Assasination Attempt on John Paul II at Fatima in 1982

On May 12, 1982, Father Juan María Fernández y Krohn, a priest of the Society of St. Pius X, attacked Pope John Paul II with a bayonet during the pope’s visit to Fatima.  

There is an interesting post by Father Cekada who knew the assassin and even belonged to the same clique of "hard-liners" in the Society.  Father Krohn was wound up pretty tight, like a lot of Sedevecantists, but anyhow.

Krohn accused Archbishop Lefebvre of being too soft during the trial.

The question now is, with Pope Francis in Portugal, does Krohn still harbour these intense ideas about religion, and if so, will he be in Portugal this weekend to see Francis? Krohn was banned from Portugal after serving three years of a six year sentence and moved to Belgium where he practices law.

Bishop Williamson Holds Forth on Sedevacantism

Number CCCLVII (357)

17th May 2014

CHURCH’S INFALLIBILITY -- III

The crazy words and deeds of Pope Francis are presently driving many believing Catholics towards sedevacantism, which is dangerous. The belief that the Conciliar Popes have not been and are not Popes may begin as an opinion, but all too often one observes that the opinion turns into a dogma and then into a mental steel trap. I think the minds of many sedevacantists shut down because the unprecedented crisis of Vatican II has caused their Catholic minds and hearts an agony which found in sedevacantism a simple solution, and they have no wish to re-open the agony by re-opening the question. So they positively crusade for others to share their simple solution, and in so doing many of them – not all -- end up displaying an arrogance and a bitterness which are no signs or fruits of a true Catholic.

Now these “Comments” have abstained from proclaiming with certainty that the Conciliar Popes have been true Popes, but at the same time they have argued that the usual sedevacantist arguments are neither conclusive nor binding upon Catholics, as some sedevacantists would have us believe. Let us return to one of their most important arguments, which is from Papal infallibility: Popes are infallible. But liberals are fallible, and Conciliar Popes are liberal. Therefore they are not Popes.

To this one may object that a Pope is certainly infallible only when he engages the four conditions of the Church’s Extraordinary Magisterium by teaching 1 as Pope, 2 on Faith or morals, 3 definitively, 4 so as to bind all Catholics. Whereupon sedevacantists and liberals alike reply that it is Church teaching that the Ordinary Universal Magisterium is also infallible, so – and here is the weak point in their argument – whenever the Pope teaches solemnly even outside of his Extraordinary Magisterium, he must also be infallible. Now their liberal Conciliar teaching is solemn. Therefore we must become either liberals or sedevacantists, depending of course on who is wielding the same argument.

A Word on the Blogroll

Edit:  I have a number of Sedevacantist friends.  I have Sedevacanists in my blogroll.  It’s not my job to police them.

I like Stephen Heiner as a person and consider him a friend.  He produces useful things and has interesting things to say.  I like The Thinking Housewife.  Again, she’s thoughtful.  I have no idea who Novus Ordo Watch is, but he’s always been helpful and friendly to me, taking pains to point out where I’ve gotten my facts wrong, or mistranslated something.

They’ve all treated me and my friends in various ways with a great deal more Christian charity than the Neocatholics at Patheos and other establicoids who seem more interested in promoting themselves, their emotive errors, cashing in on the apologetics gravy train and attack those who don’t agree with them with more open malice at times than Bolsheviks.

I love Bishop Williamson.

If I link to someone, it doesn’t mean I endorse them personally, the views of their blog or even agree with everything they’ve written, but as long as they don’t post occult material, are interested in a spirited if respectful tenor of discussion and don’t post pornography, I don’t see what else can be legitimately expected of me.

I also have blogs I roll which aren’t even Catholic, but political in nature, as well as two or three Traditional Anglican and Orthodox blogs.

Such is the state of things at this Catholic website which is loyal to the Magisterium and the current occupant of the papal throne, the Bishop of Rome.

Sedevacantists and the “Sprit of Vatican II”

We continue with the next installment of our series on what the sedevacantist protestants, especially those who are aged and female, might actually believe. Our next segment tackles the personal history of Fr. Karl Rhaner SJ and seeks to explain why the Vatican II documents are so massive but seemingly say so little. 

