INTERVIEW WITH FATHER DE TANOUARN

Interview with Father de Tanoüarn the Good Shepherd Institute

The Good Shepherd Institute was created by the Holy See on the feast of The Nativity of Our Lady (Sept. 8th) as a traditional society of apostolic life. When it was founded less than two months ago, it began with five former French SSPX priests who had left or been expelled from the Society. It now claims at least nine seminarians from several countries with many others, including many priests, showing interest in taking up with the newly created institute. Although it is headquartered in France, the GSI is not in any way consigned to any geographic boundaries, and is already garnering interest many other areas around the globe.

According to their official charge, the GSI is authorized to administer any and all traditional sacraments. The churches under its control will be given official “parish” status, although this can only be done with the express permission of the local bishop. Also of note, not only are they permitted to critically analyze the documents of the Second Vatican Council, but they have a specific mandate - in fact a duty - to do so.

The creation of the institute took most by surprise, save for those few whom had managed to catch wind of it beforehand, but were sworn to secrecy.

When the “French Connection” and I were discussing the matter, he informed me that he was sure that he could arrange an exclusive with one of these priests. I told him I would put some questions together. For this interview however, being that he is the one on the scene in France and being that he is the one who has built a rapport with these priests, I insisted that in addition to my questions he should ask a few as well. French Connection agreed.

Hence we are blessed to have as our guest, Father Guillaume de Tanoüarn. In addition to being one of the “Bordeaux 5”, Father de Tanoüarn is the author of "Vatican II et l'Evangile" (Vatican II and the Gospel) and "L'Evidence Chrétienne" (Christian Obviousness). He is also founder of the Saint Paul center in Paris.

Please be mindful when reading the interview that it had to be translated into French and the answers had to be translated from French into English.

Enjoy.

Father, you’re one of the five former SSPX priest who founded the Good Shepherd Institute. How did this happen? And who initiated the contact with Rome?

Well, we began as a group of 5 priests who already knew each other. The five included Fr. Héry – he and I were in seminary at the same time, where we had lengthy and deep discussions. Then there is Fr. Philippe Laguerie, who as my first superior I was under his orders for 7 years. Then there is Fr. Aulagnier, with whom I wrote the book “La Tradition sans peur” (Tradition Without Fear), in which he fully confides. Incidentally the book was prefaced by Fr. Laguerie. Then there is Fr. Forestier, who although I’ve known for shorter period of time because he is younger, we appreciate each other pretty much.

So we were a group of 5 priests, bound by sacerdotal friendship. It’s hard to say where the idea came from. It just came and grew.

Now, if you mean the chronology of how the Good Shepherd Institute was erected, I must mention the actions of Fr. Barthe who negotiated with Cardinal Hoyos. The result was an act of adhesion, which give us the right to constructive criticism toward the Second Vatican Council (“constructive”, as opposed to “polemical”) showing full respect for those involved. This in fact was always the position of Archbishop Lefebvre, who wanted to read the Council of Vatican II in the light of Catholic Tradition.

Paradoxically, Cardinal Ricard, the Archbishop of Bordeaux, also played a role by urging Fr. Laguerie to regularize his situation after he was ousted from the SSPX.

And we shall not forget the very nature of things: It was not possible to remain suspended for great a period of time. A Catholic heart can’t stand it too long. We found in Rome warm understanding, pastoral charity, and also great diplomatic skills by Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos.

I think that traditionalists can’t remain separated from Rome unless they want it so - either because they fear the episcopates or because they are eager to remain aloof, spiritually speaking.

You are answerable to the Ecclesia Dei commission – which has been in existence since 1988 – Why did you wait until 2006 to join up?

In 1988 and in the years that followed, the spirit in Rome was totally different than what it is today. In 1988, with the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta, Pope John Paul II (bene volens male volens) set an attitude of tolerance toward traditionalists. They were allowed into the institutional Church, but only through the back door.

The FSSP was created at that time as a sort of “decontamination chamber” to help traditionalists transition toward the Church of Vatican II. Soon enough, it was clear the maneuver would not work - with most FSSP priests refusing this ecclesial prospect and not willing to play such a role. Many tensions resulted, such as the nomination of a non-elected superior in 2000.

Step by step, by the end of the reign of John Paul II, the mindset changed. The liturgical question became important, which had been considered insignificant until then. There was an encyclical (Ecclesia de Eucharistia) in 2003 and a pastoral letter (Redemptionis Sacramentum) in 2004. At first, the idea was to improve the way the Pauline Mass is celebrated – but it evolved and the idea of a liberalization or Tridentine Mass emerged.

Today, the election of Benedict XVI confirms this. The pope wishes a liberalization of the traditional rite – and even though the new motu proprio hasn’t been published yet, the Good Shepherd Institute benefits from that freedom. We’re no longer second class Catholics whose fantasies are merely tolerated – we’re the custodians of a liturgical treasure which benefits the entire Church by manifesting the glory of Her divine Spouse.

