However, in recent years, this time the falling away of a minority of priests was for different reasons than for embracing sedevecantist beliefs. What caused it this time? With recent negotiations between SSPX leadership and Rome in recent years, some traditional Catholic priests and lay faithful associated with the SSPX became convinced that the SSPX is about to compromise on what it has always stood for and they went into panic mode and started a lot of commotion. Those who broke away from the SSPX termed themselves “the Resistance” and many among them gave themselves heavily over to gossip, calumny, hearsay, fear-mongering, rumor-spreading, slandering of SSPX bishops and priests without sufficient evidence or without sufficiently investigating, encouraging rebellion of SSPX priests against lawful commands, etc. These groups represent a very small percentage of those who associate with the position of the SSPX, but they are very vocal (particularly on the Internet). Based on many people’s experience and an objective analysis of the situation, the vast majority of traditional Catholics (and even mainstream Catholics) won’t hesitate to tell you that you will most likely find a higher percentage of sedevecantist-type bitter fruits (calumny, gossip, slander, fear-mongering, pride) among these groups than among your average SSPX priest or lay faithful (the latter of whom – namely, SSPX priests and lay faithful who use their services – I have personally found for the most part to be very balanced, intelligent, reasonable, and charitable; with some exceptions of course as there are with any religion, government, political party, club, or organization; mainstream Catholic organizations certainly not excluded among them). For those who are interested, many have found the following articles very helpful in addressing the arguments of Resistance supporters:
A Catholic Thinker: A Response to the SSPX Resistance
Louis Verrechio's Article "Bishop Williamson: Resistant to what?"
6-Part Audio Conference of Fr. Themann, FSSPX (April 2013) on the Resistance Arguments
For many years, there was a group of traditional Dominicans in France who were friends of the SSPX and associated with them and their position, especially in that the SSPX bishops used to be willing to ordain the Dominican seminarians when the seminarians had finished studying for the priesthood in the Dominican monastery. However, with the expulsion of Bishop Williamson from the SSPX in October 2012, many of the Dominicans at this monastery went along with him and began attacking the SSPX, thus breaking any associations they once had with the SSPX. An official communiqué from Fr. Christian Bouchacourt, the SSPX District Superior of France, outlines their offenses against the SSPX, concluding his article with:
Consequently, given so many dishonest accusations, the District of France can no longer support the Dominican community in Avrille which, by its subversive schemes, is sowing doubt and division in the ranks of Tradition and weakening its forces.
The minority of priests that broke away from the SSPX call themselves “the Resistance”, and hence, I refer to this particular group of Dominicans as the “Resistance Dominicans” so as to differentiate them from those traditional Dominicans who did not go along with the Resistance Dominicans. Those traditional Dominicans who did not agree with attacking the SSPX and breaking their association with the SSPX obviously no longer reside at the monastery of the Resistance Dominicans in Avrille, France, and Bishop Fellay has in recent times given his approval to their founding of a new monastery on November 15, 2013, that will strive to continue as they did prior to when the “Resistance Dominicans” broke away and began attacking (and calumniating) the SSPX. The vast majority of traditional Catholics hold the Resistance Dominicans in suspicion and most don’t take what they say seriously because of the reasons detailed very well in the official communiqué of Fr. Bouchacourt (referenced above). In other words, the Resistance Dominicans have proven themselves incapable and untrustworthy in their ability to objectively analyze things, and, the bad fruits with which they have consistently conducted themselves are very revealing, in accordance with what Our Lord taught us in Scripture: “Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.” (Matthew 7:20).In analyzing the Resistance Dominican’s anti-Valtorta article, you will notice that they exercise the same type of unsubstantiated calumny and accusations without evidence against Valtorta and her writings (without doing a proper analysis and investigation) that the majority of traditional Catholics recognize that they are guilty of doing against the SSPX. To most traditional Catholics, this will not come as a surprise.
In fact, for a long time, I did not consider it worth my time to write a refutation of this Resistance Dominican anti-Valtorta article, partly because they represent such a minority of traditional Catholics, who themselves represent a minority among the body of those who identify themselves as Catholic. However, because I was asked by several priests and multiple lay people what I thought of their article, I decided to write a refutation of it and expose the truth and objective facts so that those of good will who are interested in the truth will know what to think of their claims and article based on objective evidence and facts. I also think that writing this refutation can serve to strengthen the defense of Valtorta’s work in general. The fact that this anti-Valtorta article was written by “Resistance” Dominicans makes no difference to me and to many of those who are interested in the truth. I would write the same rebuttal no matter who wrote it (Resistance or not or traditional Catholic or not) because what matters are objective facts, objective evidence, and truth, and, as St. Thomas Aquinas taught, “contra factum non argumentum est”: against a fact there is no argument. I only include the above information to inform those who might be interested in what I mean by the term “Resistance Dominicans” in the following rebuttal, even though I imagine that for some non-traditional Catholics, the above information is secondary and they might not care.
To return to the refutation of the Resistance Dominican anti-Valtorta article, click here:
A Complete Analysis and Refutation of the Resistance Dominican’s Flawed Anti-Valtorta Article Entitled “What should we make of the book The Poem of the Man God by Maria Valtorta?”
