Author Topic: BREAKING! SSPX receives agreement from Rome - Bp. Fellay considering it (Read 53308 times)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #15 on:** November 15, 2015, 03:32:52 PM »

IMO, if they accept Francis' "year of mercy", they will have to sign the agreement before the start (8th December). Give 2-3 weeks!

Traddy · « **Reply #16 on:** November 15, 2015, 03:39:28 PM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

IMO, if they accept Francis' "year of mercy", they will have to sign the agreement before the start (8th December). Give 2-3 weeks!

That's rather a good observation, I hadn't thought of that. You may very well be right unfortunately.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #17 on:** November 15, 2015, 03:47:05 PM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

IMO, if they accept Francis' "year of mercy", they will have to sign the agreement before the start (8th December). Give 2-3 weeks!

Why?

covet truth · « **Reply #18 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:00:10 PM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

IMO, if they accept Francis' "year of mercy", they will have to sign the agreement before the start (8th December). Give 2-3 weeks!

I believe this will happen, also, either before or on Dec. 8th. First of all because it is the start of this so-called "year of mercy". Secondly, because Dec. 8th is significant to the SSPX because on Dec. 8, 1984 the SSPX was Consecrated to the Immaculate Mother of God which is renewed each year on that date.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #19 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:03:43 PM »

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: Centroamerica

I received word earlier this week that Bishop Tissier said he is preparing himself for a deal with Rome, so all those who had hope in him taking a stand will be disappointed. Seems like this is why the comment was made. Granted the source, I believe the comment.

Do you know precisely what Bishop Tissier's words were? Context is very important here. "Preparing himself" could mean "preparing" to follow +Fellay's folly or it could mean "preparing" to do the right thing.

From what was told to me earlier this week, the context was, all who were in high hopes over Bishop Tissier taking a stand will be let down...this was in a communication that Bishop Tissier made- "...is preparing himself for a recognition by Rome." The context is perhaps missing and could be misleading, I admit, but I didn't receive the communication so I wouldn't know.

Also attached to this was this tidbit... "Fr. Wegner was in Houston 2 weeks ago, he told the SSPX faithful, 'Don't be surprised if one day you wake up and you are in Rome.'"

curioustrad · « **Reply #20 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:19:43 PM »

Has anybody factored in the visit of Bishop Faure to Canada and the USA in the next 3 weeks - interesting coincidence of events. Bishop Tissier might be preparing for a compromise but on the other hand....

Prayerful · « **Reply #21 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:25:25 PM »

Quote from: Centroamerica

I received word earlier this week that Bishop Tissier said he is preparing himself for a deal with Rome, so all those who had hope in him taking a stand will be disappointed. Seems like this is why the comment was made. Granted the source, I believe the comment.

I hope this is not true. I liked the Bishop's bio of Abp Lefebvre. I hope Bp Fellay will know better than to sell out to one of the worst of the Novus Ordo Popes. There is probably some idea that if they take over the SSPX, they can use that to limit the application of Summorum Pontificorum to SSPX and FSSP churches or chapel. Maybe.

TKGS · « **Reply #22 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:25:30 PM »

During the General Chapter in which Bishop Williamson was expelled, I remember being told that the meeting was still a victory for those who opposed a deal because it prevented Bishop Fellay from signing a deal with Rome unilaterally, that is, he would have to call a special General Chapter meeting who would have to consider any deal before it would be effective.

Was this assurance incorrect? Can Bishop Fellay simply sign a binding agreement?

cathman7 · « **Reply #23 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:34:34 PM »

Honestly, this definitely stirs the emotions! What gain would the person have in sending that email to Matthew?

1st Mansion Tenant · « **Reply #24 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:38:37 PM »

"Can +Fellay simply sign a binding agreement?"

Of course he can.
Remember the old Military/Bureaucratic saying.
"Tis better to ask forgiveness, than permission."

Meg · « **Reply #25 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:47:43 PM »

Something for Bp. Fellay to consider: if Francis manages to change Church teaching, under the guise of 'pastoral practice,' then what will keep the SSPX priests (if they reconcile) from being forced to give Holy Communion to anyone who approaches the altar, such as the divorced and remarried, homo, and other living-in-sin Catholics? I've no doubt that Francis will try to allow these unrepentant Catholics to receive communion, if he can possibly find a way to do so.

stgobnait · « **Reply #26 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:49:28 PM »

I believe there has to be a general chapter to vote on a deal or not, but since BF has surrounded himself with yes men, the result is a foregone conclusion..

covet truth · « **Reply #27 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:50:05 PM »

Quote from: Meg

Something for Bp. Fellay to consider: if Francis manages to change Church teaching, under the guise of 'pastoral practice,' then what will keep the SSPX priests (if they reconcile) from being forced to give Holy Communion to anyone who approaches the altar, such as the divorced and remarried, homo, and other living-in-sin Catholics? I've no doubt that Francis will try to allow these unrepentant Catholics to receive communion, if he can possibly find a way to do so.

How could they refuse if they are under Rome?

TKGS · « **Reply #28 on:** November 15, 2015, 04:50:30 PM »

Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant

"Can +Fellay simply sign a binding agreement?"

Of course he can.
Remember the old Military/Bureaucratic saying.
"Tis better to ask forgiveness, than permission."

I guess the real question, then, is how secure is Bishop Fellay that there will not be a major revolt.

Based on what I've read here by and about the supporters of the neo-SSPX, if more than a handful of priests and, perhaps, a few dozen lay-faithful revolted, I would be surprised.

TKGS · « **Reply #29 on:** November 15, 2015, 05:01:10 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

1) this is so far only a rumor ... from an anonymous e-mailer

2) even if it's true, there's no certainty that +Fellay will sign it

3) even if he signs it, one would have to read the terms of the agreement to be able to assess the full impact

So let's not jump the gun here. Several more steps. It could be sent back to Rome with suggestions for revisions, which Rome then may or may not make, and the whole thing could fizzle again.

In regards to #1, It's not really "anonymous". It is from an un-named source. Clearly, Matthew would not have posted an anonymous email without a well-founded reason to believe that the information contained therein is credible. He has not divulged the identity of the source, but this does not make it "anonymous".

Of course, you are absolutely correct about #2, though I doubt a serious proposal would have been sent to Menzingen without a well-founded belief on the part of the Vatican that the terms are acceptable to Bishop Fellay.

In regards to #3, try as I might, I cannot imagine terms that would be acceptable to Rome that would also be acceptable to a faithful Catholic. On this matter, however, it's probably better not to speculate because, as we've seen in the past, anything we can think, Modernist Rome can make even more despicable.