Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Fr. Pagliarani Talking Tough (And I like It)!  (Read 482 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: Fr. Pagliarani Talking Tough (And I like It)!
« Reply #5 on: Yesterday at 03:33:25 PM »
Whether you "like it" or not is irrelevant. That is the wrong question to ask.

The real issue is keeping the BIG PICTURE in mind. The Neo-SSPX has fundamentally changed its stance on the Conciliar Church, the Crisis in the Church, and Vatican II.
This whole "move towards the Right" or "move towards Tradition" is all kayfabe, kabuki theater, calculated to achieve a political outcome.

We have to look at Fr. Pagliarani's words in THAT CONTEXT, for it all to make sense.

The SSPX has to keep its Conservative faction happy -- they do still make up a sizable portion of the SSPX support base, and their income!

But that doesn't mean they have to convert -- oh no. They are going to keep the Liberals happy as well. They will use every trick in the book to keep BOTH types of Trads under their big-top tent.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr. Pagliarani Talking Tough (And I like It)!
« Reply #6 on: Yesterday at 06:13:03 PM »
Yeah, that's what I've been saying also.  They have to at least partly act like a "strong man" to their own people, or else they lose credibility and people suspect that they compromised.  This way they compromise, but Tucho/Prevost will play along here and scold them sternly, etc. ... since they know he's useless to them in terms of leading people to the Conciliar Church if he loses his folowing.  Yet they won't go so far as to lose the Leftists, probably over 50% of SSPX now.   I've long suspected that one of the reasons they undertook these idiotically imprudent building projects is so that they're forced to "offend" no more people than is absolutely necessary, since they are stretched so thin trying to make these payments that even a 10% drop in attendance would prove financially catastrophic, unless of course Jaidhof / Krah come to the rescue, but of course there will be a price for such rescue.

We see it in politics all the time, where in the cigar-smoke-filled back rooms they strike a deal but then each side goes home and saves face, with a nod-nod-wink-wink to their counter-party, both of them realizing they're just hamming it up for domestic consumption.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr. Pagliarani Talking Tough (And I like It)!
« Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 06:15:50 PM »

Bishop Fellay and his successor, Fr. Pagliarani successfully culled the SSPX faithful's herd of it's true Catholic Remnant.


The SSPX will never be the same.

But, we still love the circus Kayfabe, so please... bring on the next "jew-boy excommunication" act. :popcorn:




I mean ... if Prevost isn't an over-the-top flamer, then I'll eat my underwear, after wearing it for 3 months without washing ... either it or myself.  That's how confident I am that he's at least, ahm, "attracted" in that regard.

What is this, prom night?


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Fr. Pagliarani Talking Tough (And I like It)!
« Reply #8 on: Yesterday at 06:19:58 PM »
It is an interesting theory that consecration does not carry with it jurisdiction.

That's always been a stick issue in Catholic theology.  Even the etymology of episcopus implies jurisdiction, since it means, quite literally "overseeer"  At wasn't until after the Church was freed from persecution that dioceses started to get big, and a single bishop couldn't manage the entire thing, so they started consecrating these "chor-" bishops, meaning "country" bishops, or "boonies" bishops, where they're the ones that went out to the remote areas.  I do believe that there's a certain amount of authority that's intrinsic to episcopal Orders.  Take, for instance, that bishops can validly confirm without any kind of approval, but priests ordinarily cannot.  Why?  Why can Bishop, oh, Zendejas, validly confirm but then Father Chazal cannot?  Neither one has authorization or approval or jurisdiction.