THE SCHISM EXISTS ONLY IN VATICAN MINDS
“The
devil has managed
to confuse obedience with fidelity to doctrine.
Obedience is at the service of faith, but if authority
commands the
abandonment of the faith, we must disobey.”
Msgr.
Marcel Lefebvre
Download
this document as a
PDF
If I,
as an army officer, perform an act
against a direct order of my commanding officer for an end
that charity demands,
such as aiding a group of people threatened by their
tyrannical rulers, it does
not follow that I thereby reject my commanding officer’s
authority in general. I
reject only that one order for the compelling
reason that obedience to God trumps obedience to any earthly
superior. The same
applies to the consecration of a
bishop in the face of a refusal of a papal mandate where the
salvation of souls
requires that permission. Obedience
to
God comes first.
At
most, the penalty such a consecration could attract, on
the assumption that
it was not justified by circumstances, is suspension. It is impossible, without
more, that it could
amount to an act which rejects the authority of the Pope as a
whole, just as it
is impossible that a soldier’s refusal of a commanding
officer’s order would
amount to a rejection of the authority of the Army’s Chief.
Respect
for the Pope’s authority as head of Christ’s Church is a
principle of the Society
of St Pius X whose members pray daily for his
protection, life and
position. It is
ludicrous, then, to declare
Bishops de Galaretta and Fellay, and the bishops they
consecrated on July 1st,
guilty of schism. It
is still more ludicrous
to lay a similar charge against the Society’s priests,
religious and
faithful, when all they wish to do is to practise their
Catholic faith. The
distinction at stake is that between real
being - what exists in the real - and mental being - which
exists
only in the mind.
The
best the Vatican apparatchiks can do to justify the charges is
to rely on a ruling
of the ‘Second Vatican Council’, in its document Lumen
Gentium nn. 21,
22. Its bishops
asserted there that, as
well as the fulness of the power of the priesthood,
consecration of a bishop
confers jurisdiction. That ‘teaching’, which
suited the synod’s Modernist
agenda, contradicted the Church’s tradition. On this flawed ground,
Rome can assert that Bishops
de Galaretta and Fellay arrogated to themselves a power
belonging to the Pope. Note:
on the one hand they allow that the
synod’s teaching has removed a power from the Pope’s
exclusive
authority; on the other they accuse the Society’s bishops
of arrogating this
papal power to themselves.
This act
of self-contradiction, continues a policy which ran like a
thread through all
the utterances of that heterodox synod.
The
Modernists in the Vatican are desperate to protect the
determinations of the
pseudo-synod. No
one must be
permitted to reject them, especially those whose continued
insistence on the
principles of Catholic doctrine threatens the very existence
of their regime!
Michael
Baker
July
12th, 2026—Seventh Sunday after Pentecost
