Monday, March 26, 2018

What’s going on at the FSSPX?

(click images to enlarge)

A Novus Ordo diocesan priest oversees the exchange of vows 
while the SSPX priest stands to the side and watches.

“Thus, we find ourselves in a case of necessity.... This is why we are convinced that, by the act of these consecrations today, we are obeying... the call of God.” — Abp. Marcel Lefebvre in sermon given at  the episcopal consecrations of June 30, 1988.

Quoted in Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican, 2nd ed., Fr. Francois Laisney, (Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1999), pp. 118-19.

Last month on February 10, 2018, a couple from the FSSPX community of St. Raphael’s in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada were wed by a Novus Ordo priest, Fr. Kelly Wilson.  This wedding didn’t take place at St. Raphael’s, instead it happened in Fr. Wilson’s diocesan church of St. Augustine of Canterbury in Brandon, Manitoba, Canada.  After the exchange of vows, Fr. Richard Vachon, who had witnessed all this go down, proceeded to offer a nuptial mass (Tridentine Mass — 1962) in the Novus Ordo St. Augustine’s.  According to the Remnant Newspaper,
“The couple preferred the church of St. Augustine for the ceremony, and Fr. Vachon reportedly indicated to them that since it is the couple who are the ministers of the sacrament of marriage, it doesn’t matter which priest officiated.”  

This leads to all sorts of questions.  First off, is Fr. Kelly Wilson a valid priest?  If so, is the Novus Ordo Missae valid?  If so, since communion is given in the hand and particles of the host fall on the ground, did not — the bride, groom, bridesmaids, groomsmen, priests, and guests — all those present walk on Christ?

What if the bride and groom tire of each other and decide to get an annulment?  Will they go to the diocese where annulments are given out for fogging a mirror?  Or will they go to the SSPX which claims a right they do not have under a “state of necessity” to grant annulments?

The answer to all these questions is dependent on whom in the SSPX you ask them to and how well the talks with Modernist Rome are going at the moment.  Sometimes they say, ‘yes, it’s doubtful’ other times, ‘no, it’s valid’.  None of this should be surprising as the FSSPX runs hot and cold.  Perhaps, Bp. Bernard Fellay can clarify as to what SSPX’s policy is regarding marriage and their agreement with Modernist Rome?

“[It’s] not a trap, not a bad, hidden trick”

(From 1 minute 12 seconds to 16 minutes 40 seconds; Bp. Fellay speaks on marriage and the Vatican granting them the privilege to perform weddings provided they meet certain conditions; Letter can be read by clicking here.)

St. Raphael’s Priory of the SSPX in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada was so proud of the Novus Ordoized - Extraordinary Form wedding that they published a photo of the married couple standing beside the Novus Ordo presider and SSPX priest (see below) in their bulletin of March 2018.

If the SSPX is now going to have their priests witness marriages in Novus Ordo churches that have a Novus Ordo presider as the main witness, then have their priest offer up the ‘Extraordinary Form’ for the couple in the same Novus Ordo church, what’s the point and where is the “state of necessity”?

Is the Society bringing the Faith back to Modernist Rome and its Novus Ordo Missae or is the Society becoming that which it so strongly protested for years?

It’s interesting times to be living in.

Hey if the Vatican can have two popes, why not have two priests for a wedding?

***** UPDATED 4 APRIL 2018 *****

The above mentioned groom writes an open letter concerning his wedding and the SSPX—Canada posts it on their official website.