Karl Rhaner, the dissenting heretical pseudo-theologian who was a peritus at Vatican II, was really possessed by the restless soul of a slave woman named Nini from the American south. Back in 1869 Nini was lynched by the KKK for being “an uppity negress." Because she was hung from a tree she really hated trees, and saw Rhaner as her way of destroying the rain forest. 

Let me explain. This Titchaba spirit got Rhaner to help produce the most loquacious Council in the history of the Church: Vatican II, printing massive amounts of paper containing things no one cared about and fewer would ever read. Of course, the world will never be the same primarily because so many trees had to be destroyed to produce the massive amount of paper to produce all these boring documents and commentary. To date, 17% of the rain forest has been destroyed to print Vatican II documents. Dignitatis Humanae and the subsistit of Lumen Gentium 8 are responsible for a full 6%. This explains why Vatican II and post-conciliar encyclicals keep getting bigger and bigger, using up more and more paper, but they continue to have less and less substance. 

Titchaba was also the Voodoo high-priestess of the god of nonsense-speak, so now that Rhaner's dead, she resides at Franciscan University of Steubenville in Christ the King Chapel only venturing out across to the auditorium when they have Renewal meetings or Scot Hahn talks so that whenever the charismaniacs there speak in tongues, it's really Titchaba giving forth pagan voodoo curses in her African speak. She also got Stuebie to promote the Theology of the Body because to do natural family planning you have to use a lot of cotton swabs to take the samples. This cotton is Nini's exaltation of her ancient work. Suffice it to say, she really likes aspirin too. Even to this day you can hear NNNNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEE --------------------NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE --------------------  TITCHA-BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! echoing through the Paul VI audience hall in the Vatican late at night. Nini the Titchaba spirit is the real "spirit of Vatican II."

[Update] Bishop Williamson Visits the “Resistance” in Germany

(London) Bishop Williamson, who was expelled from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. , wants to visit Germany in the next few days. He wants to meet priests and laity of the SSPX to encourage them to break away. The plan seems to include the consecration of a chapel in a small monastery in houses. Similar to the Carmelite Sisters of Brilon, the chaplain   had urged the separation from the Fraternity of St. Pius X, but took place  years ago, because the Society of St. Pius X. rejects sedevacantism.

Bishop Williamson is to visit also the sisters in Brilon Forest, which recently by parted from the Society of St. Pius X. Another stop is expected to be Wigratzbad. There was recently a priest in the 25th Year of his consecration a sedisvakantistische community, about over 50 people.  Previously, he worked for the Society of St. Pius X. believers in Überlingen. In Constance, he founded the club Saint Thomas Aquinas  and V. to get established. He has  been the Spiritual Director of the monastery for years  in close contact with the sisters there and he preaches the spiritual exercises regularly. He left the Society before, but returned once more to her. For some time he hasn’t prayed  for the Pope during Holy Mass, which was viewed very critically by his superiors and confreres.

Bishop Williamson is expected to be a private visit to Ober-Ramstadt, where he attended a newlywed couple, originally from him in a chapel of the Society of St. Pius X. wanted to get married. This was forbidden by the German District Superior of the Society of St. Pius X, Father Franz Schmidberger, whereupon the Prior of Rheinhausen wed the couple.

The dispute between the leaders of the Society of St. Pius X. and the situation around  Williamson continues to escalate. A splitting or separation of this group is imminent. At a wedding, which took place recently, a German Prior openly criticized the Superior General of the SSPX, Bishop Bernard Fellay as a “traitor". The same has been said by a priest during last year's Pentecost pilgrimage. Observers interpret this as a threat of force to impose the upper a particular opinion without wanting to leave the SSPX itself.

Many priests were present at the aforementioned wedding who had left the SSPX years ago, well before the talks with the Vatican and priests who left the Society recently and officially denounce the present course of the Fraternity as "modernist". Some of these priests, went after their departure initially, surprisingly to communities standing close to the Vatican, but left it again quickly to seek out "vagantes".

