Hi, Michelle. I'm going to try to respond to this post, as my eye is finally better! But only to this post and its thesis, that SSPX is, like your cat coming in and going out, somehow indecisive and neither leaving the modernist Church (as heretical) nor giving up its decades-long struggle and accepting Vatican II's doctrine and new mass and ending the division. I don't want to enter a protracted discussion--I'm not qualified and anyway would bore you! In anticipation, cutting to the chase, I am so glad they stay right up in Rome's face without yielding an inch of traditional doctrine and liturgy. It is true that in pursuit of clarity over the doctrinal points at issue, there was some wobbling. Bishop Fellay in April of 2012 offered to accept Vatican II as long as it could be 'interpreted in light of tradition,' said the new mass was both valid and licit, and said the 1983 Code of Canon Law that expressed points at issue of VII as Church law could be accepted. SSPX clergy and laity protested, and in July of 2012 a General Chapter was called and issued a new document to Rome that said SSPX demanded "freedom to prohibit, correct, and reprove" VII, to exclusively celebrate the old mass, and the erection of internal tribunals to bypass the new Code. That unequivocal position has been maintained by the Superior General replacing Bishop Fellay up to now, Father David Pagliarani. These conditions were presented by SSPX to Rome at that time as firm clarifications of Fellay's offer, and the negotiations collapsed. The July statement and the election of Pagliarani represented the dominance of the SSPX 'hardliners' with a moderate wing seeking a personal prelature with Rome and a loosely organized breakaway group led by the expelled Bishop Williamson, the 'Resistance.' SSPX has grown and its bishops have aged and it is physically impossible for them to continue to confirm laity and consecrate new priests to celebrate mass and administer the sacraments, and this 'state of necessity' has led, after years of discussion, to a scheduled consecration of new bishops, resulting in threats of new punishments by Rome. The names rumor is suggesting will be consecrated are all hardliners with positions of authority within SSPX, and because SSPX endured excommunication for so many years without diminution of its support and a complete erosion of Rome's coherent justification for such a radical punishment of Catholics guilty only of practicing Catholicism as it had been for centuries, there is no dread of that outcome, but only confidence that Rome will eventually come to its senses. I personally pray that SSPX will stay right where it is, as I heard Bishop Fellay express it at one of the Kansas City conferences, 'out on the porch in the rain knocking on Rome's door, and Rome comes, and SSPX asks if they are ready to reject the errors of Vatican II and Rome shouts "No!" and slams the door and SSPX resumes knocking.' If Roman authority are men able to see and hear, eventually the relation of the terrible chaos in the world to the flawed doctrine of Vatican II (as powerfully predicted in Lefebvre's "They Have Uncrowned Him') will become clear. SSPX continues to express that connection at every opportunity, SSPX laity like myself continue to try to show it, and as long as we stay the course there is hope for the precious doctrine and liturgy of the True Church and not that protestantized mess holding the real estate but not the truth.

Please re-tweet the post below. They're trying to say Trump cancelled Title IX. No, he is enforcing Title IX. For girls,the way it was intended.

It has always been a problem to me whether the economic policies of socialism--which were taken from the Catholic states before capitalism overthrew them-- could be stripped away from the philosophy of atheism and class struggle and used by us, without Christ. But perhaps we need not do that . If we began with usury, the very powerful oppression of our people, we could couple it with a call for Christ to be king and His teachings law. For both items would be a miracle to teach our public, yet miracles happen!

This is a reply in the comments to a really important interview of Alex Krainer hosted by Glenn Dieson about the role of the banking industry and the investor class in our present crisis. . . . Yes, we (I mean Glenn's 'ordinary man,' not one of the investor class) are caught in a forced choice between a kick in the head and a kick in the stomach. Between capitalism and socialism. We are choosing capitalism. But why? It is not because socialism has been misinterpreted to us. Socialism really is bad. But not for its economics. It is bad for its philosophy. If you would only turn socialism from atheism and class struggle! If you would first help us return the Catholic Church to its traditional roots, that Church's ancient rejection of usury implemented in modern terms could break the hold of the banks. If you would yourselves accept traditional Catholicism--please grasp the meaning of that adjective 'traditional, 'because the present administration is not that and must be ousted from their positions and their heresy purged--you would give us an economic system that is (and was before its overthrow by capitalism) benign, peaceful, cooperative, strong, ready to go to the stars.Philosophically ready and economically ready. Atheism is a dead end. It is energy zero. Only belief in God and acceptance of the moral teachings of Christ give us the energy sustained, sustainable, over generations, beyond the limits of mankind's natural life span. Brian McCall's book "The Church and the Usurers" (Angelus Press) gives the history of usury, which many other books have given, but also, in his chapter 7, a step by step economic program to end usury. To end the domination of the banking industry and the investor class without class warfare. With firm allegiance to the right to property. One can tell by Alex's face that he does not see a way out. This is the way out. It is not only economics, it is philosophical. It is both, and the ordinary person can accept it and escape this forced choice. To my fellow Catholics, Pius wrote the encyclical "Quadragesimo Anno" that utterly trashed socialism and gave us our position. Yet is was not socialism's economics he rejected. One little paragraph, p 114, tells us that we can accept socialism's economics--because they took them from us, from Catholicism! Go look. He says we can use those economics, just not use the atheism and class struggle. Glenn! Alex! Be aware of the distinction being made, realize it's central to our survival, begin to address this issue. Follow Christ and embrace the natural economics His traditional Church lived by over centuries before the bankers prevailed. You do that while traditional Catholics today try to restore that Church. There is a way out!

We have much poverty in the US, and we deny it. We have no policy that is distinct from both atheistic and class struggle-ridden socialism and elite capitalism, and so we are left with capitalism that churns out more poor every day. I try to promote the Catholic economy in place before the capitalist reformation. It was religious socialism with private property, no usury, staffed by religious orders. We shall always have the poor, but there are better ways to help than either atheistic socialism or capitalism. We are at a dead end with both of those. I could not reply to a post by @FiatLuxGenesis so I am offering this.