Author Topic: Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX  (Read 7264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 24642
  • Reputation: +21477/-481
  • Gender: Male
Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
« on: September 13, 2011, 09:54:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • PereJoseph posted a couple posts that jumped out at me. I believe they deserve their own thread!


    Quote
    I will not be surprised if Bishop Fellay takes the deal, but would be if he rejects it.  The Vatican knows what it is doing and will obviously submit a document for Fellay's decision that he cannot justify rejecting; and, in true NO fashion, it will mot likely contain a few phrases that entirely compromise the SSPX position, popular phrases that allow them to ruthlessly rub their victory in the faces of the SSPX bishops while maintaining a gentle smile appropriate for an art gala.  Of course, accepting this document would be incredibly short-sighted, if the official talking points are any indication :  Already John Zhulsdorf's blog and the news story that gives quotations from Jean-Marie Guenois show that the SSPX position on religious liberty will be warmly embraced by the NO establishment... as a private and legitimate theological opinion.  This document will therefore define the doctrines of the Church as not doctrines at all, only opinions.  The SSPX will be left alone for a while, and in one more generation, Rome has the precedent to tighten its grip.  The SSPX cause will lose steam and the only real Catholics twenty years from now will be sedevacantists or those loyal to Bishop Williamson's group that will surely be started after the deal is made.  He will be called schismatic and is now isolated by the Judaeo-Masonic media and European governments, who will persecute him (and perhaps us ?), etc., Rome wins the diplomatic chess game and Bishop Fellay will prove himself to be a great fool and a liberal, though he will be heralded as a generous and heroic son of the Church.

    Here is an example about how crafty Rome is that I think will be instructive. This was told to me by my fiancée who heard it from French non-una cum priest who left the SSPX. He said that Bishop Fellay and Menzingen have long desired to expel Bishop Williamson from the SSPX but that Rome gave them specific instructions not to do so. This is genius on the part of Rome, and it is clear why. First -- and perhaps this has not been considered as the Romans' intentions by Menzingen, not that this point would be spoken of by either Rome or Menzingen, which increases its impression, -- it puts more pressure on Menzingen in order to save their window of opportunity to (i) save their German apostolate and (ii) capitalise on the opportunity afforded them by Ratzinger's friendly disposition before he dies in the potentially near future. This pressure is efficient because it is all on Menzingen and is not mentioned. Second, Rome surely has read everything Bishop Williamson has written and knows what he cannot abide. Their deal can easily be tinted such that it will ensure Bishop Williamson leaves of his own accord, now an easy target for the label of schism and a magnet for the liberal-bourgeois world's hatred. He will bring all of those unwilling to coöperate with him, and they will quickly become irrelevant in NO establishment circles. Done deal; Rome achieves a coup from the inside, nullifies the momentum and vigour of the Archbishop's message, and turns his true followers into lepers who cursed themselves as untouchable by their stiff-necked decision to pursue formal schism. Meanwhile the SSPX will have been regularised in the NO establishment, as all the papers will let everybody know.


    I have long suspected (in my worst nightmares, of course) that something like this would happen -- that the Crisis would get worse before it gets better. The SSPX is just too juicy a target for adversaries like the devil, the Freemasons, and Conciliar Rome to leave alone. If the Catholic Church founded by Christ could be infiltrated and damaged from the inside, who would claim that a mere BRANCH of the tree would be somehow immune?

    Well, if this speculation actually comes to pass I'll be doing a bit of editing to the header of this forum...
    Feeling generous? Want to say "thank you"? Feel free to send gifts from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Start Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline parentsfortruth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3822
    • Reputation: +2660/-3
    • Gender: Female
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #1 on: September 13, 2011, 09:59:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is what I suspected as well, although I wasn't as good at expressing it as PereJoseph.
    Matthew 5:37

    But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil.

    My Avatar is Fr. Hector Bolduc. He was a faithful parish priest in De Pere, WI,


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 24642
    • Reputation: +21477/-481
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #2 on: September 13, 2011, 10:05:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You know, the way Bishop Williamson (and the true traditional Catholic cause) is being treated by the SSPX leadership, I'd say there could be a split in the SSPX no matter WHAT happens on September 14.

    Maybe the reason there hasn't been a split is because +W hasn't been kicked out yet, and he's a good obedient man?

    But if a false agreement were reached, +W would be forced in conscience to act, and not go along with it. That's when the masks would come off and he'd be kicked out, encouraged to quit, etc.

    Then they'd have their split. That's actually the only way I ever see an SSPX split happening.

