Author Topic: Bishop Fellay (Read 7477 times)

SerpKerp · « **on:** May 30, 2014, 09:06:00 AM »

Moderator: I edited the subtitle; it was inappropriate, regardless of what you think of +Fellay.

Is there anyone who would want to defend Bishop Fellay? He can't be that bad can he?

VinnyF · « **Reply #1 on:** May 30, 2014, 11:11:28 AM »

Why would anyone care to defend him on a Resistance website?

SerpKerp · « **Reply #2 on:** May 30, 2014, 11:36:54 AM »

Quote from: VinnyF

Why would anyone care to defend him on a Resistance website?

There are Sedes and Indults here so I figured its possible he had defenders here as well.

Matthew · « **Reply #3 on:** May 30, 2014, 01:02:17 PM »

Quote from: SerpKerp

Quote from: VinnyF
Why would anyone care to defend him on a Resistance website?

There are Sedes and Indults here so I figured its possible he had defenders here as well.

I know that some people like to "rise above it all", come up with new terminology, try to create ground-breaking threads, and in general feel like they're ultra-special.

Unfortunately for this thread, it's nothing new. Rather than being a ground-breaking genius, you come across more as a retard that's been hiding under a rock for the past 2 years.

Why don't you familiarize yourself with the forum for a few days -- look at past posts in the SSPX Resistance subforum. We have thousands of posts there going back to 2012 when the whole thing started.

Sorry, you can't just conveniently ignore all the reams of evidence that have been posted here in the past 2 years. As a matter of fact, those who passionately (against all evidence) choose to ignore such history are PRECISELY those who aren't welcome here. I'm not going to host those kind of fanboys and blind idiots on CathInfo.

We've had dozens of "+Fellay defenders" since 2012 and none of them did a good job at all.

Worthy opponents might keep me on my toes, but I won't ban them for that. In fact, if you want to be special you're welcome to try to debunk the Resistance. No one has succeeded yet. :)

I can understand criticizing Fr. Pfeiffer (who is admittedly quite controversial, even among Resistance supporters), Fr. Pfeiffer's lay helper(s), the outlook for success for the Resistance, etc. but you MUST acknowledge the very real facts which have been put out there in the past 2 years. Very real and concrete changes have happened in the SSPX in the past 2 years.

Anyone who thinks the Resistance is nothing more than several thousand SSPX-supporters ("oh, they weren't real supporters, but leeches at the various chapels, and sedevacantists") who spontaneously decided to give up on the spiritual life all at once in May 2012 -- even though they were scattered all around the world and don't have contact with each other -- I don't know what to say. Anyone that foolish is beyond words. That's why they're not welcome on CathInfo.

Anyone who keeps harping on neo-SSPX propaganda talking points, anyone who uses the classic Communist "repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth" tactic, and anyone who ignores evidence injected into a discussion as if it wasn't there is in reality an agent, a troll and quite ban-worthy. Such a person is not here to discuss, nor is such a person interested in discussion. Such a one is only here to blindly promote an agenda.

What +Fellay (and his followers -- this part is very important) is doing to the SSPX and those loyal to its mission is indefensible.

SerpKerp · « **Reply #4 on:** May 30, 2014, 01:35:18 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: SerpKerp
Quote from: VinnyF
Why would anyone care to defend him on a Resistance website?

There are Sedes and Indults here so I figured its possible he had defenders here as well.

I know that some people like to "rise above it all", come up with new terminology, try to create ground-breaking threads, and in general feel like they're ultra-special.

Unfortunately for this thread, it's nothing new. Rather than being a ground-breaking genius, you come across more as a retard that's been hiding under a rock for the past 2 years.

Why don't you familiarize yourself with the forum for a few days -- look at past posts in the SSPX Resistance subforum. We have thousands of posts there going back to 2012 when the whole thing started.

Sorry, you can't just conveniently ignore all the reams of evidence that have been posted here in the past 2 years. As a matter of fact, those who passionately (against all evidence) choose to ignore such history are PRECISELY those who aren't welcome here. I'm not going to host those kind of fanboys and blind idiots on CathInfo.

