Saturday, May 2, 2015

Lou Verrechio's Latest

Wow, I haven't been to Lou Verechhio's blog in a long time - I could not believe what I was reading. It has become the haunt of sophomoric fools and liars. What a shipwreck.

Everything Fr. Paul Nicholson said about SSPX is right on the money. They are not faithful Catholics by any stretch of the imagination. They don't have faculties and they are simulating Sacraments.

Further, Lou's peculiar conspiracy theories about refusing to talk up SSPX to people who have no interest in the truth, was creepy.

Everyone following the controversy knows who SSPX is and the claims they make about what they hope to accomplish. We don't talk to SSPX for the same reason we don't see Lou giving air time to Joan Chittister to give her an opportunity to speak for herself. Lou already knows Joan is off of the reservation. Why would he waste time with a charade to talk about "allegations" she's a heretic? We've heard the words coming directly from her mouth and we know how to compare them against the Magisterium. The jury delivered the verdict decades ago.

The same verdict was delivered on SSPX. Their public statements are enough to convict them beyond a reasonable doubt. There is nothing further to discuss other than the invitations to admit their errors and come back to communion with Christ's Church.

Christian decency has nothing to do with declining an invitation to engage with the deceived and deceivers.

I had a lot of respect for Lou and he always struck me as affable. Watching the video, he comes across as a jerk.

Come on Lou, pull it together. Time for a retreat!


Anonymous said...

This will be my last visit to your blog...but will pray for you for the grace neede to open your heart to reality.

TTC said...

I don't have donors to please so that excuse doesn't fly.

I've been in pursuit of reality for a couple of decades now. When you really want it and open yourself to it, it isn't complicated.

God Bless.

Dbon said...

I only recently started following him but this last video is not just flawed logically, it's just unpalatable. He comes across overweening and snide. I had been trying to set aside the fake laughs he inserts while reading from the prompt but taken on the whole, making these videos does not play to what his strengths may be on any level. Looking back at several videos they all evoke an uncanny squeamishness, not unlike when you see someone on one of those talent shows where you are dying a little bit watching someone bomb - but they are completely unaware of how bad they are on stage. Lou comes across just like that.

TTC said...

The fake laughter is sophomoric. I was expecting him to drop his drawers and light his flatuence on fire at any moment. It was his sniveling demeanor that got to me. Then, the people in the comments section --- OIY!

Maryanne LaGrua said...

Last time visiting here. You need to do more research and less flapping of your lips. Then go find a real priest so that you might have some much needed grace from a real confession..

TTC said...


I did the research. It's pretty straight-forward. Real priests are in communion with Rome and have faculties to perform all Sacraments.

Edison Frisbee said...

Normally I like your writing but you have really missed the mark on this one...since you quote Chris Ferrara elsewhere, take the time to review his discussion on this very topic. Fr. Nicholson comes across as something's not 100% right with him. To say, as he did, that an SSPX mass is more offensive to God than a black mass is certainly proof positive of that.

Edison Frisbee said...

Normally I like your writing but you have really missed the mark on this one...since you quote Chris Ferrara elsewhere, take the time to review his discussion on this very topic. Fr. Nicholson comes across as something's not 100% right with him. To say that an SSPX mass is more offensive to God than a black mass is certainly proof positive of that.

Anonymous said...

I don't know where to begin to start. I saw your comment on Fr Nicholson's Facebook page critical of Fr Gruner and mentioning his "scandalous" actions--the day after he died. Really? First, how about Fr N and you giving him a few days of prayer for the repose of his soul before you criticize him. And when has Fr Nicholson criticized heretics like Cardinal Kasper and Cardinal Marx? What were Fr Gruner's scandals? OK, he disobeyed the order to return to his diocese and he talks about a belief that Russia was not truly consecrated to our Lady in the manner requested on the Fatima apparitions. That's it! And you, all knowledgable about what had or has not happened slam a recently deceased priest as though he was doing more damage to souls than folks like Marx, Kasper, O'Malley, Dolan, Wuerl, Bergolio and the rest of the heretics out there leading the Catholic Church into the gutter.