    DIVIDE AND CONQUER
    Feeling generous? Want to say "thank you"? Feel free to send gifts from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Start Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Sedevacantist MelFan

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 118
    • Reputation: +75/-0
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #3 on: September 13, 2011, 10:10:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew

    ...I have long suspected (in my worst nightmares, of course) that something like this would happen -- that the Crisis would get worse before it gets better. The SSPX is just too juicy a target for adversaries like the devil, the Freemasons, and Conciliar Rome to leave alone. If the Catholic Church founded by Christ could be infiltrated and damaged from the inside, who would claim that a mere BRANCH of the tree would be somehow immune?...


    The damage seems to often come from the leader of the sspx particularly recently.

    Quote from: Matthew

    Well, if this speculation actually comes to pass I'll be doing a bit of editing to the header of this forum...


    Great!

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8213
    • Reputation: +7164/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #4 on: September 13, 2011, 10:12:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I could no longer consider myself a supporter of the SSPX if Bishop Williamson is kicked out. The fact that Fellay wants to kick him out only shows the flaws in his leadership skills...


    Offline PereJoseph

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1411
    • Reputation: +1973/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #5 on: September 13, 2011, 10:22:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This infamous affair that has been developing for the past several years shows, at the very least, that Bishop Fellay is a brilliant administrator, since he has subjugated and ostracised those priests who are faithful to the Archbishop's cause by demoting them and framing the language he uses publicly and privately to get them to leave the Society on their own or else compromise themselves.  Meanwhile, he has posted French priests docile to his programme all over, especially in the US, which, ironically, is of all places the land of rigorism (I use that word very lightly here, since I am perhaps am one of the most appropriate targets for that meaningless epithet).  Otherwise, in France, for instance, there has been a generational drift towards liberalism that has been solidified by the belief that one must act in a way that is politically attractive or else become irrelevant.

    On the other hand, Bishop Fellay is entirely inept as a diplomat, bumblingly allowing himself to become utterly checkmated by Rome.  Or is he ?  Given what we know of his subtlety as an administrator, as well as his execrable public declarations ("antisemitism," "Jews our elder brothers," "extremist," etc.), it seems that we cannot suppose this to be the case.  On the contrary, it seems far more likely, given who he associates with (the Zionist bourgeois-liberal calumniator Krah and the other calumniator, Fr Pfluger), that this deal or something like it is what he wants.  I am reminded of what a friar told me about a letter from Pope St Leo the Great to one Priscillus, who wanted to Christianise astrology and spent his time, therefore, speaking to pagan astrologers in order to better understand their teachings.  Pope Leo cut to the chase, he said (and I paraphrase), "You keep talking with these people; it must be because you believe as they do."

    Offline Hobbledehoy

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3746
    • Reputation: +4805/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #6 on: September 13, 2011, 10:25:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew
    But if a false agreement were reached, +W would be forced in conscience to act, and not go along with it. That's when the masks would come off and he'd be kicked out, encouraged to quit, etc.


    This is precisely why it behooves us to pray for Bishop Williamson, that he may receive through the patronage and tutelage of the Blessed Virgin Mary, together with the intercession of all Angels and Saints, the graces necessary for him to bear meritously the great crosses and tribulations that he is facing and shall face for the greater edification of the faithful. Bishop Williamson will suffer a "bloodless martyrdom" no matter what happens between Rome and the SSPX.

     :pray:
    Please ignore all that I have written regarding sedevacantism.

    Offline LordPhan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1171
    • Reputation: +826/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #7 on: September 13, 2011, 10:27:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I would remind everyone you only have the word of an anonymous poster to go on with this, I am not accusing him of lying, but I caution everyone to bear that in mind.

    For what it's worth, these things are not being talked about right now, word is Bishop Fellay will reject any deal, the only way I see anything happening is if what one of the posts in the other thread stated along the lines of

    "The Society become regularised but can say and do as it pleases"

    To which I would reply, how would that be any different then SSPX pre-1988?
    We were in the Church then and disobeying what was wrong and attacking the Pope for Assisi.

    I would also like to point out that the attack on Assisi which I posted earlier today came with the permission of Bishop Fellay from Bishop Fellay's appointed District Superior of France.

    I would also like to point out that people are making it out like there are 2 camps in the SSPX Fellay's and Williamson's... but France will follow Bishop Tissier de Mallerais and theologically he is as hard-lined as Bishop Williamson from what I've heard.

