Oh, yes, I almost forgot.

What's a troll?

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: John McFarland

Sigismund,

I also find it a bit rich for the SSPX or their apologists to talk much about obedience.  The Archbishop owed obedience to the Vicar of Christ, but he founded a religious society, established seminaries and parishes, and ordained priests and bishops not only without the pope's permission but against his expressed wishes...  

Sigismund you are very incorrect.

The SSPX was canonically founded, first via the local ordinary, then Rome - Congregation of the Clergy (under Cardinal John Wright) - the last being on November 1, 1970. You can see the necessary docuмents on sspx.org.

Archbishop Lefebvre also came to America in the early 1970's to seek permission and support from the Philadelphia, PA and Covington, KY bishops for establishing an English-speaking seminary, which they granted, though the seminary was ultimately established in Armada, MI.

For many of its early years when this was still possible, the Archbishop always obtained necessary dismissorial letters for his seminarians (as they were coming from a diocese or religious congregation). Observing this canonical procedure only came to a halt when Cardinal Villot (Secretary of State) wrote in 1975 to all of the bishops telling them they were not allowed to give such letters for seminarians wishing to enter an SSPX seminary.

The SSPX was also granted the ability to incardinate members from other dioceses and religious congregations - Fr. Urban Synder from the States (of the Trappist monastery at Gethsemane, KY) is a notable example.

Finally, the Archbishop did not open any chapels (Mass centers) until the situation became so bad that he was forced to for the sake of souls - this did not occur until 1974 (the Detroit chapel here in the USA being a notable exception in 1971 under the diocesan-Benedictine, Fr. Bonfil).

It was the local bishops and the Holy See that made it impossible for the SSPX to observe these rules, as they illegitimately claimed the SSPX had been suppressed. Thus then, and only then and under duress, was the Archbishop-SSPX required to work under the mode of supplied jurisdiction just as St. Athanasius had done.

Because the Church had mandated the SSPX into existence through the proper legislation of her human authorities, the Archbishop knew he/SSPX had the right to continue exercising its role in forming and ordaining priests - as well as exercising the priestly ministry of saving souls - despite what the authorities were illegitimately saying. But in doing this, the law and its spirit has always been adhered to within the SSPX.

Finally (finally), Pope John Paul II actually did give the Archbishop permission to consecrate a bishop - the matter came down to who the bishop would be and when he would be consecrated - thus the matter of the "papal mandate" which had already been implicitly given. When Rome stalled on these points, only then did the Archbishop went ahead (per his Catholic episcopal duty) and consecrate four bishops to ensure the continuation of Tradition.

Thus it is entirely incorrect to state that the Archbishop or the SSPX have been acting as a "fly by night" congregation. This merely repeats what the liberal French bishops accused the Econe seminary of being in 1974: "a wildcat [renegade] seminary".

They were canonically founded originally, yes.  I am simply saying that I don't see how it is okay for ABL to be disobedient when he was convinced it was necessary, defying the authority of the Pope, the vicar of Christ and successor to St. Peter, while a priest in the SSPX now is excoriated for disobeying a bishop with no jurisdiction or canonical mission for the same convictions.  I am not attacking the SSPX at its origin, although I think ABL's decision to consecrate bishops without a papal mandate and against the wishes of the Pope was a schismatic act.  I am attacking the sham it has become under a superior with delusions of godhood.

+Fellay made the judgment that a no doctrinal strings regularization was something that should be done.

Oh, yes, I almost forgot.

What's a troll?

And no, "we" do not have the right to "be naturally suspicious of all his [Bishop Fellay's] re-assignments" - the SSPX is a religious congregation, not a public corporation!

Quote from: romanitaspress

And no, "we" do not have the right to "be naturally suspicious of all his [Bishop Fellay's] re-assignments" - the SSPX is a religious congregation, not a public corporation!

Virtually all the diocesan bishops and most of the former traditionalist have gone over to the side of Modernism while Bishop Fellay is saddled with an openly Zionist, Israel confidant, and "Madonna" fan as his top legal and financial aide.

Is there any conceivable point at which "we" might obtain the right to harbor suspicions?

Sorry, I don't believe in those kind of coincidences. Not when other actions corroborate what I'm seeing. You have to look at everything TOGETHER before you draw your conclusions.