This is a good sermon by Fr. Rafael, O.S.B., given in the past week. The only real problem I have with it is that Fr. Rafael doesn’t unequivocally take the firm stance that Jorge Bergoglio is an antipope.
False Resistance
NEWSLETTER #3 FROM THE CONVENT OUR LADY OF SOLITUDE
“In the case of the false resistance of Bishops Williamson, Faure, Aquinas, and Zendejas, and all of those priests and religious associated with them, one wonders what they are resisting and why they left the SSPX?”
Sr. Mary Magdalene of the Sorrowful Mother OSB
Red Light for Attendance at All False Resistance Masses
On page 11 in Issue 59 of The Recusant, there is a neat pictogram regarding what different parties say about which Masses the faithful may attend. Under the Frs. Hewko and Rafael column, attending a Mass of the False Resistance is marked as “red”. However, it is my opinion that this should include red lighting attending the Masses of all priests who receive any of the four False Resistance bishops (i.e., Bishops Williamson, Faure, Thomas Aquinas, and Zendejas) to attend to those priests’ faithful even if those priests publicly condemn the errors of Bishop Williamson regarding the New Mass, for example. In my estimation, to receive any of the four False Resistance bishops is akin to siding with the False Resistance despite what is otherwise publicly taught or condemned.
Note: I am not aware of Bishop Williamson red lighting the Masses of the True Resistance. If anyone can provide the evidence, I would appreciate it.
Bravo, Fr. Hewko and Fr. Ruiz!
“We have to distance ourselves from these (False Resistance) bishops and wait for a better day.”
The above are the words of Fr. David Hewko in the sermon below. Father recounts that he and Fr. Hugo Ruiz have decided to distance themselves from the four False Resistance bishops (Bishops Williamson, Faure, Thomas Aquinas, and Zendejas). I was glad to hear a public and explicit statement from Fr. Hewko on this matter and his speaking on behalf of Fr. Ruiz. Thank you, Fathers.
I cannot leave out Fr. Rafael, O.S.B. He has been solid since the beginning in refusing to mingle with the False Resistance and publicly preaching the same.
“I’m Am Not Saying that Francis Is Certainly Pope” – His Excellency Bishop Williamson
In the video linked below at the 1 hour, 55 minutes, and 20 seconds mark, His Excellency Bishop Richard Williamson acknowledges that the arguments put forth by those who accept Benedict XVI as the current true pope are serious and that he is not saying that Francis is certainly pope. How is it that a False Resistance bishop can acknowledge and say these things and yet not one True Resistance clergy member can publicly admit the same? Instead, what we hear from the True Resistance clergy is that they accept Francis as the current true pope and that they will wait for the Church to decide otherwise or that to accept Benedict XVI as the current true pope is nonsense. True Resistance clergy and faithful, please look seriously into this issue. The identity of the current true pope is an issue of critical importance. To acknowledge Francis as the current true pope is, objectively, an act of schism! Why? Because Benedict XVI, as the supreme head of the Church, decided what the nature of his “resignation” would be, and that is that it would be only a renunciation of the exercise of the active ministry. That’s it! As I mentioned in a previous post, if it can be shown that Benedict XVI intended to keep even one iota of the office (munus) of the papacy, he would remain pope. Read his Declaratio. It is clear that he did not renounce his office (munus) entirely and without qualification. As a matter of fact, he did not renounce his office (munus) at all. What he renounced was an exercise of a power that belongs to the office of the papacy (see this diagram). Therefore, he is still the current true pope.
