In this picture, the priest's quarter are located at the left side
of the building, above the west entrance, on the second floor above the entrance. Just noticeable to the right of the
outcropping of brickwork can be seen the small chimney for the water heater for the priest's washroom and shower.
The name AGENDA was chosen because allegedly I had been accused by Fr. Scott
of having had some kind of "scurrilous agenda," concerning either OLI or the SSPX in general.
SOME ODDS AND ENDS ABOUT THE SOCIETY
The SSPX will tell you what is and what is not Catholic reading material - according to the
Society's version of Catholicism. It has been reported that Bishop Williamson recommends "The Poem of the Man-God"
by Maria Valtorta; a book that was on the Church's Index of Forbidden Books. Reportedly the seminarians are introduced
to this scandalous book during their course of study. For more information on this screed, go to these sites:
Br. James SDB's Critique of the "Poem of the man-God" - http://members.tripod.co.uk/jloughnan/critique.htm
Maria Valtotra's "Poem of the man-God" and Medjugorje - http://members.tripod.co.uk/jloughnan/valtmedj.htm
Maria Valtorta's portrayal of the "Sensuality" of Jesus - http://members.tripod.co.uk/jloughnan/4mchomo.htm
And, as long as we've mentioned Medjugorje, we might as well mention Garabandal, of which Williamson
is a promoter, or, at least has been in the past. For more info, use this link: http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/Garabandal2.html
The book was placed on the Index on December 16th, 1959. L'Osservatore Romano a year
to the day later called it a "poorly romanticized life of Jesus." The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
gave seven reasons why the book was condemned. These had been printed in the December 1992 issue of the pro-Society, Australian
newspaper Catholic (which was banned from SSPX bookstores as of that year).
- The book does not have a legitimate imprimatur. The book shows one supposedly given by Pope
Pius XII, but, it is, in fact, bogus (the Holy Father never read the book);
- The portrayal of Jesus and Mary are inconsistent with what is found in the Gospels. According
to the Newsletter of the Cardinal Newman Center "Jesus speaks like a chatterbox, always ready to proclaim Himself the
Messiah and the Son of God, or to share lessons in theology with the same forms used by a modern professor... and the Blessed
Virgin Mary speaks as abundantly as a modern propagandist...;"
- Some passages read like a modern novel and are considered risqué and would pose a danger of
spiritual damage;
- There are numerous errors of history and geography along with others;
- Theological errors in the book are numerous beginning with what "Jesus says" about Eve's sin;
- The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said that it should have been condemned if for
nothing else because it is irreverent;
- The authoress claimed revelation which the Church decided it wasn't.
As for Maria Valtorta, the story is that she was a lesbian and her lover was her mother. Just
a tad on the kinky side wouldn't you say? This is the nature of the book and its author that we've been told the seminarians
are exposed to at the Society's seminary at Winona, Minnesota.
Fr. Francois Laisney, former U.S. District Superior before Scott, also condemned this trash
and he even apologized to patrons of the SSPX in the Q & A section of the 1/91 issue of the Angelus. He said
that the "Angelus Press apologized to its readers for having carried these titles in its catalogue, upon the misguided
recommendations of good men."
It has also been reported that Williamson has allegedly said that his theology is based in part
on the spurious theological pretenses of this book. We have also heard the bishop push the doubtful and unapproved "apparitions"
of Garabandal which are not sanctioned by the Church and though the Church prohibits encouraging people to pursue unauthorized
apparitions.
A PLAN?
Why the constant demand upon missions to go into debt to purchase property and buildings (to
be put in the Society's name of course) when they are in no financial shape to do so?
Instead of coming to a working agreement with Rome, Econe (Switzerland, the location of Society
international headquarters) has cut itself off entirely by its stance. The Society has been independent of Rome far too long
- and they like it. It's a good life. They don't have to bend their wills to a superior authority that may require them to
do something they'd rather not. They lack humility. They are proud. They are, after all, an elite. We have Fr. Scott's word
for that ( Fr. Scott made that statement in a meeting of the parish after the last Mass on October 18th, 1992). As a religious
aristocracy they want to maintain their present position; otherwise they might have to give up some of their empire - all
those properties, all those churches - if they were to come to some sort of understanding with Rome. THEY LIKE BEING THEIR
OWN CHURCH. I would not be surprised in the least if in the not too distant future they end up electing their own Pope though
only time will tell.
THE INDULT? GREAT!
Back in 1984 when Rome initiated the "Indult Mass" there was rejoicing in the SSPX at the highest
levels. Bishop (then Father) Williamson wrote in one of his letters "that the logjam has broken." Nothing then
should have been more natural than for the Society to take advantage of the opportunity to assist the spread of the Tridentine
Rite of the Mass throughout the world. After all, the reason Lefebvre put the SSPX together was for the formation of
priests to preserve "tradition" - i.e., this rite of the Mass. Yet, where has the Society been over the years? Not there
to work with Rome in support of these "indult'" Masses that's for sure. But why? Good question!
From various quarters over the years there has been all too frequent claims by SSPX clergy that
the Indult Masses are satanic; that they're a plot to destroy the SSPX; that there are all sorts of conditions attached to
it to get the Society back under the authority of Rome !?? But isn't this where Catholic priest belong? So what's
behind this pattern of misrepresentations, deceptions, distortions and outright lies from the leadership of the Society?
Simple. The Society likes being independent from Rome in its operations. That's why they can't get an agreement
with Rome because the Society won't compromise its status. Essentially, they like being their own boss.
DOUBTFUL SITUATION
But the most clear cut deception is the one that revolves around the Society's lack of jurisdiction.
Most people who become involved with the Society are unaware of the finer points of Canon Law which may affect them, thinking
the controversy only concerns the use of the so-called Tridentine Rite of the Mass. When the Society speaks of jurisdiction,
the layman assumes it is in reference to the Mass the Society uses or its operations around the world. "Oh, well!
That's not such a big deal" he thinks. After all, "a priest is a priest, isn't he? All that's important
is that he can administer the sacraments. Right?"
Well, yes and no. Lacking jurisdiction, as Society priests do, their marriages and confessions
are invalid though other sacraments are valid. But the layman doesn't understand that, and the Society, deceitfully,
never explains this refinement to him. Also, what they don't tell him is that he does not fulfill his Sunday or Holy Day obligation
by attending Mass at a Society location.
The problem is, this unknowing Catholic is also, undoubtedly, blunting or ignoring his conscience.
He knows that the Society is controversial. Therefore, he must have a doubt about the validity of its whole operation.
This being the case, there is now culpability on his part. I doubt that there is more than one percent of the people
patronizing the Society at any given moment who don't have any doubts about its legitimacy. If the other ninety-nine
per cent were to do what the Church requires, which is, if in a doubtful situation, one must LEAVE it, the Society would have
few patrons to support this schismatic sect.
