Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Anσnymσus Posts Allowed => Topic started by: Änσnymσus on September 27, 2022, 07:52:54 PM
-
The rumour is circulating amongst the European priests: 4 bishops to be consecrated within a year's time?
Will they be consecrated with or without the permission of Rome?
If without, how can that be verified?
If the SSPX thought it necessary to have Rome ratify their General Chapter results, how could they not think it necessary to have the same insane Rome ratify their consecrations?
-
Why is this nonsense in the Anonymous forum again?
-
If the SSPX thought it necessary to have Rome ratify their General Chapter results, how could they not think it necessary to have the same insane Rome ratify their consecrations?
I've been out of the SSPX loop for quite some time now. Is that the 2012 General Chapter?
-
Is this the rumor you are starting here?
-
Why is this nonsense in the Anonymous forum again?
This subforum was created precisely for these types of posts: "Members can post here αnσnумσυѕly for legitimate reasons. For first-hand chapel reports, ωнιѕтlєвlσωιng, sensitive/personal questions, and any other legitimate occasion for αnσnymıty."
-
The rumour is circulating amongst the European priests: 4 bishops to be consecrated within a year's time?
Anyone here actually believe this here rumour?
-
Anyone here actually believe this here rumour?
Yes, it seems very plausible. Bishop Tissier can barely make the rounds, so despite large growth from Novur Ordo covid defections, they are nearly down to 2 bishops. Very soon they will need more, somehow.
-
This subforum was created precisely for these types of posts: "Members can post here αnσnумσυѕly for legitimate reasons. For first-hand chapel reports, ωнιѕтlєвlσωιng, sensitive/personal questions, and any other legitimate occasion for αnσnymıty."
This is not whistleblowing.
-
This is not whistleblowing.
It is the textbook definition of whistleblowing: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whistleblower
-
The rumour is circulating amongst the European priests: 4 bishops to be consecrated within a year's time?
Will they be consecrated with or without the permission of Rome?
If without, how can that be verified?
If the SSPX thought it necessary to have Rome ratify their General Chapter results, how could they not think it necessary to have the same insane Rome ratify their consecrations?
You will know when they do it. Speculation is so fruitless.
-
They’ve waited 30 years to consecrate new ones… I don’t believe it if I’m being honest.
-
It is the textbook definition of whistleblowing: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whistleblower
No it's gossip. I'm sick iof the abuse of the anonymous forum...but I'm also aware that's it's not going to change.
-
Anyone here actually believe this here rumour?
Not I.
-
Not I.
Forgot the check box.
-
The rumour is circulating amongst the European priests: 4 bishops to be consecrated within a year's time?
Will they be consecrated with or without the permission of Rome?
If without, how can that be verified?
If the SSPX thought it necessary to have Rome ratify their General Chapter results, how could they not think it necessary to have the same insane Rome ratify their consecrations?
If I had to guess, and if this rumor is indeed true (or has any elements of truth to it, such as consecrating one or two more bishops instead of four, or having a new-rite bishop such as Schneider or Huonder to join in the consecration), the SSPX may be waiting until Francis leaves the papacy, and waiting to see who the next Pope will be, and how favorably disposed he is to both the SSPX and the TLM in general. If it were Erdo, things might be okay. If it were Tagle, things might not be okay.
They may want to see if it's going to be a worst-case scenario, and if they might have to press ahead and incur excommunication for consecrating a bishop without a papal mandate, IOW, 1988 all over again. (But I do have to wonder if Tagle, as "Pope John XXIV", would be as bold as to declare excommunication and schism, and strictly to enforce TC and that despicable "in due time" coda, with hundreds of thousands of screaming traditionalists of all stripes and a very, very vocal Web presence. We didn't have that in 1988, when it was basically The Angelus and Radko Jansky's Mass directory and that was about it.)
-
That’s great! So glad to hear this and I hope it’s true.
-
I wouldn't believe it, but with this supposed rumor going around, and this article I just found yesterday on their website: https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/we-owe-pius-xii-important-clarifications-nature-episcopate it makes me wonder. What I don't like about that article is how they justify the possibility for the first 4 bishops to be validly consecrated, but they don't explain how they ever got the authority to ordain priests seeing how they were not approved by the pope, or at least the article never mentions the pope approving them and giving them jurisdiction.
-
I wouldn't believe it, but with this supposed rumor going around, and this article I just found yesterday on their website: https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/we-owe-pius-xii-important-clarifications-nature-episcopate it makes me wonder. What I don't like about that article is how they justify the possibility for the first 4 bishops to be validly consecrated, but they don't explain how they ever got the authority to ordain priests seeing how they were not approved by the pope, or at least the article never mentions the pope approving them and giving them jurisdiction.
