Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX  (Read 1384 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ElwinRansom1970

  • Supporter
  • ***
  • Posts: 1000
  • Reputation: +759/-145
  • Gender: Male
  • γνῶθι σεαυτόν - temet nosce
The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
« on: May 13, 2025, 08:34:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Suppose that the SSPX seeks a mandate from Rome for the consecration of a new bishop or several bishops. Now further suppose that the Dicastery for Bishops fully agrees to the SSPX request, including approval of all three names submitted in a terna (not merely one name) as candidates for the episcopate. In other words, Rome says absolutely "yes" to the request of the SSPX.

    However, suppose that this request is accompanied with a note from the Dicastery stating that the episcopal consecration will take place at St. Peter's or another of the major basilicas in Rome and that the consecrators will be Leo XIV as primary consecrator and Msgr. Ilson de Jesus Montanari (Secretary for the Dicastery of Bishops, the prefect position being currently vacant) and Msgr. Joseph Maria Bonnemain (Bishop of Chur, Switzerland, the diocese in which Menzingen is located) as co-consecrators.

    Does the SSPX accept this?

    Would the SSPX faithful accept this?

    Would YOU accept this?
    Logged
    "I distrust every idea that does not seem obsolete and grotesque to my contemporaries."
    - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

    Offline Shrewd Operator

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 171
    • Reputation: +96/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #1 on: May 13, 2025, 08:43:30 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • The SSPX would accept it. Most of their parishioners would also accept it.

    The question is, would Felay do his own consecration on the candidates later in order to quell any resistance from those who wouldn't accept the official consecration.
    Logged

    Offline LeDeg

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 778
    • Reputation: +535/-135
    • Gender: Male
    • I am responsible only to God and history.
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #2 on: May 13, 2025, 09:12:09 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Shrewd Operator on May 13, 2025, 08:43:30 PM
    The question is, would Felay do his own consecration on the candidates later in order to quell any resistance from those who wouldn't accept the official consecration.
    Fellay doesn’t have the balls to do this.
    Logged
    "You must train harder than the enemy who is trying to kill you. You will get all the rest you need in the grave."- Leon Degrelle

    Offline hgodwinson

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 133
    • Reputation: +57/-14
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #3 on: May 13, 2025, 09:36:50 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Shrewd Operator on May 13, 2025, 08:43:30 PM
    The question is, would Felay do his own consecration on the candidates later in order to quell any resistance from those who wouldn't accept the official consecration.
    Not unless he wants to get "excommunicated" by the Novus Ordo hierarchy, which he has so-far done everything in his power to prevent. 
    Logged

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1947
    • Reputation: +518/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #4 on: May 14, 2025, 06:19:03 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ElwinRansom1970 on May 13, 2025, 08:34:08 PM
    Suppose that the SSPX seeks a mandate from Rome for the consecration of a new bishop or several bishops. Now further suppose that the Dicastery for Bishops fully agrees to the SSPX request, including approval of all three names submitted in a terna (not merely one name) as candidates for the episcopate. In other words, Rome says absolutely "yes" to the request of the SSPX.

    However, suppose that this request is accompanied with a note from the Dicastery stating that the episcopal consecration will take place at St. Peter's or another of the major basilicas in Rome and that the consecrators will be Leo XIV as primary consecrator and Msgr. Ilson de Jesus Montanari (Secretary for the Dicastery of Bishops, the prefect position being currently vacant) and Msgr. Joseph Maria Bonnemain (Bishop of Chur, Switzerland, the diocese in which Menzingen is located) as co-consecrators.

    Does the SSPX accept this?

    Would the SSPX faithful accept this?

    Would YOU accept this?
    I’m an outsider looking in at this point, but I think this would essentially turn the SSPX into another FSSP.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46471
    • Reputation: +27360/-5055
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #5 on: May 14, 2025, 06:42:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 14, 2025, 06:19:03 AM
    I’m an outsider looking in at this point, but I think this would essentially turn the SSPX into another FSSP.

    Yes, but they're already halfway there as it is.

    As I mentioned in the context of the controversy over "Pope" Leo, the SSPX paradigm regarding the crisis has already aligned with that of FSSP.

    There are two basic paradigms:

    1) V2 represents a substantial rupture, and there's no "fixing" this crisis in the Church until it's rolled back, declared null, and sent packing along with the New Mass and all the post-V2 "papal" Magisterium.

    2) Since V2, due to various bad actors mostly at lower levels, the Church has gotten too liberal and there are many Modernists in the hierarchy now, and while "95% Catholic" (per +Fellay ... the same line that Schneider takes), a few course corrections by the right conservative "pope" would change the trajectory of the Church back on the right course.

    It's precisely because of this shift from #1 to #2 in SSPX that the Resistance parted ways and labeled SSPX the "neo-SSPX".