And what exactly is your beef with the SSPX? They refuse to cow-tow to admitting everything about Vatican 2 was hunky dory, so they have an irregular canonical status in the post V2 church. They are allowed to celebrate Mass. If you attend one of their Masses, you do still fulfill your Sunday obligation. One could argue that if they compromised with the Holy See today in order to get a normalized canonical status, they would probably suffer the same fate as the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.

If you think the Novus Ordo Mass is so great, where has it gotten us since V2? Mass attendance is way down. The liturgy in most parishes is a circus. Catholic school education is no longer truly Catholic. It was Catholics who helped elect Obama. What had 50 years of the Novus Ordo Mass since V2 gotten us? What had 50 years post v2 gotten us? If we agree that the crap coming from this Synod on the Family must be rejected, then why are you so quick to dismiss the prospect that the SSPX objections to V2 might actually be right?

I'm also done reading your blog. All the good you have done on the past 10 plus years you are undoing by your ill-informed judgments on people who are far more right than you are giving credit.

TTC said...

You would have no knowledge of my prayers for the repose of Fr Gruner's soul. Your histrionics are completely off base.

Since the schismatics area king a hero out of thisisguided shepherd, naturally, it requires a response.

I am not going to waste
Another moment of precious time responding to your hysteria.

TTC said...

Edisson, I don't normally follow Chris and the Remnant but I did like the videos I watched on the synod. If he supports SSPX, that wod be something I disagree with him about.

I don't agree with Fr Paul that SSPX Masses are as bad or worse than black masses but do agree that they are extremely damaging because they are sucking faithful Catholics who are scandalized by the corruption. Black masses give power to demons but demons are powerless against sanctifying Grace. Consequently, what he says is a legitimate position for a priest to take.

I don't agree with everything Fr Nicholson says, just like I don't agree wih everything fr z says, but their judgment is outstanding.

Does that help explain my position?

Edison Frisbee said...

Unless you can cite a definitive Church document that shows the SSPX is schismatic, it would be best to refrain from making statements about their status. Their masses are valid.
How many Catholics have been "sucked out" of the Church by "irregularities" in the Novus Ordo? Far more than anything the SSPX can account for....yet SSPX is unfailingly the target of Neo-con Catholic the ire.

TTC said...

Here is the head of the CDF's statement that SSPX is in schism:

he leaders of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) are in schism, and remain suspended from the sacraments, says the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

In an interview with the Italian daily Corriere della Sera, Archbishop Gerhard Müller said that although Pope Benedict XVI lifted the canonical excommunication of SSPX prelates, they remain suspended from the sacraments because “by their schism they have broken away from communion with the Church.”

Archbishop Müller said that while talks with the SSPX have reach an impasse, the Vatican will not close the door to reconciliation. However, he said, a restoration of full communion would require the SSPX to accept the authority of the Church and of the Pope.

The Canons are clear. They do not have faculties to perform the Sacraments of Confession, Marriage, Confirmation. They can give Extreme Unction if a soul is close to death but their confessions are invalid. They are simulating the Sacrament of absolution of sin. It is one of the most outrageous things I can think of in the Church.

They will never accept they are in schism and they will never accept they do not have the power to absolve sins. But it's black and white in Canon law and the CDF has spoken. They are in schism.

TTC said...

Here is Fr. Z's explanation of invalidity of SSPX Sacraments. Everyone agrees they can Transubstantiate -- but they are performing other Sacraments which are invalid.

Meaning, people are going into Confessionals thinking their sins are absolved and they are not. Their defiance which puts souls in harms way makes my blood boil. It should make your blood boil too.

TTC said...

A priest’s sacramental authority, or power, to forgive sins comes from his ordination, the ontological change to his soul from Holy Orders. A priest’s juridical authority to forgive sins comes from the bishop, the chief judge of the diocese (… or his religious superior).

The Church says that a priest must have both to be able to absolve validly.

