This will really be just an excerpt-from-Catholic-Sources dump and not one of these items will be useful to the SSPX, rather, it is intended to be a resource for those who find the disingenuous (and at times bald faced lying) propaganda of the SSPX irksome at best.
So, Raider Fan will began with a statement by a humble Catholic priest that turned-out to be more prophecy that observation.
Fr.
Richard Ginder, a former columnist for The
Wanderer. In
his short book, 1968 *, Thou
Art the Rock, when
referring to the separation of the "wheat and the tares"
that took place between Luther igniting the revolt and the Treaty of
Westphalia (1517-1648), Fr. Ginder noted the following:
It
is the old story of the tares among the wheat. It took 131 years to
make a separation once before but with the advance in communications
media, we shall not have to wait so long this time. But we shall see
it. It will come - very likely in the shape of a heretical sect
attributing primacy of honour but refusing jurisdiction to the Holy
Father, at the same time proclaiming themselves the only True
Believers. [10]
http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/squire.html
* What was Mons Lefevbre doing in 1968 when this prophecy was written?
* What was Mons Lefevbre doing in 1968 when this prophecy was written?
During
the course of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), Mgr. Lefebvre
was one of the leaders of the International Group of Fathers (Coetus
Internationalis Patrum)
which sought to uphold the traditional Catholic faith. The role of
Mgr. Lefebvre during the Council will not be discussed in this book
as it is fully documented in his own book, A
Bishop Speaks,
and in my own account of Vatican II, Pope
John's Council.
The texts of Mgr. Lefebvre's interventions, and a good deal of
supplementary information, are now available in French in his book,
J'Accuse
le Concile. (See the long-established pattern here? He was for the V2 documents before he was against them; that is he voted for the very same documents he later condemned. He repeated this pattern which his Econe Seminary when he got approval for it on an expire mental basis accord to the local Bishop but then refused to shut it down and he did it with the protocol towhoch he signed his name and then reneged)) An English translation of this book is pending. All that needs to be
stated here is that Mgr. Lefebvre, in his criticisms of the reforms
which have followed the Council, and of certain passages in the
documents themselves, is not being wise after the event. He was one
of the very few Fathers of Vatican II who, while the Council was
still in progress, had both the perspicacity to recognize
deficiencies in certain documents and the courage to predict the
disastrous results to which these deficiencies must inevitably give
rise.
(O, so that is why he signed them)
By
1968 the General Chapter of the Holy Ghost Fathers had become
dominated by a Liberal majority which was determined to reform the
Order in a sense contrary to Catholic tradition. Mgr. Lefebvre
resigned in June of that year rather than collaborate in what would
be the virtual destruction of the Order as it had previously existed.
He retired to Rome with a modest pension which was just sufficient to
rent a small apartment in the Via Monserrato from some nuns. After a
full and active life devoted to the service of the Church and the
glory of God he was more than content to spend his remaining years in
quietness and prayer. In the light of subsequent events, Mgr.
Lefebvre's unobtrusive retirement is a fact upon which considerable
stress must be laid. Some of his enemies have accused him of being
proud and stubborn, a man who could not accept defeat. He is
portrayed as a proponent of an untenable theological immobilism
totally unrelated to the age in which we are living. Although this
untenable theology was defeated, discredited even, during the
Council, Mgr. Lefebvre's pride would not allow him to admit defeat.
The Seminary at Ecône, it is maintained, is his means of continuing
the fight which he waged so unsuccessfully during the conciliar
debates.
But
Mgr. Lefebvre's retirement proves how baseless, malicious even, such
suggestions are. Those who have met him know that he is not a man who
will fight for the sake of fighting - he has always been a realist.
No one could have compelled him to resign as Superior-General of the
Holy Ghost Fathers - he had been elected for a term of twelve years.
But he could see quite clearly that the Liberals dominated the
General Chapter; that they were determined to get their way at all
costs; that resistance on his part could only lead to unedifying
division. "Je
les ai laissés à leur collégialité,"
he has remarked. "I left them to their 'collegiality'.
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_one/Chapter_1.htm
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_one/Chapter_1.htm
But a schism is a pacific edifying division?