Ottawa, ON
March 26th 2018
A clarification on my wedding
I, Nicolas Lessard, got married to Monica Green on the 10th of February 2018, in the Roman Catholic Church of Saint Augustine of Canterbury in Brandon, Manitoba. Both my wife and I are faithful of the Society of Saint Pius X. The host priest, Father Kelly received our vows, and Father Vachon, of the SSPX celebrated our wedding mass. Following the wedding, there has been a lot of buzz about the circumstances of the wedding in the context of the relationship between Rome and the Society. This letter intends to address this “controversy”.
The first point I would like to make is that the controversy started off with the SSPX's Winnipeg bulletin showing a picture of my wife and me, Father Vachon of the SSPX, who prepared our marriage, and Father Kelly. The bulletin didn’t give many details and the articles that spawned from it implied or assumed many things that were false. Normally, someone who doesn’t know all the aspects of an issue should give the benefit of the doubt, in all Christian charity. The fact that some bloggers did not do so indicates to me that they are spinning a story to drive an ideological narrative, which is disingenuous and dishonest.
The second point addresses the location of the marriage. The location was not imposed on us by the diocese or the SSPX but was freely chosen by Monica (from SK) and myself (from QC). The SSPX priests here do not have the necessary civil license to perform marriages in Saskatchewan (SK) since they do not reside there, which complicated the location selection. We found this church, which presented all the qualities we were looking for which many churches, including both the SSPX churches in Welwyn (SK) and Winnipeg (MB), lacked. These include seating capacity, whether the church was heated (we’re in Canada here!), distance to the reception hall, cost, transports, and the dignity of the church. This last point is worth mentioning since all attendees noticed the sheer beauty of St. Augustine of Canterbury. There was an appreciation for the beautiful harmony of the Traditional liturgy, the Gregorian singing and the church’s well preserved gothic interior. 
The third point regards the laws of the Church. Monica and I consider ourselves not just faithful of the SSPX, but faithful Roman Catholics. In spite of the cancerous crisis going on in the Church, she stays the One True Church of God, and thus the errors of her representatives do not negate the obligation to follow legitimate requests. Neither of us were willing to weaken our marriage bonds by operating outside proper regulations.
We would have had Father Vachon receive our marriage vows if it had been up to us. But since, we were in a church of the diocese, we followed the directives given to the Society by Rome concerning the Society’s marriages. We understand that the Society has followed this same procedure for many individual cases long before these directives were published anyway; actual SSPX parishioners will know that. 
I hope this letter answers most of the questions that were raised from this one picture and label in a parish bulletin. Although it is unfortunate that our marriage was used by some online to promote baseless speculation, my wife and I will take this occasion to ask those who read this to pray for us and for the SSPX! 
Nicolas Lessard
‘Open Letter Lessard—Green SSPX Wedding’, A clarification on my wedding, SSPX—Canada, (26 March 2018)


  1. Notice the bride's head's uncovered--could well describe the VC2 whore of Babylon and the SSPX 'nuptials' w/that whore: abomination!

    1. She is wearing a veil. If the marriage ceremony is over, it is normal for the bridegroom to lift her veil and put it back for the wedding kiss. If the ceremony was not over, you can complain about it.

    2. We are not Muslims. Comparing the bride to the whore of Babylon because you don't think her veil is heavy enough is ridiculous.

  2. SSPX/Fellay musta been promised they'll get to be in charge of FSSP--and seems they believe it (even though the N.O. lies about Jesus Christ, the Faith, and hasn't honored promises to one traditionalist group (or anyone else for that matter--see pedophile pervert scandal-up to and including murdering their own expendables like Bevilacqua & Keith O'Brien (he died of 'a fall' (from sodomite graces)?) --but YOU are different (unless of course they're being blackmailed)).

  3. I think those who believe the Society is "compromising" its principles would be well advised to read this and the article in the Angelus it relates to: . The Society's approach to the authority of Rome, and the implications of the abuse of that authority, are not exactly top secret. Too much is being made of the supposed "silence" of the Society regarding the seemingly endless stream of obscenities from the Vatican (a la Amoralis Lamentia). There is a general chapter coming up in a few short months. Is it so hard to believe that this current crisis is so unprecedented that it essentially requires a general chapter to debate, discuss and come to a general consensus as to the best response by the Society to it, rather than individuals within the Society broadcasting their own personal opinions? Could it possibly be that members of the Society (which we laypeople are NOT) are only taking care not to jump to ill-informed conclusions? Obviously, this current crisis requires the utmost of care. Honestly, these are priests who have dedicated their lives to providing us with the Sacraments according to Tradition. Are we really going to nit-pick the manner in which they do it, much less accuse them of caving in on the principles that have directed their lives?! Maybe we should all dedicate as much time praying for the general chapter as we do debating this online (myself included).

    1. Yes, I'm so tired of people saying the SSPX has "gone soft". That's nonsense as the poster above cites. Bishop Fellay SIGNED the filial correction regarding Bergoglio's heresies. How many other bishops can you point to that have done that? Do you really think they expect to be "regularized" after that? The Society has its General Chapter session coming up this summer at which a new priest will be selected to lead the order (the only way HE Fellay can be elected a third time is if the vote is unanimous; he does not expect, nor seek, that). Nothing significant is going to be said until after that. My hope is that at some point what is confused with the Church--those heretics and apostates who only occupy traditional Catholic real estate--will ask to be regularized with the True Church in the form of the SSPX and the other faithful who make up the remnant that Christ has never abandoned.

    2. Sure Fellay SIGNED the 'filial correction,' but then he would JOIN w/VC2 in giving communion to adulterers, sodomites, protestants, etc.? Did you ever read the parable about the 2 sons--one said he was going to work in the field but didn't; the other said he wouldn't, but did?