    I have absolutely no knowledge of Bishop de Gallereta but he was appointed to head the doctrinal commision of the SSPX by Archbishop Lefebre himself. It was HE who handled the doctrinal discussions.

    Some(See how you qualify statements everyone) Sedevacantists are trying to split us for their own gain, bewary of that.

    Bishop Williamson is not a Sedevacantist nor does he support that thesis. I know. I know more then I let on, but I have heard nothing of what PereJoseph stated.

    The way I see it, there are 2 possibilities tommorow, Rome will have conditions and it will be rejected, rome will not have conditions and you could flip a coin which way it will go, there are Priests in the SSPX that want a deal and there are Priests that do not want a deal. If any were in the first camp they would not tell me, I only heard they exist from others being taken aside during a BBQ party. I cannot mention names but they would be credible to anyone here.

    Let us all sit back and see what happens, worrying about it will do us no good.


    Offline LordPhan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1171
    • Reputation: +826/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #8 on: September 13, 2011, 10:30:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: PereJoseph
    This infamous affair that has been developing for the past several years shows, at the very least, that Bishop Fellay is a brilliant administrator, since he has subjugated and ostracised those priests who are faithful to the Archbishop's cause by demoting them and framing the language he uses publicly and privately to get them to leave the Society on their own or else compromise themselves.  Meanwhile, he has posted French priests docile to his programme all over, especially in the US, which, ironically, is of all places the land of rigorism (I use that word very lightly here, since I am perhaps am one of the most appropriate targets for that meaningless epithet).  Otherwise, in France, for instance, there has been a generational drift towards liberalism that has been solidified by the belief that one must act in a way that is politically attractive or else become irrelevant.

    On the other hand, Bishop Fellay is entirely inept as a diplomat, bumblingly allowing himself to become utterly checkmated by Rome.  Or is he ?  Given what we know of his subtlety as an administrator, as well as his execrable public declarations ("antisemitism," "Jews our elder brothers," "extremist," etc.), it seems that we cannot suppose this to be the case.  On the contrary, it seems far more likely, given who he associates with (the Zionist bourgeois-liberal calumniator Krah and the other calumniator, Fr Pfluger), that this deal or something like it is what he wants.  I am reminded of what a friar told me about a letter from Pope St Leo the Great to one Priscillus, who wanted to Christianise astrology and spent his time, therefore, speaking to pagan astrologers in order to better understand their teachings.  Pope Leo cut to the chase, he said (and I paraphrase), "You keep talking with these people; it must be because you believe as they do."


    Where do you attend Mass? Is it SSPX, Sedevacantist, independant what? Where do you get your information? The Press? Firsthand? Laymen? Priests?

    Offline PereJoseph

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1411
    • Reputation: +1973/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #9 on: September 13, 2011, 10:40:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, it is possible that Rome could be so stupid as to give Bishop Fellay a document that he cannot accept as per their knowledge of his inclinations and the results of the doctrinal discussions.  But he has really tee-ed everything up for them so nicely, it would be inconsistent with their own goals and their past record of diplomatic aptitude for them to waste their golden opportunity.  They announced the meeting on relatively short notice; perhaps it is because they are confident in its outcome because they were able to draft a fool-proof document (whatever that desired outcome might be -- who knows, maybe they now despise the SSPX and want to cut them off for good, even though this is not in keeping with Ratzinger's character).  Rule of thumb in high politics : never leave to chance what can be achieved by calculation.

    Offline PereJoseph

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1411
    • Reputation: +1973/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #10 on: September 13, 2011, 10:55:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • LordPhan, I attend Mass at an independent sedevacantist chapel.  I get my information from publicly available sources (see the open letters from Fr Basil Meramo, the Capuchin in France who denounced Bishop Fellay as an infiltrator, the interview with Fr Floriano Abrahamowicz on True Restoration, and the various other letters, one of which is from a priest in Colombia -- all of these are on the internet; likewise, the Krahgate file is as well) and private sources, both priests and laymen, whether firsthand or secondhand.  Suffice it to say, I trust the veracity of what is told to me and understand the gravity of public speculation and calumny when there is no solid basis for one's words.  I choose not to disclose my souces by name, however, lest some Menzingen attack dogs are sicced on them or me.  Most of what I have written, though, is my own speculation unless I otherwise denote that it is information given to me, in which case I describe the source.  I have not mentioned anything told to me by private sources in confidence.


