Telesphorus
Reputation: 8261
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 11,729
|
| Columba said: | | The only remaining question is whether +Fellay was genuinely fooled into thinking the Romans were friendly or secretly knew they were anti-traditionalist all along. |
Do you think he discovered during the doctrinal discussions that what was condemned in the Council was not of the Council and that Vatican II should become part of the great tradition of the Church?
|
.........................
"I realized the desire of Rome to impose their ideas and their way of seeing. Cardinal Ratzinger always told me "But Monsignor, there is only one Church, it is not necessary to make a parallel church."
Which is this Church for him? The Conciliar Church, this is clear."
-Archbishop Lefebvre
|
| Posted Jul 25, 2012, 8:12 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
Nishant
Reputation: 767
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 1,091
|
SSPX Crisis, if I may ask, I presume Bishop Williamson is aware that his statements are being made public in this manner, and has approved it?
|
.........................
"There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church. Tranquility will not return until the Pope succeeds in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion to Our Lady. This will come about one year before the end of the century." ~ St. John Bosco, "Twin Pillars prophecy", A.D. 1862.
|
| Posted Jul 25, 2012, 8:36 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
Incredulous
Reputation: 2148
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 1,151
|
| justso said: | | InstaurareEcclesiam said: | | I think Bp. Williamson should not have said this in a public video. This is just too aggressive, although I can understand his anger somewhat. |
Respectfully, I disagree.
The time for holding one's tongue is over. While I do agree that in times gone by, when the true feelings and private sentiments between +Fellay and +Williamson were somewhat necessarily muted in the name of harmony of the inner workings of the FSSPX, then yes, such statements would prove provocative.
But the provocation of soundbyte one-liners and gentle inuendo between the two has given way to a very public, blunt and resolute bottom line: +Fellay wants +Williamson gone and the feeling is mutual. No more games, no more hesitation - the cat is out of the cellophane bag and is clear for all to see. It is clear that the new SSPX has no use for +Williamson any longer. That being said, if +Tissier de Mallerais or +de Galarreta continue to take their positions which align with +Williamson's, it won't be long before they too find themselves on the outs.
After this general chapter and the public actions taken to forbid +Williamson, and the public release of information from the SSPX organ (DICI) regarding the "vote" and the tally, there's no more secrets. So these statements, even given before the general chapter, do not bother me. Whether +Williamson said these things two weeks prior or two weeks after the general chapter, he still would have been unwelcome to come there, just as he has been unwelcome at ordinations, meetings, etc.
| InstaurareEcclesiam said: | | Fellay clearly pushes his own opinion too much, without much dogmatic and doctrinal basis. |
Agreed.
And sadly, since the Church isn't in Her right mind and we have no leadership from the top down, there's no one hierarchically speaking to discipline +Fellay for his out-of-line behavior and abuse of power. But he too, just like we, will have to kneel before his judge to make an account of his life.
We must pray for him.
| InstaurareEcclesiam said: | | The Church is not politics, no hobby, but deadly serious. One jota from dogma being changed, will corrupt the entire Church and faithful communities. |
No it isn't, but all too often, we moderns love to make it political. The one jot or tittle of the faith being changed or compromised is exactly what drives +Williamson to do what he does. And the fact that he is one of a very small handful on earth of true shepherds who understands that and takes his episcopal ministry seriously speaks of how well his mind is formed around doctrine.
| InstaurareEcclesiam said: | | Of course the internal inconsistencies of Bp. Williamson's "recognize, sift and resist" position still remain. |
Agreed again. Although this is merely academic in respect to your next valid point.
| InstaurareEcclesiam said: | | But we do all agree on Roman Catholic dogma and definitive moral and other teaching of the Holy Roman Apostolic and Catholic Church. |
Indeed.
|
From Father Rostand's comments in San Antonio last weekend, we see that Bp. Fellay's political incompetance is being blamed on Bp. Williamson.
The SSPX "soft-liner" cabal is resorting to blatant lies to cover their tracks.
While Max Krah's buddies resurrect anti-semite charges in German courts,
Bp. Williamson is on the verge of being expelled from the SSPX.
As Bp. Fellay concocts his expulsion case, Bp. Williamson has nothing to lose by calling for Fellay's ouster. Bp. Fellay has abused his authority, lied and lost his credibility. In justice, the majority of SSPX priests should be behind Bp. Williamson.
|
|
| Posted Jul 26, 2012, 2:13 am |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
