The business of enemies
St. Peter's Church - the graffiti is visible on the grey wallSt. Peter's Church - the graffiti is visible on the grey wallThe Prophetic Aspect of Religious life.
This conference was given on the occasion of the Religious Profession of Brother Francisco Maria of the Hidden jesus, in Christchurch on the Feast of St Clement Mary Hofbauer, 15th March 2025. The celebrant was Father Martin Mary, F.SS.R.
Comments
Unfortunately, these militant SSPX revolutionaries don't recognize any churches other than their own chapels as "Catholic churches". Their acts reveal thems as radical separatists who are in schism de facto, if not de jure.
I would expect that Bishop Fellay will distance himself from such hooliganism. What about the other SSPX leaders?
The picture above is of course meaningless since the graffitti has as they say been removed there is no evidence that it was ever there. I am not saying that it wasnt thee or the person is lying simply that the picture proves nothing.
Damian Bath
Agreed, I would not think a priest of the SSPX had written the graffiti - perhaps they did not know it would be there when they arrived - but a member of the faithful... I have no doubt believing. I could name 20 off the top of my head who I know myself and who would do so with the greatest pleasure.
In like manner I have the same doubts as yourself that the President of Una Voce in the city would tell such lies. Una Voce is hardly anti-SSPX?
If this News is true, I am outraged by what I have read.
Silence is better than provocation, dialogue is better than violence.
With All Respect
A.B.
I wonder if you are as indignant about the calumnies that have been heaped upon the FSSP by militant SSPX people?
Also note that graffiti is, sadly, incredibly common here in Guadalajara. The people who did it (SSPXers or not) probably didn't think much of it, especially since it was done on the wall in front of the Church and not on the Church wall itself.
If the SSPX supporters took as much care to ascertain the facts about what our Holy Father did or didn't say, do or didn't do, as they are taking to ascertain the facts about the Mexican incident, maybe you'd be back in the Church where you belong.
Catherine
Let those listen who have ears to hear ...
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,675163-2,00.html
Sean
I sent the information to the US District and their reply was as above. I also sent it to the SA District and the response to Mexico is addressed to the SA District. The contact link for the mother house in Switzerland was not working so I was unable to send it to them.
Anyway, their said excuse...
SSPX-FSSP MEXICO INCIDENT: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
http://www.sspx.org/miscellaneous/sspx_fssp_mexico_incident.htm
The hubris of these people is breathtaking.
Here's more of what happened:
* The SSPX folks prayed a rosary outside the Church. They left before the Consecration.
* A woman at the church closed the doors, presumably to keep out the sound of the people praying the rosary. Someone else inside the church then opened the doors.
* Persons not associated with the SSPX sprayed graffiti on the church.
* Una Voce Mexico has a history of spreading false reporst about the SSPX.
The update seems to acknowledge that they did the protest but they justify it in their minds because the FSSP 'supports' false ecumenism, even if the priest did not. Such nonsense. I pray Bishop Fellay comes down on all involved - those in Mexico and those in the US who are giving tacit approval of this.
"February 7, 2010
During the month of January, the association, "Christ the King Crusade," organized a prayer vigil to include the recitation of the Holy Rosary at various churches in Guadalajara, Mexico.
These gatherings were in response to an understanding that those churches were conducting ecumenical services in the spirit of the new ecumenism introduced in the Catholic Church starting with Vatican II. The Society of St. Pius X has always been opposed to this new ecumenism.
On Wednesday, January 20, 2010, a priest and faithful of the Society of St. Pius X participated in the prayer vigil at St. Peter the Apostle Chapel. Following the vigil there were rumored acts of violence committed by SSPX members and reports of vandalism against the church property. Violence and vandalism are far removed from the spirit of the SSPX and must be condemned.
An investigation is under way to determine the facts. At this point, it appears that there were no acts of violence."
As a result, I tried to pull up their original response and it seems it has been completely pulled from the web now.
You are most certainly correct. I think the point is that the SSPX is still trying to get their own story together. My hunch is that the initial story posted on their website was not authorized by higher ups - or others higher got wind of it and came down on them. First they delay a response - wasn't it about 10 days after this event happened before it made it to blogs? It would seem that maybe they knew about it themselves during this time. Maybe not though - so we'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But the Mexican priests knew, their Chapel knew, and possibly their District knew by then. My first email response from the SSPX (after I first read the story) acknowledged they knew of the storu and were investigating it but they already seemed to be denying the story and the details, even if in a vague manner. Next, up - they post a response from a priest (from the Mexican District? Not the Chapel involved?) and he seemd to deny the events. However below his response was the resposne from a priest from the Chapel. That response was evasive in details. It seemed to admit, yet not admit. Again, it did ot lie, but it was evasive. It made it hard to tell what exactly happened, yet it did seem more likely that the circulating story was indeed true. That was all that initially went up on the website when Ifirst saw it. Later the North American District added their 2 cents. Their comments basically admitted what happened but excused it. I sent the blog links, detailed comments and the SSPX links all over the SSPX to all headquarters and even seminaries to try to get this to higher ups. Since then I received an email response from one seminary. I won't reveal their comments but to say they had not heard the story but found the details they read unsettling. Next up, the story is pulled from the front page of the NA District website but still accessable by URL. Later, I received the last email which appears to be backing down a little. Now the URL for their initial response no longer works. I don't know if we will ever see a complete public response. They may just try to handle this privately and let the story die down. With the elapsed time since this began, it would seem that that is what they are hoping for.