Hindsight is 20/20?

I saw an interview and must admit it is very hard to watch. A) the interviewer is relentless but more so because B) you can see the realization on Bp. Fellay's face that he is now neutered. The future for Tradition is bleak now that the head of the SSPX has departed from Abp. Lefebvre's position at the price of the upcoming deal. Another thought crossed my mind. There are two people in the news who would not have let this interview get out of hand. That is of course Bp. WIlliamson and Donald Trump. Did I really just make that comparison? Think about it! Those two are the only people I can honestly say would speak there mind in the face of ridicule. Trump and Fellay, on the other hand, are nothing alike! Bp. Fellay is dangerous because (after watching this excruciating interview) its clear he doesn't have a backbone and he wields power to lead millions (from where did this power come, I know not.) Trump is dangerous because he doesn't have the Faith and has the power to lead millions (from where this power came, I know not either.) It will never work because as Abp. Lefebvre said "we are working to Christianize society, and [Trump] is working to dechristianize society.
At the risk of sounding dramatic, I'm reminded of the movie The Cardinal. When the Cardinal of Austria realizes Hitler broke his promise (and how His Eminence forsook his office by putting his hope in man) he exclaims "And to think, instead of saying praised be to Jesus, I said Heil Hitler." Following the campaign, I am afraid to say Trump's goals are Christ the King's. After watching this interview, I am forced to say neither are Bp. Fellay's goals.
Is the deal with Rome is premature? Depends on your conditions.
1) Obedience is infallible. The SSPX messed up when Abp. Lefebvre consecrated the four bishops. (Well, then you should be FSSP.) Traditionalists need to be approved and that is the end of it.
2) The SSPX will never get what they want, Rome is too far gone. Lets strike while the "approval" iron is hot. We will infiltrate Rome like the Trojan Horse despite the record of all approved Traditional groups in the last 50 years.
3) Abp. Lefebvre recognized a real crisis, one that is not over. His stance is to batten down the hatches and let the storm blow over. It might take 20 years, 50 years, 100 years, or more, but when the storm is over and the Pope acts like a Catholic again, then you simply submit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0eTadAYK6o
(link to interview. The Conflict Zone interviews Bishop Fellay.)

Another Head Scratcher

"(Benedict XVI) encourages us to read once again the documents of Vatican II with a particular frame of mind, interpreting these teachings in the continuity of church life rather than presenting Vatican II as a creative move to build a completely new church in contrast to past centuries."
-Bishop Estevez in The Saint Augustine Catholic February Issue of St. Augustine Catholic (Magazine)

"If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text [Gaudium et Spes] as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of countersyllabus."- Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

What's the syllabus? Wait... you mean the pope admitted at one time that a Vatican II document said things that were contrary to the Church's teachings in these things?
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

Conclusion:
A) Bishops (not just this one) do not know what Pope Pius IX wrote
B) Bishops (not just this one) know what Pius IX wrote and disagree with Him

because C is not a possibility
C Bishops (not just this one) know what Pius IX wrote and are confused with what Pius IX meant when he wrote the Syllabus of Errors and thought His Holiness meant something closer to what Vatican II said.

Bless Your Heart

Recently, I have been checking the "On This Day" app that Facebook provides. It is very interesting to me to see what I was posting as far back as 2007. Some good/some not so good posts. This was a good post from 2012.

"However, what we must never do is let this need for order translate into a strange sort of 'Catholic fundamentalism'... Sometimes our desire for a 'perfect Mass' can prevent us from seeing the beauty present in every Mass."
-Rev. Joseph Krupp

Some one asked "I would want to know the context of this priest's comment. Seems like the statement could easily be used to justify a very lax approach to the Holy Mass."

The answer: In the St. Augustine 2012 February/Match Catholic Diocesan Magazine. The article is entitled "How do I report liturgical abuse" or the "Ask Fr. Joe" column. It should have been titled "Awwww, you want a reverent Mass? How cute..."

As the ol' Southern saying goes "Bless your heart!" Allow this blogger to translate. "You think you know what Catholicism is because you grew up in it, Lady? Well, I studied at a fancy seminary. I've read more books that have come out since 1969 than you. Why don't you let the professionals handle this. Its what we get paid for." 

I posted this as my FB status to see what the reaction would be.After I got a few "Amens" I wanted to clarify what I felt the response should have been. I posted these responses. I guess no one took the bate because a discussion did not ensue. (I was a littler more feisty back in 2012. The number of 2014-2016 blogs should attest.)

"He is called accursed, who doth the work of God negligently…  No other work can be performed by the faithful so holy and divine as this tremendous mystery itself, wherein that life-giving victim is daily immolated on the altar by priests. It is also sufficiently clear, that all industry and diligence is to be applied to this end, that it be performed with the greatest possible inward cleanness and purity of heart, and outward show of devotion and piety. --22 Session of the Sacred Council of Trent
We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal. ----Pope St. Pius V, Quo Primum
I agree that God knows we are humans, and that if the priest or the altar boys or the choir messes up, its not the end of the world, and the Sacrifice of the Mass was still pleasing to God. But when priests are “being creative” and adding prayers to instruct the people…?  Trent says that the priest should be as OUTWARDLY diligent as possible (inwardly too) because the Mass is the most perfect thing on this planet, and we should strive to have it as perfect as humanly possible! A perfect Mass is reading what is on the page and following the instructions given on the page. Nothing more, nothing less. If ‘Catholic fundamentalism’ means wanting a priest to stick to that, St. Pius would say we have a problem…

Conclusion:

A) These priests do not know about St. Pius, Trent, or anything before Vatican II (brainwashed)

or

B) They do know about St. Pius and Trent, but think they know better. (pride)

Can you think of another possibility?

St. Pius V, pray for us.