Supplied jurisdiction, emergency situation, epikeia. It's no more complicated than that.
-
It is the textbook definition of whistleblowing: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whistleblower
Garbage. There's nothing here that justifies your abuse of the Anonymous forum.
-
Garbage. There's nothing here that justifies your abuse of the Anonymous forum.
Ladislaus, your posts are identifiable more by your bad manners, than by their content. The OP is clearly within the domain of whistleblowing. Perhaps you don't like that, but that's the way it is.
-
Garbage. There's nothing here that justifies your abuse of the Anonymous forum.
Says someone posting as anonymous! :clown:
-
Says someone posting as anonymous! :clown:
He probably forgot to check the box. It happens to me sometimes as well. OTOH, those who initiate anonymous threads in the Anonymous sub-forum, do so with the full intention of posting it anonymously.
-
He probably forgot to check the box. It happens to me sometimes as well. OTOH, those who initiate anonymous threads in the Anonymous sub-forum, do so with the full intention of posting it anonymously.
Yes, yes, that stands to reason:laugh1:
-
He probably forgot to check the box. It happens to me sometimes as well. OTOH, those who initiate anonymous threads in the Anonymous sub-forum, do so with the full intention of posting it anonymously.
I'm the OP, and I fully intended to post this thread anonymously, having read the rules thoroughly prior to doing so, and coming to the clear and obvious knowledge that this forum is precisely for such posts..
I suspect you are just a nosey person who's being eaten alive by wanting to know who might have such information as was posted.
But I can promise you this: If you should ever succeed, I will never post here again.
-
I'm the OP, and I fully intended to post this thread anonymously, having read the rules thoroughly prior to doing so, and coming to the clear and obvious knowledge that this forum is precisely for such posts..
I suspect you are just a nosey person who's being eaten alive by wanting to know who might have such information as was posted.
But I can promise you this: If you should ever succeed, I will never post here again.
:laugh1: I couldn't care less about your so-called "information". Which is just gossip....nosey people LOVE gossip.:laugh1:
-
:laugh1: I couldn't care less about your so-called "information". Which is just gossip....nosey people LOVE gossip.:laugh1:
Please observe Catholic charity in your postings.
-
I'm the OP, and I fully intended to post this thread anonymously, having read the rules thoroughly prior to doing so, and coming to the clear and obvious knowledge that this forum is precisely for such posts..
I suspect you are just a nosey person who's being eaten alive by wanting to know who might have such information as was posted.
But I can promise you this: If you should ever succeed, I will never post here again.
You have no "information", and yes this is an abuse of the Anonymous forum.
As for not posting here again, that would probably be a good thing.
-
Please observe Catholic charity in your postings.
Catholic charity includes not spreading rumours. Care to take a look in the mirror?
-
Bump
-
Bump
You do know the bishop is still breathing. :facepalm:
-
I'm the OP, and I fully intended to post this thread anonymously, having read the rules thoroughly prior to doing so, and coming to the clear and obvious knowledge that this forum is precisely for such posts..
I suspect you are just a nosey person who's being eaten alive by wanting to know who might have such information as was posted.
But I can promise you this: If you should ever succeed, I will never post here again.
Could we have the restraint to at least wait until he's been in the ground for a day or two before starting up rumor mongering?
-
SSPX should begin a novena for fidelity to the no compromise +Lefebvre position. Asking Rome for a candidate for consecration to carry the torch of Faith and Tradition would be akin to raising the white flag.
-
Could we have the restraint to at least wait until he's been in the ground for a day or two before starting up rumor mongering?
You must be new here. :cowboy:
-
The rumour is circulating amongst the European priests: 4 bishops to be consecrated within a year's time?
.
This post just turned two years old. That didn't age well. :laugh1:
-
.
This post just turned two years old. That didn't age well. :laugh1:
There were a few other similar predictions, the aged even less well, one where it was predicted that the consecrations would happen by the end of a month, when there were only a few days left in said month. I think that's one where some of the Resistance folks later concluded that it was deliberate disinfo put out there to make the Resistance look bad, and, frankly, I can't find any other explanation for that one.
-
There were a few other similar predictions, the aged even less well, one where it was predicted that the consecrations would happen by the end of a month, when there were only a few days left in said month. I think that's one where some of the Resistance folks later concluded that it was deliberate disinfo put out there to make the Resistance look bad, and, frankly, I can't find any other explanation for that one.
I suspect the Menzingen used this tactic to ferret out the mole within the SSPX feeding information to the resistance. No doubt the culprit was shot when caught