Author Topic: Bishop Fellay Revisionism (Read 3586 times)

Ladislaus · « **on:** October 28, 2013, 10:49:36 AM »

Quote from: Bishop Fellay

When we see what is happening now [under Pope Francis] we thank God, we thank God, we have been preserved from any kind of Agreement from last year (2012). And we may say that one of the fruits of the [Rosary] Crusade we did is that we have been preserved from such a misfortune.

If we are to take this as sincere, Bishop Fellay needs to publicly apologize to all those whom he expelled from the SSPX or to whom he refused the Sacraments precisely for opposing this very "kind of Agreement". Evidently in retrospect these people were doing God's work, while Bishop Fellay was not.

Bishop Fellay needs to 1) publicly apologize to them, 2) welcome them back to the SSPX with no strings attached and no "hard feelings", and 3) promise to never use the Sacraments as weapons ever again. In essence, he needs to have the humility to say, "You know, you guys were right and I was wrong. I'm sorry. Thank you for resisting me to my face just as St. Paul did to St. Peter." Then and only then can he atone for his public sins and win back some measure of confidence -- as well as to repair the damage he did to the SSPX. But I imagine that he would be unwilling to manifest such humble contrition. I hope that I am wrong. Until that happens, however, this has to be viewed as nothing more than self-serving damage control. Were he, however, to prove me wrong, I would have an immense respect for him.

Machabees · « **Reply #1 on:** October 28, 2013, 11:54:39 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Bishop Fellay
When we see what is happening now [under Pope Francis] we thank God, we thank God, we have been preserved from any kind of Agreement from last year (2012). And we may say that one of the fruits of the [Rosary] Crusade we did is that we have been preserved from such a misfortune.

If we are to take this as sincere, Bishop Fellay needs to publicly apologize to all those whom he expelled from the SSPX or to whom he refused the Sacraments precisely for opposing this very "kind of Agreement". Evidently in retrospect these people were doing God's work, while Bishop Fellay was not.

Bishop Fellay needs to 1) publicly apologize to them, 2) welcome them back to the SSPX with no strings attached and no "hard feelings", and 3) promise to never use the Sacraments as weapons ever again. In essence, he needs to have the humility to say, "You know, you guys were right and I was wrong. I'm sorry. Thank you for resisting me to my face just as St. Paul did to St. Peter." Then and only then can he atone for his public sins and win back some measure of confidence -- as well as to repair the damage he did to the SSPX. But I imagine that he would be unwilling to manifest such humble contrition. I hope that I am wrong. Until that happens, however, this has to be viewed as nothing more than self-serving damage control. Were he, however, to prove me wrong, I would have an immense respect for him.

Yes, where is the humility of a real Bishop of the Catholic Church, an Apostle like St. Peter, rather than the pride of Judas?

hollingsworth · « **Reply #2 on:** October 28, 2013, 12:18:52 PM »

What +Fellay needs to apologize for is tying the 3rd Rosary Crusade in any way to the deliverance from an "Agreement." It is bad enough that he should have thought that his self-intiated Crusade might have brought about the Consecration of Russia to begin with. What is worse, he admits thereafter that he did not believe the Consecration would result from it anyway. And just to make it even more galling, he speculates that had the Consecration occurred, it would not have been a very dramatic, or immediately fulfilled event, but would have developed gradually over a period of time. Fellay is a shameless rascal. He is the last appointed bishop, the Archbishop's after thought. Bp. Fellay proves that a bishop should not have been appointed just because a couple of his countrymen gave large donations to the Society.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #3 on:** October 28, 2013, 12:22:47 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

What +Fellay needs to apologize for is tying the 3rd Rosary Crusade in any way to the deliverance from an "Agreement." It is bad enough that he should have thought that his self-intiated Crusade might have brought about the Consecration of Russia to begin with. What is worse, he admits thereafter that he did not believe the Consecration would result from it anyway. And just to make it even more galling, he speculates that had the Consecration occurred, it would not have been a very dramatic, or immediately fulfilled event, but would have developed gradually over a period of time. Fellay is a shameless rascal. He is the last appointed bishop, the Archbishop's after thought. Bp. Fellay proves that a bishop should not have been appointed just because a couple of his countrymen gave large donations to the Society.

With respect, Hollingsworth, if you called me a "shameless rascal," I would not concede to your demands whatever the price.

In other words, you are making it very hard for your adversaries to give you what you want.

As an aside, is there anything in the Fatima apparitions that indicates that, were the Consecration properly performed, the conversion of Russia would be immediate?

hollingsworth · « **Reply #4 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:05:06 PM »

sean johnson:

Quote

With respect, Hollingsworth, if you called me a "shameless rascal," I would not concede to your demands whatever the price.

In other words, you are making it very hard for your adversaries to give you what you want.

As an aside, is there anything in the Fatima apparitions that indicates that, were the Consecration properly performed, the conversion of Russia would be immediate?

Don't bother with the "with respect" stuff. I don't need it. I repeat, Bp. Fellay is a shameless rascal, or as Bp. Williamson has referred to him a number of times now, a "rat" and a "liar," and, oh yes, a "traitor." And yes, I would have expected an immediate action to be taken, if the proper Consecration were performed.