      Now take this analogy to +Lefebvre and Fellay. +Lefebvre signed the VC2 documents but didn't let RATZ & JP2 get control of the faithful trying to follow tradition. He was excommunicated. Fast forward 30 years. The N.O. is advocating and paying for contraception, abortion, sodomite civil unions, baptizing children of transvestite couples, and communion for adulterers, things for which +Lefebvre would've been called crazy if he'd said the N.O. would become so degenerate.

      Fellay signs a correction, but (1) what else has he signed--when will the public see the agreement that lifted his excom? (2) What does it matter to sign a correction, when he acts to go in communion w/them and to deliver the faithful under his care to these practices and superiors approved by RATZ/Francis (to wolves!)? Do you believe the faithful can mingle w/"believers" in the state of mortal sin (hasn't he read 1 Corinthians 5 - expel the evil doer from your midst?). Does he intend to overcome evil by joining w/it? Does he believe a house divided against itself can stand?

      Francis (and all VC2) states he's a faithful son of the church but what does he do? Signing a correction means nothing when you then join w/your father to DO what you claim to be correcting(!):

      "Every one therefore that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock. And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof."

      SSPX must be totally infiltrated and teaching a false faith (or letting it grow like weeds to take over their field).

  4. One also needs to look at the positive side of this. A NO priest no longer needs to worry about attending SSPX Masses. And the SSPX is no longer stigmatized for not being in "full communion", whatever that is...

  5. Communion in the hand is objectionable for many reasons. It should never have been allowed, and it should be abolished. And I am well aware that carelessness about particles is rife in some parishes.

    But you make yourself look like a kook by accusing ALL those who practice it as crumbling and crunching the hosts, brushing the crumbs on the floor, and stomping on them delightedly.

    1. Exactly Fr. VF. As someone who came to tradition largely through a diocesan "Extraordinary Form" Mass (which in turn was ultimately brought about through the efforts of the SSPX), I have never, ever seen communion in the hand at a diocesan "Extraordinary Form" TLM. Never. Not once. There is nothing in this story about this couple that indicates it occurred at their wedding. Those of us devoted to Tradition have enough opponents already. Let's not create them where none exist.

    2. What paragraph in the above post are you pointing to? This one: "This leads to all sorts of questions. First off, is Fr. Kelly Wilson a valid priest? If so, is the Novus Ordo Missae valid? If so, since communion is given in the hand and particles of the host fall on the ground, did not — the bride, groom, bridesmaids, groomsmen, priests, and guests — all those present walk on Christ?"

      Where are the words: accuse, crumbling, crunching, brushing the crumbs, stomping on them (crumbs) delightedly?

      You make yourself a liar. And you betray your own view (crumbs, particles (of what?) indeed--and during Holy Week no less). And while you are aware of "carelessness" and maybe even that N.O. popes like Benedict leave whole hosts and chalices to be abused at WYD (Australia 2008), pass in plastic cups thrown into trash (Rio 2016) and even toss garbage bags full of consecrated hosts in the trash (JP2 Baltimore 1995; 1979 DC sent in black garbage bags to parishes to use) and the parishes toss unused consecrated 'wine' down the sink: who would make themselves look like a kook by publicly objecting to professed 'priests,' 'bishops,' and 'popes' care-lessly (caring nothing) abusing the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ and leading others to do so (Hebrews 10:33; 1 Cor 4:10)?

      Notice you don't address the first two questions re: validity of priesthood and mass--wonder why "fr."

      "I have a close priest friend whose conversion to Tradition occurred in 1995 when, as a seminarian at Mt. St. Mary’s, he was forced (yes, forced) to distribute Holy Communion at John Paul II’s Mass at Camden Yard. He saw hosts in large clear plastic garbage bags “consecrated” hundreds of yards away from the altar. Afterward, he saw those same bags still full actually pitched into dumpsters along with hosts scattered in the stands. That was enough for him."

      "At the 2008 papal WYD Mass in Sydney, Australia, Pope Benedict XVI continued the tradition of his predecessor by denigrating the Real Presence. After the conclusion of the papal Mass, when the Pope and supporting Bishops and clergy had made their exodus, many of the sacred vessels were left unattended.

      "A crowd descended on the unattended sacred vessels and, without scruples, began filling their bags, pockets and coats with the remaining Sacred Hosts while others stood by and watched. Still other members of the crowd dipped their fingers into the chalices filled with the Precious Blood in order to dab their foreheads with the contents."

