Author Topic: Bishop Fellays deck was stacked  (Read 726 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanGovan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 162
  • Reputation: +229/-7
  • Gender: Male
Bishop Fellays deck was stacked
« on: April 19, 2013, 05:13:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
    I'm thinking right now... How did Bishop Fellay become Superior again?


    I think it was a) because of his people skills and b) because of his mastery of 5 European languages. The Chapter that elected him doubtless did not realize how he was going to change.

    Unfortunately, since most SSPX Chapter members become Chapter members by virtue of the posts that they occupy, the Superior General - who decides what priest to put in which post - chooses in practice the majority of the Chapter members. Right?

    So if the Superior General decides that he wants to stay in office a second time around, he picks the priests who he knows are likely to vote for him. Right?

    Also, if the Superior General wants a certain Liberal mentality to prevail in his society, all he has to do is pick chapter members with that Liberal mentality. If he wants a certain decision to be "made by the Chapter," he just has to pick the priests who will go along with whatever he says is the right decision. This means that even if major decisions are supposedly "made by the Chapter," in practice they are all made by the Superior General!

    The conclusion is that the Society could only survive as long as the Superior General was solid. As soon as a Superior General came along who was a bad apple, the Society was bound to succumb.
    Adversus hostem Fidei aeterna auctoritas esto! To the enemies of the Faith no quarter!

    If they refuse to be converted by the Heart of the Immaculate, then in the end they shall be

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4808
    • Reputation: +5596/-453
    • Gender: Male
    Bishop Fellays deck was stacked
    « Reply #1 on: April 19, 2013, 07:17:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Does anyone have the SSPX Rule ?

    I would like to see the voting regulations for electing the SG.

    As it has been mentioned, +ABL didn't want an SSPX bishop to also be the SG.
    There must have been a reason for this?

    The next question is to look at any changes in the SSPX Rule under Bp. Fellay's tenure as SG.  

    It would be very interesting to check their document control log.
    Who is privy to this information... only Msgr. Fellay ?
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi


    Offline Cristera

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 172
    • Reputation: +378/-1
    • Gender: Female
    Bishop Fellays deck was stacked
    « Reply #2 on: April 19, 2013, 08:54:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Incredulous
    Does anyone have the SSPX Rule ?



    Just in french, dear Incredulous: http://frat.canalhistorique.free.fr/200503/20050303_statutsFSSPX.htm

    Le Supérieur Général doit être élu aux deux tiers des voix ; les assistants à la majorité absolue. Tous trois doivent être engagés définitivement dans la Fraternité, être prêtres et avoir au moins trente ans.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4429
    • Reputation: +4002/-1317
    • Gender: Male
    Bishop Fellays deck was stacked
    « Reply #3 on: April 19, 2013, 09:38:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Incredulous
    Does anyone have the SSPX Rule ?

    I would like to see the voting regulations for electing the SG.

    As it has been mentioned, +ABL didn't want an SSPX bishop to also be the SG.
    There must have been a reason for this?

    The next question is to look at any changes in the SSPX Rule under Bp. Fellay's tenure as SG.  

    It would be very interesting to check their document control log.
    Who is privy to this information... only Msgr. Fellay ?


    When Bishop Williamson was in St. Paul a couple weeks ago, this issue came up.

    He said there was never a prohibition in the Rule to a bishop becoming Superior General.

    This was news to all of us, because like you, we had always been told that ABL did not want a bishop as SG, for fear of creating the impression he had conferred jurisdiction.

    I think perhaps it is possible (this is my own theory) that ABL chose Fr. Schmidberger for this reason originally, because of the proximity to the consecrations at that time, but that it never became a rule that a bishop could not be an SG?
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

     

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