By Eleison Comments in Eleison Comments on June 1, 2019
On May 20th, the day on which Bishop Huonder’s term of office as head of the major Swiss Diocese of Chur since 2007 came to a close, the disputed question of his future place of retirement was settled once and for all by a Declaration signed jointly by himself and by the Society’s Superior General, Fr David Pagliarani – the Bishop will be living in the Society’s boys’ school in Wangs in Eastern Switzerland. Doubts had arisen as to where the Bishop would retire because of the natural improbability of a Conciliar bishop settling inside a Traditional house, but on both sides of the doctrinal abyss between the Second Vatican Council and Catholic Tradition, the anti-doctrinal dream of bridging that abyss has prevailed. Thus about his decision the honourable Bishop himself has just written, “In accordance with the wishes of Pope Francis, I shall strive there (in Wangs) to contribute to Church unity.” It is an honourable intention, but it leaves out of account the evil of Vatican II.
As the modern world goes, and with it the modern Church, and with the Newchurch the Newsociety, Bishop Huonder is a decent and well-meaning churchman, full of good intentions which can make any “decent” person think that he is good company, and safe to mix with, and safe to place within a “decent” school. Certainly one may hope that Traditional surroundings in Wangs will do him good.
But from the standpoint of God and of the true Catholic Church, he is a believer in the Second Vatican Council, and therefore he believes in working with the present Pope of that Council, Pope Francis, and in working with all followers of Tradition who have lost their grip on the objective ambiguity and evil of that Council, with its six Conciliar Popes. For indeed that Council is profoundly godless and contaminates all that it touches (see several issues of these “Comments” due soon to appear), and it twists out of true all persons who believe in it. Therefore from the standpoint of the salvation of souls – which is God’s own standpoint – Bishop Huonder is, objectively speaking, contaminated and twisted, not fit company at all for Catholics or a Catholic school, all the more dangerous for his being subjectively decent, well-meaning, likeable and so on.
Nor need he be blamed any more or less than thousands of other “decent” bishops since Vatican II for having let himself be misled by a series of Conciliar Popes, nor need he be insulted as though he is a villain, nor need he be socially shunned like a pariah. But Catholics should absolutely avoid any kind of contact with him, social or otherwise, which might give rise to any temptation to keep with him, for as long as he believes in Vatican II, any kind of company in matters of the Faith. And if to avoid any such temptation it would be necessary to shun his company altogether, then his company should be shunned altogether. God and the Faith must come “first, last and foremost,” otherwise we risk losing our souls.
In conclusion, we can only wish to Bishop Huonder in his retirement all grace of God to understand the perfidy of Vatican II, and we can only wish all grace of God to the Traditional inmates of the Society school in Wangs to help him by their example to understand the danger of the “wishes” of Pope Francis towards the Society, which another example has just brought to light.
The report has come from Rome in the last few days that the Argentinian priest who was appointed by Bishop Fellay to be the Society’s General Bursar, at the request of Pope Francis and with the permission of his successor at the head of the Society, Fr Pagliarani, has rejoined the official Church, and in accordance always with the wishes of Pope Francis he resides presently in the Casa Santa Marta where the Pope himself lives; he will be incardinated in the diocese of Rome, possibly waiting to be appointed bishop by Pope Francis. If such a report were only half true, what would it not still reveal of the inability or unwillingness of high Society officials to understand that Archbishop Lefebvre fought the Second Vatican Council for reasons of the Faith?