    In the one paradigm there's no difference in kind between Catholic Church and Conciliar Church, but a difference in degrees, as in degrees of liberalism vs. degrees of conservatism.
    Logged

    Offline Philip

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 122
    • Reputation: +63/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #6 on: May 14, 2025, 06:54:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • If the scenario happened I cannot see the SSPX current leadership daring to cast doubt, in public, about the validity of the NREC.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46471
    • Reputation: +27360/-5055
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #7 on: May 14, 2025, 06:59:55 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • They've been gradually acclamating the lay faithful to accepting NO "Holy Orders", by not conditionally reordaining priests coming over from the Conciliar Church before sending them out there.

    Then they took some additional steps to boil that old frog by having Huonder "consecrate" those "holy oils".  I'm convinced that the next step would have been to get Huonder to "ordain" some priests and possibly even "consecrate" some bishops for SSPX ... but God had other plans.

    To me, the fact that Huonder suddenly took gravely ill just before Holy Week where he could simulate consecrating oils again might be reasonably taken as God's endorsement of the doubts people have about his orders and the oils ... as perhaps God did not want to subject the faithful to his oils.
    Logged

    Offline ElwinRansom1970

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1000
    • Reputation: +759/-145
    • Gender: Male
    • γνῶθι σεαυτόν - temet nosce
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #8 on: May 14, 2025, 08:06:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Doubts regarding the validity of the 1968 Ordination Rite (both that of priests and of  bishops) was every bit equal to doubts regarding the 1969 Roman Missale when one looks back at what was expressed in the books, journals, and ephemera of traditionalists from the 1970s and 80s.

    I am amused yet dismayed by trads who try to make the 1979-85 Archbishop Lefebvre normative whilst ignoring the 1974-78 & 1986-91 Lefebvre. This latter Lefebvre spoke and wrote some very spicy things that Trad, Inc. and the Neo-SSPX explicitly reject.
    Logged
    "I distrust every idea that does not seem obsolete and grotesque to my contemporaries."
    - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

    Offline VerdenFell

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 310
    • Reputation: +283/-37
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #9 on: May 14, 2025, 08:19:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I don't mean to create any controversy by this question but as a fairly new traditional Catholic I 
    don't understand the main reasons why doubt is cast upon the validity of NO ordinations, specifically
    with FSSP priests. 
    I get the reasons that Paul VI didn't have the right to change the mass but rites of ordination have doubtlessly
    been changed countless times in the Church's history. 
    For example, when a Medici or Borgia pope or cardinal wanted to make a relative a bishop they probably got a slap on the back and said, "hey bro, you're a bishop now go see Luigi the tailor and have some nice vestments made." And that was it and nobody questioned it. These individuals never went to seminary, probably never said a mass, or cracked open a book on theology. This kind of nepotism went on for centuries. These positioned were filled for the sole purpose of consolidating the power, influence and wealth of various families.  
    Logged

    Offline nonpossumus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 32
    • Reputation: +44/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #10 on: May 14, 2025, 08:34:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • The SSPX would probably have no qualms with this, as they had no qualms having a NO bishop consecrate the Holy Oils in Zaitzkofen in 2023. 

    From what I can tell, the large majority of sheeple in the SSPX would simply go along with it. They have their nice priest in their nice chapel with their nice music, and what's the big deal with Rome? I am fairly sure that the majority of them believe that the whole drama of tradition vs. Rome has been overblown in the first place.

    As for myself, no, I would have nothing to do with that. 
    Logged

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1947
    • Reputation: +518/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #11 on: May 14, 2025, 08:59:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 14, 2025, 06:42:11 AM
    Yes, but they're already halfway there as it is.

    As I mentioned in the context of the controversy over "Pope" Leo, the SSPX paradigm regarding the crisis has already aligned with that of FSSP.

    There are two basic paradigms:

    1) V2 represents a substantial rupture, and there's no "fixing" this crisis in the Church until it's rolled back, declared null, and sent packing along with the New Mass and all the post-V2 "papal" Magisterium.

    2) Since V2, due to various bad actors mostly at lower levels, the Church has gotten too liberal and there are many Modernists in the hierarchy now, and while "95% Catholic" (per +Fellay ... the same line that Schneider takes), a few course corrections by the right conservative "pope" would change the trajectory of the Church back on the right course.

    It's precisely because of this shift from #1 to #2 in SSPX that the Resistance parted ways and labeled SSPX the "neo-SSPX".

    In the one paradigm there's no difference in kind between Catholic Church and Conciliar Church, but a difference in degrees, as in degrees of liberalism vs. degrees of conservatism.
    I see your point, although as you know, Lefebvre himself went back and forth on some of these questions.  But I get that the SSPX is already closer to the FSSP than the resistance and some other groups are



    but permanently ensuring that all (not just a few) of their priests come from new rite episcopal orders would seem like a HUGE step towards indult status.  Even more so if they are also regularized at the same time

    i I guess the last step would be formally accepting the infallibility of V2 and that the new mass is licit 
    Logged