We've had dozens of "+Fellay defenders" since 2012 and none of them did a good job at all.

Worthy opponents might keep me on my toes, but I won't ban them for that. In fact, if you want to be special you're welcome to try to debunk the Resistance. No one has succeeded yet. :)

I can understand criticizing Fr. Pfeiffer (who is admittedly quite controversial, even among Resistance supporters), Fr. Pfeiffer's lay helper(s), the outlook for success for the Resistance, etc. but you MUST acknowledge the very real facts which have been put out there in the past 2 years. Very real and concrete changes have happened in the SSPX in the past 2 years.

Anyone who thinks the Resistance is nothing more than several thousand SSPX-supporters ("oh, they weren't real supporters, but leeches at the various chapels, and sedevacantists") who spontaneously decided to give up on the spiritual life all at once in May 2012 -- even though they were scattered all around the world and don't have contact with each other -- I don't know what to say. Anyone that foolish is beyond words. That's why they're not welcome on CathInfo.

Anyone who keeps harping on neo-SSPX propaganda talking points, anyone who uses the classic Communist "repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth" tactic, and anyone who ignores evidence injected into a discussion as if it wasn't there is in reality an agent, a troll and quite ban-worthy. Such a person is not here to discuss, nor is such a person interested in discussion. Such a one is only here to blindly promote an agenda.

What +Fellay (and his followers -- this part is very important) is doing to the SSPX and those loyal to its mission is indefensible.

I have absolutely no intention of defending Fellay, and I am sorry.I was more interested in if anyone could give me any positive qualities (ie pastoral stuff), and if he was rotten egg from the beginning or if he changed later on. I should have clarified that better, and I am sorry for not doing so.

Ekim · « **Reply #5 on:** May 30, 2014, 01:50:36 PM »

Why is it that when people who proudly hold the banner of "The Resistance" are asked a simple question (in a very charitable manner, I might add), or point out an obvious truth (I.e. Church has never officially condemned woman wearing pants), result to name calling (retard) or make false accusations (your wife must waer pants) , when something is innocently posed??
Very uncharitable to say the least. Certainly no way to convert souls for "The Resistance."

You catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar.

SerpKerp · « **Reply #6 on:** May 30, 2014, 02:09:43 PM »

I don't understand the intentions of Bp. Fellay why would he want to get approved by modern Rome. I mean what does he have to gain wouldn't he just get removed from his post like Fr. Bisig, and replaced. I mean what did Bp. Rangel gain?

SJB · « **Reply #7 on:** May 30, 2014, 02:11:46 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Worthy opponents might keep me on my toes, but I won't ban them for that. In fact, if you want to be special you're welcome to try to debunk the Resistance. No one has succeeded yet. :)

The very fact that "the resistence" has chose that name for their "cause" is interesting to say the least. What exactly is the apostolate of this "resistence" clergy? To "resist" something or "provide" something?

To me anyway, much like "the nine," they have defined themselves solely on the opposition of the organization to which they once belonged. They will probably be just as "successful" as "the nine."

Matthew · « **Reply #8 on:** May 30, 2014, 02:14:04 PM »

Quote from: SerpKerp

I have absolutely no intention of defending Fellay, and I am sorry.I was more interested in if anyone could give me any positive qualities (ie pastoral stuff), and if he was rotten egg from the beginning or if he changed later on. I should have clarified that better, and I am sorry for not doing so.

You should put the + before +Fellay's name, out of respect for his rank and office. He is a valid bishop of the Catholic Church. That is how we abbreviated back at the seminary. The professors as well as seminarians did this constantly.

Bishop Fellay's soul is none of my business. I am not his judge.

If I had to guess, I'd say it was a long period of power that slowly corrupted him. Men change; that much is obvious. +Fellay has ruled the SSPX for quite some time. Not all men are equally able to rule. To rule without having it corrupt you (or "go to one's head") requires an enigmatic trait called "nobility". Bishop Williamson has the nobility for such a task.

All we on CathInfo "judge" is the objective evil of making a premature/practical accord with Modernist Rome. That is our business. That affects our Faith, our souls, and our access to the life-giving Sacraments.