The priests of the Society of St. Pius X have separated themselves from the legitimate authority of the diocesan bishop, in union with the Roman Pontiff. Since they have no connection to the local bishop’s authority, they are not given faculty – permission – to hear to absolve. They lack the jurisdiction to do so. Fr. Z explains law:

The SSPX bishops are not diocesan bishops who are authorized to share their jurisdiction to absolve, to exercise the power of the keys, as it were. The SSPX bishops are an anomaly unheard of in Christian tradition: bishops without no diocese, either actual/real or titular. They are like husbands without wives. They have orders but no jurisdiction.

TTC said...

Confessions are invalid, as are some of the other Sacraments they are simulating.

This is why a priest would say the damage they are doing to the Body of Christ is actually more harmful than that of a black mass. The demons do not have power over us unless we grant it. In the case of SSPX, they are taking the elite of Christ's Church and pretending they have the power to absolve sin, leaving the effect of sin upon their soul and intellect.

Fr. N's position is quite valid.

TTC said...

When it comes to whether or not SSPX is in schism - we have the opinion of the head of the CDF, substantiated black and white in Church law, and then we have Lou Verrechio.

It's a no brainer for me.

TTC said...

Have a great day.

Anonymous said...

TTC, I have enjoyed many of your posts, but on this occasion I have to agree with those who berate you.

Have you ever considered why it is that great numbers of patently heterodox priests, ranging from the PP level to high ranking prelates such as Cardinals Kasper and Danneels, 'have faculties', while the SSPX, who are totally orthodox, don't? If you are sincere in your pursuit of reality maybe it's time to give the matter some thought.

Have you also considered why it is that Joan Chittister, whom you mention as being 'off the reservation', is supported by priests with faculties, including high ranking prelates - the very ones whom you defend, and has never been properly disciplined, still moving freely in mainstream Catholic circles, something the SSPX has been barred from doing? In short, Joan Chittister has a far higher standing in the present day Church than the SSPX. Think about that reality.

And, from someone who has so far felt respect for you, please don't use scatological references to make your point. When a Catholic lady does that it leaves the impression that something is amiss.

And, BTW it's not just Lou Verrechio, it's many Catholics who take their faith seriously - and their numbers are increasing daily. Your time will come :)

TTC said...

Dear Anon,

I have a substantial number of readers who attend SSPX or used to before Motu Proprio.

You say though that my time will come when I will realize how bad things are and jump the ship. But the time I woke up to the diabolical disorientation of our royal priesthood and state of affairs in catechesis and governance came for me a long time ago. I've written about it before but maybe will write again.

I took at least a year and studied the situation, read the Catechism of Trent, read everything anyone had to say about the state of affairs and was pursued by a priest from SSPX who was supplying me with all the info and beckoning me. I read it all and nearly jumped.

Thank God I had good friends and priests around me who were educated and gave me their resources which believe me, at that time, I was skeptical about. At the end of the day, the resources of SSPX and their positions just didn't add up.

more later

S. Armaticus said...

Dear TTC:

Something to consider:

As for the SSPX and whether they are inside or outside the Church, I think this is an open question.

At the end of the day, I guess it is a matter of where one wants to draw the lines. I think that the smart money (in terms of Salvation) is on drawing the line on "doctrinal error". And in the case of the SSPX, we are dealing with a strictly a "disciplinary" matter.

W/r/t doctrine, they are more sound than anyone else out there, Ecclesia Dei included. On a personal note, they are the only ones that I trusted with the catachism of my little guys.

Clare said...

"I don't agree with Fr Paul that SSPX Masses are as bad or worse than black masses..."


TTC said...

Clare, That is what the post says.

"I know it's upsetting that Fr. N compared it to satanic worship - and maybe I wouldn't go that far myself but I absolutely am in agreement with him that Catholics need to return to Christ's Mystical Body to whom the authority to deliver Sacraments has been bequeathed"

" and maybe I wouldn't go that far myself"

I do understand why a priest would take that position and come mighty close to agreeing with him.