    Offline ElwinRansom1970

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1000
    • Reputation: +759/-145
    • Gender: Male
    • γνῶθι σεαυτόν - temet nosce
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #12 on: May 14, 2025, 09:02:19 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: VerdenFell on May 14, 2025, 08:19:01 AM
    I don't mean to create any controversy by this question but as a fairly new traditional Catholic I
    don't understand the main reasons why doubt is cast upon the validity of NO ordinations, specifically
    with FSSP priests.
    I get the reasons that Paul VI didn't have the right to change the mass but rites of ordination have doubtlessly
    been changed countless times in the Church's history.
    For example, when a Medici or Borgia pope or cardinal wanted to make a relative a bishop they probably got a slap on the back and said, "hey bro, you're a bishop now go see Luigi the tailor and have some nice vestments made." And that was it and nobody questioned it. These individuals never went to seminary, probably never said a mass, or cracked open a book on theology. This kind of nepotism went on for centuries. These positioned were filled for the sole purpose of consolidating the power, influence and wealth of various families. 
    No, incorrect to all that you have written here regarding historical practice.

    How a man is ordained is something about which the Church has always been meticulous. Whilst there are and have been a variety of liturgicals rites for ordination, these all share common elements and similar wording in their forms.

    Nepotism pertained to ecclesiastical offices and benefices (salaries and material goods). This is something quite different than entrance and advancement in the clerical state. Simony (buying sacraments) was an issue with ordination in certain places at particular times, but this is something very different from nepotism.

    The problem with the 1968 ordination rite lies in changes in the essential form that alter what is being bestowed on the candidate as well as in changes to the ritual actions and language before and after the form, changes that fail to express a Catholic understanding of Holy Orders.

    The form for the rite of priestly ordination has been changed so that what was once a cause leading to an effect is now merely two declaratory statements. This casts doubt on the validity.

    The change in the form for episcopal ordination is far more radical, changing the whole wording and never indicating that the episcopacy is being bestowed. This form could be wholly invalid, needs to be treated as such (with all that implies), and may be one day definitively declared invalid by the Church.
    Logged
    "I distrust every idea that does not seem obsolete and grotesque to my contemporaries."
    - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1947
    • Reputation: +518/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #13 on: May 14, 2025, 09:04:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 14, 2025, 06:42:11 AM
    Yes, but they're already halfway there as it is.

    As I mentioned in the context of the controversy over "Pope" Leo, the SSPX paradigm regarding the crisis has already aligned with that of FSSP.

    There are two basic paradigms:

    1) V2 represents a substantial rupture, and there's no "fixing" this crisis in the Church until it's rolled back, declared null, and sent packing along with the New Mass and all the post-V2 "papal" Magisterium.

    2) Since V2, due to various bad actors mostly at lower levels, the Church has gotten too liberal and there are many Modernists in the hierarchy now, and while "95% Catholic" (per +Fellay ... the same line that Schneider takes), a few course corrections by the right conservative "pope" would change the trajectory of the Church back on the right course.

    It's precisely because of this shift from #1 to #2 in SSPX that the Resistance parted ways and labeled SSPX the "neo-SSPX".

    In the one paradigm there's no difference in kind between Catholic Church and Conciliar Church, but a difference in degrees, as in degrees of liberalism vs. degrees of conservatism.
    To a certain extent, the trajectory of the SSPX makes sense to me though. If you believe that Leo (and in a historical context JP2, Benedict, and Francis) are/were true popes then, even if you believe that resistance to evil command is justified, it makes sense that you would submit as much as you possibly can, without violating your conscience.  People here see this as “betrayal” but in a way it kind of makes sense.  
    now, for the most part, it seems to me that the resistance perspective is that we aren’t actually sure these people are even popes.  Maybe we “give the benefit of the doubt” and pray for them in the mass etc. but in practice it seems to come down to “a doubtful pope is no pope”.  We don’t obey him at all because we aren’t certain he’s not actually a pope

    on the other hand if you say that he’s certainly a pope but isn’t due any submission whatsoever… I don’t see how you don’t avoid just converting to Eastern Orthodoxy at that point.  
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46471
    • Reputation: +27360/-5055
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Great Episcopal Dilemma for the SSPX
    « Reply #14 on: May 14, 2025, 09:15:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 14, 2025, 09:04:08 AM
    To a certain extent, the trajectory of the SSPX makes sense to me though. If you believe that Leo (and in a historical context JP2, Benedict, and Francis) are/were true popes then, even if you believe that resistance to evil command is justified, it makes sense that you would submit as much as you possibly can, without violating your conscience.

    Well, R&R hold that you should submit where you can.  But the problem is whether you can chop it up in discrete pieces where you can submit to this, but not to that ... i.e. where some of it is OK / good, or whether the entire thing is polluted due to the corrupt Vatican II theological framework.

    It's actually similar to the Vatican II claim about false religions that there can be discrete elements of truth within them.

    Is that true?

    "God exists."  Is that true?  OK, taken in complete isolation and out of context, yes, it's true.

    How about now?

    "God exists.  God takes the appearance of a winged serpent and demands human sacrifice."

    Is it true now?  That "God exists"?  No, because THAT God (as described) most certainly does not exist.

    Once you start defining the terms, you can't really take isolated statements out of context and say "that's true".
    Logged
    Pages: [1] 2 3
    « previous next »