John Grace · « **Reply #5 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:13:00 PM »

Ladislaus

Quote

Bishop Fellay needs to 1) publicly apologize to them, 2) welcome them back to the SSPX with no strings attached and no "hard feelings", and 3) promise to never use the Sacraments as weapons ever again

They have never left the SSPX of the Archbishop. Bishop Fellay, a late edition and never one intended to be consecrated a Bishop has abandoned the heritage of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Bishop Fellay and his gang had to wait until the Archbishop died. They could be more open then about the liberalising and new direction of the 'pious union'.

For many years they wanted the one chosen by Archbishop Lefebvre out of the SSPX.

Their business partner Krah has been influential in the new direction.

Instead of a Traditionalist Catholic priestly Society, the SSPX is now a conservative Catholic, watered down society.

It went from fighting Modernism and the enemies to a Society that collapsed and surrendered. It's not fighting Vatican II, the Novus Ordo is accepted, the new code.

The SSPX with Bishop Fellay as Superior General is the 'Church of Bishop Fellay'. Even Fr Rostand used that title in America.

John Grace · « **Reply #6 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:25:36 PM »

Quote

"You know, you guys were right and I was wrong. I'm sorry. Thank you for resisting me to my face just as St. Paul did to St. Peter." Then and only then can he atone for his public sins and win back some measure of confidence -- as well as to repair the damage he did to the SSPX. But I imagine that he would be unwilling to manifest such humble contrition. I hope that I am wrong. Until that happens, however, this has to be viewed as nothing more than self-serving damage control. Were he, however, to prove me wrong, I would have an immense respect for him.

The priests and laity of the SSPX have both demonstrated they are unable and unwilling to 'get rid of' Bishop Fellay. Momentum was lost and even if Bishop Fellay were to resign tomorrow, who would replace him? One of his gang.

John Grace · « **Reply #7 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:32:24 PM »

Quote

"You know, you guys were right and I was wrong. I'm sorry. Thank you for resisting me to my face just as St. Paul did to St. Peter."

You are sincere no doubt but this is naïve.

John Grace · « **Reply #8 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:45:04 PM »

John Anthony

Quote

I've followed +Fellay's writings, conferences and sermons very carefully for nearly ten years. If he has contradicted himself in any way that matters, I don't know what it is.

A comment on another thread. JA is hardly going to lead the call to get rid of Bishop Fellay. Most laity, who attend the SSPX haven't the inclination and adhere to the advice of Fr Leo Boyle. This being not to get involved in the politics of the SSPX.

Many in Ireland seemed to have heeded Fr N. Pfluger when he told the laity from the pulpit to be grateful to have the Mass.

I recall the Irish SSPX youth group didn't attend the Bishop Williamson conference so a fairly public show of strength for Bishop Fellay.

One would be naive to believe there is hostility to Bishop Fellay.

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #9 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:45:29 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

Instead of a Traditionalist Catholic priestly Society, the SSPX is now a conservative Catholic, watered down society.

You can place the neo-SSPX in the same category as the indult communities, except that they have a canonical agreement with Rome. But this makes no difference in regards to the spirit involved.

Ecclesia Militans · « **Reply #10 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:46:53 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

Many in Ireland seemed to have heeded Fr N. Pfluger when he told the laity from the pulpit to be grateful to have the Mass.

So it's all about the Mass to these people? Sounds much like the indult mentality.

John Grace · « **Reply #11 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:51:06 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: John Grace
Instead of a Traditionalist Catholic priestly Society, the SSPX is now a conservative Catholic, watered down society.

You can place the neo-SSPX in the same category as the indult communities, except that they have a canonical agreement with Rome. But this makes no difference in regards to the spirit involved.

I agree. I left the Indult under the impression the SSPX were solid and resisting. When I attended the Indult I was always pro-SSPX and had attended Mass offered by the SSPX. A main reason not to attend the SSPX was geographical. It was easier get to the Indult. I found the Indult a superficial world.

The irony is the first Society Mass I attended was in a house. Now, we are back to that with the resistance.

The first book I ever bought at a Society Mass was 'They Have Uncrowned Him'.

John Grace · « **Reply #12 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:56:19 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: John Grace
Many in Ireland seemed to have heeded Fr N. Pfluger when he told the laity from the pulpit to be grateful to have the Mass.

So it's all about the Mass to these people? Sounds much like the indult mentality.

An argument or a viewpoint I get is because Tradition is so small in Ireland "we should help each other out".

Sadly many SSPX people support the Institute of Christ the King.

It annoyed me when I informed SSPX laity that Bishop Williamson was expelled. I was amazed when they said they also go to the Institute Christ the King. If they are willing to go to the Indult why be bothered about Bishop Williamson?

John Grace · « **Reply #13 on:** October 28, 2013, 02:58:27 PM »

For clarification I am not against people befriending Indult folk. I have friends who attend but I would never attend the Indult nor should Catholics.

John Grace · « **Reply #14 on:** October 28, 2013, 03:03:00 PM »

Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

Quote from: John Grace
Many in Ireland seemed to have heeded Fr N. Pfluger when he told the laity from the pulpit to be grateful to have the Mass.

So it's all about the Mass to these people? Sounds much like the indult mentality.

Because of the Penal Laws and persecution of the faith in Ireland there is loyalty to the Mass.