So there’s a new state of mind in Rome, and you become part of the Ecclesia Dei circle of influence. What’s you’re specific charisma there?

We’re not the fifth wheel of the Ecclesia Dei car, or the thirteenth wheel if you wish, as thirteen groups are answerable to that commission, the Good Shepherd Institute being the youngest one. We’re not serving a “circle of influence”; we’re fully in the Roman Catholic Church, which we wish to serve at a difficult time in Her history. We have a double specificity: From a pastoral point of view, and according to the name we choose for our Institute, we want to open personal parishes -traditional personal parishes - in France and elsewhere. Personal parishes are not much of a problem in the USA, but in Europe they are a new concept – a concept that raises deliberate hostility from French bishops.

Also, we want to contribute – as much as we are able – to theological work and aide in renewing Catholic intelligence. The time has come to definitively quit religious ideologies which were imposed in the sixties. Our age is one of uncertainty and fear, and we want to respond to this by proposing the traditional Roman Catholic forms of liturgy and theology.

You mention ‘religious ideologies’ – would you define this?

For example the ideas which fall under what the philosopher Jacques Maritain called “the “temporalization” of God’s kingdom” – in other words, an unhealthy mixture consisting of politics and religion, but also (and more subtly) those theologies which mistake therapy for spirituality or self development for eternal salvation. Faced with these tendencies, we feel it’s essential to show in the liturgy “God felt by the heart” as Pascal (the 17th century philosopher) said. We want to show, without any fear, the power of seduction the Catholic Faith has when it is in all of its splendor, and we want to appeal to everyone’s responsibility toward the truth of its destiny.

Today cultural challenges won’t be met unless Catholics stop considering Vatican II as the new tables of the law, and enthusiastically rediscover the richness of the great Roman Catholic Tradition.

How will you expand? You need altars, you need priests. What about bishops?

For the time being, the GSI has the Saint-Eloi church in the center of Bordeaux, where our headquarters are located. It’s a 13th century church, a magnificent building that had been abandoned, but was restored by a group led by Father Laguérie.

We have a seminary in Courtalain, 150 kilometers (93 miles) away from Paris, which was just opened. The seminary hosts 7 first year seminarians; one is a Pole, one is a Mexican, and one is Brazilian, the others are French.

In Paris, where I am, we opened a cultural center with courses and conferences that reach outside of the traditionalist circles. 300 people attend Mass here on an average Sunday.

Also, we opened a house in Rome (a “procuracy” is the technical name) with 4 students. Two are seminarians and two are priests. We’ve got contacts in Latin America – where some 10 priests around Fr Rafael Navas are on the verge of joining the GSI. We’ve also got some other contacts, here and there.

Last but not least, we’ll have three ordinations very soon.

Regarding France, I’m optimistic despite the bishops here. They are often hostile and seem to be laid back in the eighties, as if they didn’t take into account the evolutions of the Universal Church. But I’m optimistic, for a simple reason: demography. There are more churches than priests in France, and the ratio isn’t getting any better. Also, I feel the bishops will finally follow the pope’s will - even those who don’t hide their John Paul II nostalgia.

Some think (or fear) that the Good Shepherd Institute was erected in order to destabilize the SSPX.

We don’t intend to compete with the SSPX. The SSPX has created a stronghold to stay within until the crisis is over. That was their angle. Ours is different. We put ourselves at the pope’s disposal, without any delay, which is a less comfortable position, but a more exciting one. We don’t seek confrontation with the SSPX, but we wish to debate truly, in order to elaborate theological answers following Vatican II.

That’s the reason we’re organizing a large meeting in Paris on November 20, under the motto ‘Catholic Tradition – our Common Good’. The SSPX was at the top of our invitation list, we wanted them to take part in the debates. SSPX superiors decided they couldn’t accept, but I’m confident things will change with the passing of time – whatever personal wounds this attitude may conceal.

This is no time for division. All those who sincerely want to see traditional liturgy and traditional theology returned to the faithful must unite - as Catholic Tradition really is our common good.

Thank you Father for answering our questions. Is there anything you would like to add ?

Yes – I understand some members of your forum doubt the Good Shepherd Institute will succeed, or that it will even remain traditional. As you know: “By their fruits you shall know them”. I tell your readers: ‘Wait and see’. Would you agree on another interview, say by next year? By this time we’ll be able to draw a first appraisal of the Good Shepherd Institute.

http://www.angelqueen.org/

By John Grasmeier and the French Connection

Angelqueen.org

November, 2006

MISSA DA FSSPX EM PORTUGAL

Locais e horários das missas

RATZINGER ABRE-SE À EXTREMA DIREITA

Leia o que diz o Diário Ateísta...