The Resistance is not about Bishop Fellay (abbreviated +Fellay by priests and seminarians back in my seminary days) or any other personalities -- it's about policies, it's about betrayal, it's about the struggle against Modernism (or the sellout thereof).

I had nothing against Bishop Fellay, personally or professionally, before it came to light what he was up to. That is, before the "Letter to the 3 bishops" that came to light in May 2012. That letter was dripping with pride and condescension towards the other 3 bishops, etc. and that exposed him for what he was.

His subsequent actions to change the SSPX, including kicking out +Williamson, have all harmonized with that (quite unfortunate) picture.

SJB · « **Reply #9 on:** May 30, 2014, 02:14:41 PM »

Quote from: SerpKerp

I don't understand the intentions of Bp. Fellay why would he want to get approved by modern Rome. I mean what does he have to gain wouldn't he just get removed from his post like Fr. Bisig, and replaced. I mean what did Bp. Rangel gain?

Bp. Fellay believed Benedict XVI was the pope. You can't forget that even though you may hold an opposite view.

Ekim · « **Reply #10 on:** May 30, 2014, 03:00:46 PM »

Power corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely!

MaterDominici · « **Reply #11 on:** May 30, 2014, 03:01:26 PM »

It's not really a matter of Bp Fellay himself. He's implementing a policy change in the Society and has many people around and below him who agree with the change. Unfortunately, they're trying to keep it discreet so that the numerous priests and layity who do not agree are swept along in the tide believing that the policy had never changed at all.

Even if you remove Bp Fellay from the equation, the same would still be true due to the other superiors of the Society being placed according to their agreement with this new policy or their willingness to go along with the SSPX no matter the direction.

I don't believe he's "the devil's righthand man". I suspect he believes he's doing a good thing. If this is a case of infiltration, I think it more likely that Bp Fellay has been influenced heavily by infiltrators rather than him being the infiltrator.

SerpKerp · « **Reply #12 on:** May 30, 2014, 03:11:09 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: SerpKerp
I don't understand the intentions of Bp. Fellay why would he want to get approved by modern Rome. I mean what does he have to gain wouldn't he just get removed from his post like Fr. Bisig, and replaced. I mean what did Bp. Rangel gain?

Bp. Fellay believed Benedict XVI was the pope. You can't forget that even though you may hold an opposite view.

Well yes, but doesn't he know that those who are in the councilor church must break down something like this.

2 % Traditionalist
18% Conservative Novus Ordo
40% Church of Nice/Moderate Novus Ordo
40% "Genuine Modernist"

It's just all around not a good idea to join weather or not it was extremely evil, or the right thing to do as Francis was a very likely thing that was going to happen.I really don't think Pope Benedict XVI wanted the SSPX in. I think that Pope Benedict XVI has been deeply bothered with his Hermeneutic of Continuity being questioned. I think deep down the SSPX and traditionalists scared him, because his legitimacy as a theologian is questioned by it. For instance Hans Kung and modernist (don't know if he is considered a priest or not any more) criticism really doesn't have any weight to him as you know Hans Kung denies multiple Dogmas. Here is a real compliment for the SSPX, the SSPX before +Fellay tried to reunite with Modern Rome had its house in order too. (Sedevacantistism is really a giant mess when you look at it from the outside, and the Novus Ordo obviously is a train wreck). Again by having their house together, the SSPX has a huge amount of legitimacy. I think Pope Benedict XVI was trying to destroy this legitimacy by getting +Fellay in then waiting a few years later and sacking him, or causing the the SSPX to fall apart into to two (yes I think the Resistance is in the right). The whole point was to get the SSPX destroying itself in a cινιℓ ωαr. Its really sad +Fellay has too big of an ego to realize he has been played.

SerpKerp · « **Reply #13 on:** May 30, 2014, 03:14:55 PM »

Quote from: Ekim

Power corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely!

There is nothing wrong with power or even absolute power when someone is humble .

Ekim · « **Reply #14 on:** May 30, 2014, 03:37:25 PM »

Agreed. That is why we must always pray for those in power, that they stay humble.