    Offline LordPhan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1171
    • Reputation: +826/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #11 on: September 13, 2011, 10:59:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: PereJoseph
    LordPhan, I attend Mass at an independent sedevacantist chapel.  I get my information from publicly available sources (see the open letters from Fr Basil Meramo, the Capuchin in France who denounced Bishop Fellay as an infiltrator, the interview with Fr Floriano Abrahamowicz on True Restoration, and the various other letters, one of which is from a priest in Colombia -- all of these are on the internet; likewise, the Krahgate file is as well) and private sources, both priests and laymen, whether firsthand or secondhand.  Suffice it to say, I trust the veracity of what is told to me and understand the gravity of public speculation and calumny when there is no solid basis for one's words.  I choose not to disclose my souces by name, however, lest some Menzingen attack dogs are sicced on them or me.  Most of what I have written, though, is my own speculation unless I otherwise denote that it is information given to me, in which case I describe the source.  I have not mentioned anything told to me by private sources in confidence.


    Thank you, I just wanted to know where it was coming from. I also do not disclose my sources, I usually just don't disclose the information at all. I gather not disimminate, I have once heard something on this board that I dismissed and was later told by very reliable sources a week later in person, so I don't dismiss rashly, though I do take heed of where the information is coming from lest I be led astray. Hope you understand, you probably do, probably the same way.

    Deo Gratias

    Offline PereJoseph

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1411
    • Reputation: +1973/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #12 on: September 13, 2011, 11:03:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • LordPhan, yes, I think we are on the same page.

    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #13 on: September 14, 2011, 06:55:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is ridiculous agitprop for Sedes and malcontents.

    ABL always talked with Rome and simply wished for Rome to allow the "experiment of Tradition" to exist in the Church unimpeded. If he were offered regularization with no strings he would have taken it. BXVI has agreed to all 3 preconditions of the Society in a move unheard of under JPII. The thought that this would happen when BF made the demands was minuscule.

    This is a far better situation for Tradition than under the wrath of Paul VI who dolled out censures and treated the Society with disdain. And even then ABL talked to Paul VI and only asked that he leave them alone.

    If some would have their way, the Society would just go into open schism, refusing to accept communion with the man they recognize as the Roman Pontiff when they can do so with no doctrinal compromise. They may as well be Sedes if they do so, for that is the only way they could remain consistent. BW has been a crypto-Sede for years. If you posted his articles with no attribution you'd think John Lane were talking.

    The Society was meant to be a "lifeboat" for Tradition, not a parallel Church who does their own thing in perpetuity.

    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +120/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Possible Roman scheme against the SSPX
    « Reply #14 on: September 14, 2011, 07:51:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2011/09/communique-of-holy-see-meeting-between.html
    Quote
    On September 14, 2011, at the office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a meeting was held between His Eminence, Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of this Congregation and President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, His Excellency, Archbishop Luis Ladaria, S.J., Secretary of this Congregation, and Monsignor Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, and His Excellency, Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, and Fathers Niklaus Pfluger et Alain-Marc Nély, General Assistants of the Fraternity


    Following the petition addressed on December 15, 2008, by the Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X to His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, the Holy Father had taken the decision of lifting the excommunication of the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and to open at the same time doctrinal conversations with the Fraternity, aiming to overcome the difficulties and the problems of a doctrinal nature, and to achieve a reduction of the existing rupture.


    Obedient to the will of the Holy Father, a mixed study commission, composed of experts of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X and of experts of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, assembled eight times for meetings that took place in Rome between the month of October 2009 and the month of April 2011. These conversations, whose objective was that of presenting and examining the major doctrinal difficulties on controversial themes, achieved their goal, which was that of clarifying the respective positions and their motivations.


    Given the concerns and explanations presented by the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X regarding the integrity of the Catholic faith considering the hermeneutic of rupture of the Second Vatican Council in respect of Tradition - hermeneutic mentioned by Pope Benedict XVI in his Address to the Roman Curia of December 22, 2005 -, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith takes as a fundamental basis for a full reconciliation with the Apostolic See the acceptance of the Doctrinal Preamble which was delivered in the course of the meeting of September 14, 2011. This preamble enunciates some of the doctrinal principles and criteria of interpretation of Catholic doctrine necessary for ensuring fidelity to the Magisterium of the Church and to the sentire cum Ecclesia, while leaving open to legitimate discussion the study and theological explanation of particular expressions and formulations present in the texts of the Second Vatican Council and of the Magisterium that followed it.


    In the course of the same meeting, some elements were proposed regarding a canonical solution for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, which would follow the eventual and hoped-for reconciliation.


    [Original Text: French]



     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16