Monday, May 2, 2011

Society of St. Pius X Threatens Legal Action Against Friendly Catholic Forum

Editor: This is definitely an overreaction and a friendly fire incident. This raises some serious questions about the integrity and good will of the SSPX legal representation, and even the leadership of the Society itself. Actually, Ignis Ardens administration was sympathetic to Bishop Fellay. I don't think they will be any more. Rather than contest the claims that were made and discredit them, the Society seems to be vindicating them with respect to the questionable associations of their new Attorney. We actually stopped reading the thread after we saw that people were attacking Mr. Krah's Catholic authenticity based on his videos and even speculated on whether or not he prayed the Rosary, however questionable his fan appreciation for the actress and pop star "Madonna" might be.

This threat of legal action puts the whole thing in a different light, however.

Seriously, what kind of a man, to say nothing of a Catholic, would put "Madonna" as one of his favorite performance acts?


The Ignis Ardens website states that 'it is a Taditionalist Catholic forum with a pro-SSPX bias... but that 'this forum's support for SSPX is not to be taken as evidence of the SSPX's support for this forum.'

The latter part of this statement is certainly true with regard to Ignis Ardens' involvement to date in a campaign which undermines the authority of the Society's General House.

I refer to the section entitled 'Krahgate,' which, under the cover of anonymity, raises serious allegations against Menzingen's lawyer, Maximilian Krah, and, by extension, against the Superior General himself.

Whilst this file, which apparently originated elsewhere, was recently removed at the initiative of the Ignis Ardens moderator, the damage caused will be much more difficult to repair given the public nature of the internet and the propensity for calumny and detraction to spread.

In this regard Bishop Fellay does not exclude having recourse to judicial process, and this should serve a warning to those who think they can commit public slander via the internet with impunity.

Father Paul Morgan.

Link to Ignis Ardens Site...

Edit as of 9:15 GMT, 2 May: After having talked to the owner of Ignis Ardens, we understand that she is quite happy with things as they are and has no animus at all toward Father Morgan or the SSPX. As she explained it, she was never comfortable with the Krahgate report anyway and is happy to be rid of it.

She's not too worried about any legal action either.


Anonymous said...

There is more to 'Krahgate' than Max Krah and Madonna.Bishop Fellay and the Society leadeship have evaded factual questions nor have they allayed concerns of the faithful

Anonymous said...

This is also not the first "friendly fire" incident -- cf. the S.S.P.X suing Editions Saint-Remi to prevent them from selling Abp. Lefebvre's complete unedited sermons (

Tancred said...

Of course, there are many issues related to Mr. Krah's curiously high level of influence in managing the affairs of the SSPX and the way he was allowed to treat His Lordship, Bishop Williamson.

Anonymous said...

The only public slander is that against Bishop Williamson by the top two within SSPX - describing him as 'uranium' and insinuating that he has Parkinsons disease so that he is not responsible for what he says. Rarely has one come across such slander in the secular world let alone within a religious fraternity.

Anonymous said...

I do not think she is the owner of the forum, just a moderator.

I read what was called the Krahgate Files. There was certainly no slander contained in them. They merely reported publicly verifiable facts, raised questions and requested politely for those questions to be answered for the good of SSPX.

Bishop Fellay's threats and use of untrue but emotional 'scare words' such as 'calumny' and 'slander' are undoubtedly propaganda designed for the gallery.

Anonymous said...

This is a Blog that does not see the truth. Bp Williamson saw fit to preach on Easter Sunday, never mind the risen Christ, about the HAARP Project as the cause of the Japan earthquake/Tsunami... people are scandalised...

Tancred said...

I see that Bishop Fellay's legal representation is threatening a friendly set of individuals with legal action. Is it stupid? Most definitely stupid. Is it vindictive? It sure looks like it.

Wessex said...

Threatening your subscribers is not a clever move. This smacks of cult behaviour which is far from unique in the history of the Society. Property rights are fought to the death, dissident priests and laity (and the odd bishop) are persecuted and the leadership is always right!

The moderator of Ignis Ardens encouraged and researched Krahgate with some enthusiasm and this issue was current for months generating an unusually large audience. After the international campaign died down somewhat and, following Father Morgan's belated words on the subject, Ignis Ardens is now back towing the party line with a faulty memory.

Vincent of Lerins said...

Don't mess with the best.

Catholic Mission said...

Thursday, July 21, 2011
The following quotation is from the website of the SSPX.


A reissue of the article appearing in Verbum, No. 24 (1986), prefaced by the previous Editorial, clarifying the teaching of the Church regarding Baptism.

Many of our friends have heard of Fr. Leonard Feeney, and some of them have a great esteem for this priest who fought against the liberal ecumenism by recalling again and again that outside the Church there is no salvation. But, to make his point, Fr. Feeney went so far as to exclude Baptism of desire (and martyrdom) from the means of salvation.
Fr.Leonard Feeney like Catholic priests in Rome say there is no baptism of desire that we can know of and that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus says everyone needs to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church for salvation.

The Society of St.Pius X claims that the baptism of desire is explicitly known to us and so contradicts the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This is heresy.It is a rejection of an ex cathedra dogma.In principle as a possibility a non Catholic can be saved with the baptism of desire and this would be known only to God. So it does not contradict the ‘rigorist interpretation’ of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, p. 216:

“Evidently, certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion. There may be souls who, not knowing Our Lord, have by the grace of the good Lord, good interior dispositions, who submit to God...But some of these persons make an act of love which implicitly is equivalent to baptism of desire. It is uniquely by this means that they are able to be saved.”[Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press, 1997, p. 216] (Emphasis added)

Bishop Lefebvre, Address given at Rennes, France: “If men are saved in Protestantism, Buddhism or Islam, they are saved by the Catholic Church, by the grace of Our Lord, by the prayers of those in the Church, by the blood of Our Lord as individuals, perhaps through the practice of their religion, perhaps of what they understand in their religion, but not by their religion…” [Quoted in Bro. Robert Mary, Fr. Feeney and the Truth About Salvation, p. 213]
The above two passages quoted are in accord with the 'rigorist' interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. There are those who can be saved with the baptism of desire etc and they are known only to God. There is no explicit or implicit baptism of desire that we can know of. It is always a probability not an actual reality for us. So the dogma stands: everybody needs to explicitly be a member of the Catholic Church with no exception to avoid Hell.

SSPX supporters using their assumed interpretation of the founder of the SSPX have been on a constant attack against those who claim there is no baptism of desire. The enemies of the Church could be happy that traditionalists are fighting over a strawman.

The Society of St. Pius X website and a book by Fr. Laisney sold by the SSPX Press and advertised on the internet, have also swallowed the above mentioned Zionist interpretation of the dogma, the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and claims of Fr. Leonard Feeney being in heresy.


Catholic Mission said...

Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Bishop Fellay, Fr.Schmidberger,FSSP,Joseph Fenton seem unaware the baptism of desire is not an explicit exception to the dogma
From Rorate Caeli comments on Who is a Traditionalist?

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...