Laymen, who  openly position themselves sedisvacantist, earned a  ban by the German District Superior. You may in specific cases currently still receive the sacraments in the chapels of the SSPX, but not distribute leaflets and not to incite unrest. Such measures are nothing special and were immediately imposed by district leaders since the founding of the SSPX.

 Layman who’ve been banned are supposed to have co-organized  Bishop Williamson’s trip. Bishop Williamson is clearly testing how much and what kind of support he can expect in Germany.

Most of the "priests in the resistance"  were already expelled years before for disobedience and intemperate criticism of superiors. Transfers and composition of priory communities were often the main points of criticism. Whether the "resistance priests” themselves are under an authority or establish their own initiatives where they are the only authority themselves remains to be seen.

Since the "theological" justification for the "resistance" moves on thin ice and the talks between the Vatican and the Society of St. Pius X. seem to be misinterpreted, the conflict provides the current [? Father Firmin Udressy?] superior of the German district, Father Franz Schmidberger, more on a personal level: described the behavior in a preface of his newsletter in April 2013 as  "stubbornness, self-righteousness, condescension, addiction to criticism, false dialectic, mockery and malice".

The Society of St. Pius X. has endured since its inception from attacks on the top, on the one hand of progressives, on the other side from sedivacantists. Therefore regular articles on the part of the SSPX are regularly published like Rightful disobedience to authority and Mgr Lefebvre: About the negotiations with Rome.

Bishop Williamson extended the position of sedevacantism for weeks in his periodical Eleison Comments  and the direction begins to differentiate itself from Archbishop Lefebvre. Presumably he is trying to found the St. Marcel Center of the global initiative to expand sedevacantism the future.

Since its founding in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the Society of St. Pius X  has lost two or three priests per district every year,  because they were dissatisfied with their superiors, or they were excluded because they refused, “to pay their rightful leaders  due respect and obedience. "

The SSPX claims to have 569 priests worldwide according to its report in 2012. The number of faithful, who are connected to it should include, according to Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos in 2007, about 600,000 people, including 100,000 in France. Other sources mention 150,000 followers.

Blogs and forums of "resistance" currently claim there are  22 priests who are supposed to be associated with this initiative worldwide.

Bishop Williamson was convicted in January in Regensburg court on the charges of incitement for a fine of 1800 Euros.The district court justified the relatively small fine with the fact that Williamson currently enjoys no income according to the court. Williamson is appealing against the judgment before an appeal.

[Update 17:06 clock: Williamson's visit in Germany is making the process of reconciliation between the Society of St. Pius X.and the Vatican enormously difficult, if not halting it entirely, which is most certainly his intention.

He writes in his column of 9 March ""We think that lifting the excommunications would set in motion an irresistible process of drawing closer, with a view to an agreement between the Holy See and the SSPX, or at least an agreement with a large part of the SSPX priests and faithful." Comment: indeed the friendly contacts between Rome and the SSPX were setting such a motion in process in January of 2009, and only an outburst from within the SSPX of the most horrible heresy of modern times - "anti-semitism" - stopped that process. But either Catholic reconciliation with Vatican II is no problem, or one has to say that that outburst was providential, because it also stopped, at least for a while, the false reconciliation.” In the article published in February’s column he writes: And historical truth goes by evidence, the most reliable kind of which is the material relics of the past, because these are in principle quite independent of human emotions.

Bishop Williamson is indifferent, in his own words, to whether his statements could be used in Germany or not, even if he refrained from publishing his words, because he pursues another goal with the help of Holocaust "denial", namely the torpedoing of the talks between Rome and the Fraternity. This intention should correspond to the so-called Dolus eventualis, according to which the offender holds for the possible success of its commission as a result of the seriousness of his actions and condones it to hazard the conditions and accept it. In other words, Bishop Williamson has deliberately committed a crime as a provocation in order to achieve a different purpose, the torpedoing of the talks between Rome and the Fraternity.

That Bishop Williamson cites in this context on the one hand the truths of divine revelation, and on the other hand sees his actions as inspired by the Divine Providence, it is an interesting insight into his state of mind.]

Text: Linus Schneider
Photo: Jens Falk

Link Katholisches...