BANCO DO VATICANO SOB SUSPEITA

Investigação: Alegada violação de normativa europeia

Banco do Vaticano está sob suspeita

O Instituto para as Obras Religiosas, mais conhecido como Banco do Vaticano, volta a estar sob suspeita, com o seu presidente, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, e o director-geral, Paolo Cipriani, a serem investigados pelo Ministério Público de Roma por alegada violação de uma normativa europeia adoptada em 2007 para evitar lavagem de dinheiro.

Numa medida preventiva enquanto decorre a investigação, a magistrada Maria Teresa Covatta, a pedido dos procuradores públicos Nello Rossi e Stefano Rocco Fava, mandou congelar 23 milhões de euros depositados no Banco do Vaticano. Segundo os investigadores, o Instituto para as Obras Religiosas pretendia transferir 20 milhões de euros da conta que foi congelada para a sucursal de Frankfurt, Alemanha, do banco norte-americano JP Morgan, e mais três milhões de euros para o Banco del Fucino, sem comunicar às autoridades italianas os nomes dos clientes, como exige na Itália o artigo 55 do decreto 231, que faz eco da normativa europeia.

Foi esta omissão – punida com uma pena até três anos de prisão e uma multa que pode atingir os 50 mil euros – que colocou Tedeschi e Cipriani sob investigação.

Esta não é a primeira vez que o Banco do Vaticano está sob suspeita. Em 1982, esteve envolvido na declaração fraudulenta da bancarrota do Banco Ambrosiano e em 2009 o jornalista Gianluigi Nuzzi denunciou no seu livro ‘Vaticano S.A.’ que o banco lavava dinheiro da máfia.

SANTA SÉ "ESTUPEFACTA"

A Santa Sé não tardou a reagir à investigação iniciada pelo Ministério Público de Roma ao presidente e ao director-geral do Instituto das Obras Religiosas (IOR), manifestando a sua "perplexidade e estupefacção" pela iniciativa e sublinhando que mantém a máxima confiança naqueles dois responsáveis da instituição. "É conhecida a nossa clara vontade de actuar com plena transparência no que respeita às actuações financeiras do IOR. Tal implica o cumprimento de todos os trâmites destinados a prevenir o terrorismo e a lavagem de capitais", afirma num comunicado, no qual adianta que os dados informativos necessários sobre a operação em causa estão já disponíveis no departamento do Banco da Itália competente para os receber.

CORREIO DA MANHÃ 22-09-2010

Por:Sabrina Hassanali com agências

PRESIDENTE DO BANCO DO VATICANO INVESTIGADO

Violação de nova lei contra lavagem de dinheiro

O presidente do banco do Vaticano IOR (Instituto das Obras Religiosas), Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, está a ser investigado pelo Ministério Público de Roma por violação de uma nova lei contra a lavagem de dinheiro.

A investigação, que também envolve um outro responsável do IOR, já levou ao congelamento preventivo pela polícia financeira de 23 milhões de euros do IOR depositados num outro banco, precisou a agência italiana ANSA citando fontes judiciais.

Os dois homens são suspeitos de não terem respeitado uma clausula de uma nova legislação italiana anti-branqueamento de 2007 que tornou obrigatória a menção do mandatário de qualquer operação financeira bem como o objectivo e a natureza da mesma.

Em Junho, o jornal ‘La Repubblica’ tinha afirmado que o banco era suspeito de estar envolvido em operações de branqueamento de dinheiro e que uma investigação tinha sido aberta pelo ministério público de Roma.

O IOR - que gere as contas das ordens religiosas e de associações católicas - é uma estrutura que beneficia da extra-territorialidade concedida ao Estado pontifical e por isso não tem de respeitar as normas financeiras em vigor para os estabelecimentos italianos.

Segundo o ‘La Repubblica’, a justiça tinha descoberto que o banco geria contas em estabelecimentos italianos sem nome de titular e que eram identificadas apenas com a sigla IOR.

Por uma das contas, descoberta em 2004, transitaram "cerca de 180 milhões de euros" em dois anos, referia o jornal.

"A hipótese dos investigadores é que pessoas com residência fiscal em Itália utilizam o IOR como ‘guarda-chuva’ para esconder diferentes delitos, como a fraude ou a evasão fiscal", precisava o jornal.

Há cerca de um ano, o IOR mudou de patrão com a nomeação para o posto de presidente de Etorre Gotti Tedeschi, representante em Itália do grupo espanhol Santander, para substituir Ângelo Caloia, Segundo os media, Tedeschi, especialista de ética da finanças, foi escolhido para repor a ordem das contas do IOR.

O Instituto ocupou as primeiras páginas dos jornais com a falência em 1981 do banco italiano privado Banco Ambrosiano, do qual o IOR era o principal acionista.

CORREIO DA MANHÃ 21-09-2010