  6. Anonymous @ 6:53 & S. Armaticus you got to be kidding me? Lefebvre was excom way before the N.O. started giving out communion to adulterers and sodomites and you are saying the current crisis is so unprecedented? How could SSPX even think of coming into communion w/a heretical church? Why don't you have a Swedish female Lutheran Bishop or Anglican or Bishop Tony who was buried as a Catholic by the orders of Francis marry your members? SSPX is no longer 'stigmatized' (whatever that means (haha)) as not being in full communion and neither are the Jews, the Muslims, the atheists, the Protestants, the sodomites, the fornicators, the abortionists, the pedophiles, the adulterers, the satanists (i.e. any offense to God is welcome). Anyone who would go along w/this might as well go to the Episcopalian Church where you have high mass, low mass and rock concert--whatever the hell pleases you--NOT God. Catholics keep God's commandments. They don't worry about being stigmatized by men--more worry about being anathematized by God!

  7. Anyone who has any interest in receiving Catholic sacraments from a Catholic priest and preserving and passing on the Catholic Faith should stay as far away from the N.O. and anyone affiliated w/that organization as possible. Many perceive Amoris Laetitia as an attack on morals. But it is also a continuation of the concerted and planned attack on the Faith. This “Master Teacher” webinar for parish staff on Amoris Laetitia was uploaded in Fall of 2016. Now that all the staff have been trained they are rolling out in the parishes. There are 4 videos: the first and third are by lay hirelings. The middle two are by bishops (one is Wuerl).

    I couldn’t watch the first video. Just have to look at the paper behind the man, but listen to how fast he talks to ensure no-one thinks or questions that Church wasn’t established by Jesus Christ; nor did He give the commandments: The apostles had an experience, then they ran and told everyone they could, then they formalize write down, and last: they create laws, principles, traditions.

    The third video also attacks Faith and sacraments. @ 18:36: “UH! A number of parents will come to us in our parishes um well and they’ll say you know how do I pass along THE Faith to my (one!) child—and I hear this a lot and I listen to terminology (so do we!) because I think it’s very interesting um how people talk about their faith life. If you are thinking about passing along THE FAITH to your child or assisting families to grow in This Particular Way you’re going to be disappointed. One: because families grow in lots of different ways. Pope Benedict was asked once how many paths there are to God and he said as many paths as there are people. So you have to recognize that what might work for you isn’t going to work for someone else.” @ 19:22 “Stop talking about OUR faith like it’s this box!” @ 20:00 How and what to pray for (Rosary not mentioned) but hands raised praying over children like protestants/parents are the ministers (priests) in their domestic church and the parish is just an extension of that; @22:40 “we call them “Rituals on the Run” [when you bless your kids shoes].

    I wanted to put this w/the video of Steven's unholy disintegration because after relating two (long) stories about her daughter interrupting mass (once when she ran shouting after lector mom and so “we proclaimed the scriptures together” and 2nd when daughter asked when will mass be over and mom said just have to say good bye to Jesus so daughter “scooted out into the middle of the aisle and knelt down and I saw her waving and our pastor sitting at the side of the altar kind of leans over and waves back at her and she goes “Not you! Not you! I’m waving to Jesus!” (laugh) and so we had this light hearted moment but my daughter was waving good bye to Jesus. She believed with every ounce of her being that Jesus was right there present in front of her. To me this was a holy moment and I think it’s helpful to have that conversation with families and be real and authentic. So you might be panicking as a mother: oh, she’s gone; I can’t catch her! But as wrapped up as you are in that moment you have to think about the widow who is sitting three rows back grieving the loss of her husband whose children have left the nest and is smiling at this sign of life within the church (The holy sacrifice of the mass just don’t cut it!) the woman concludes @15:15: “so what we’re trying to do w/families is help them stay attuned to be aware of those ordinary moments that hold powerful SACRAMENTAL grace because God is truly present in those moments.”

  8. Guess this couple wanted to try to be certain they were legally married by having both a Novus Ordo "priest" and an SSPX "priest" present at this ceremony. Tragically, neither of these are priests. The NO's believe and practice a different religion than Catholicism and the SSPX'ers don't believe in the Catholic dogma of obedience to the pope. They may as well have gone to any Protestant church or to a local park and had a dog marry them.

    1. Even the heretics consecrate validly. But here it is about the sacrament of marriage. For one to be formally heretical, it must be declared by the Church. You may not follow FSSPX, but they are not heretical.

  9. Boycott the SSPX!

  10. When a Pope is a true Catholic who abides 100% to the teachings of Christ and Holy Mother Church; who does not utter heresies; who does not denigrate traditional Catholics and the young who embrace the Mass of ages; who does not deny Almighty God...then of course we must believe in - and respect the Dogma of obedience to the Holy Father. Otherwise to follow an apostate whose election in the light of Church teaching was seriously questionable and whose own 'teaching' is morally reprehensible is to make a conscious decision … obey HIM or obey the Holy Spirit. For me that is no contest. Saint Paul said 'Even should an angel from Heaven comes down and changes one iota of Holy Scripture - let him be anathema!"