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

Author Topic: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON  (Read 9262 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Incredulous

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8901
  • Reputation: +8675/-849
  • Gender: Male
Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
« Reply #15 on: May 12, 2019, 07:54:00 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • It's hard to determine the influences that +ABL was under and we hope for the best concerning his intentions. 

    But who else would have come forth to help save Catholic tradition... Father Wathen?   Prof. Plinio Correa de Oliveira?

    They were ahead of +ABL in understanding the nature of the Church's ʝʊdɛօ-masonic infiltration.
    But they both lacked the clerical stature and European Catholic cache to be thrust into the limelight as movement leaders.

    As in the Max Krah/Jaidhoff benefactor connection, it may be fruitful to research the SSPX's older benefactors who could have had questionable intentions.

    For example, the "Black Nobility" family of Princess Elvina Pallavicini.
    She endorsed +ABL early on... but you always have to ask why and who did she really represent?

    Was her endorsement and probable funding a move to make the SSPX the newChurch's controlled opposition?

    In 2017, the SSPX, in a self-serving history, honored her help to +ABL in their Catholic Family News magazine.

    But here's a video of a Pallavicini family member leading the political promotion of Italian Islam
    Note: This is a Soros level operation






    "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


    Online Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4187
    • Reputation: +2431/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #16 on: May 12, 2019, 08:45:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Only a third? That means 2/3 oppose the new direction? I would love that to be right, but it sure doesn't feel that way.

    I agree, This seems awfully optimistic. I would hazard to guess the amount to be closer to half.
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #17 on: May 13, 2019, 06:34:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SeanJohnson on Today at 12:58:57 PMIt's a fact. That is a serious statement that one needs to be sure of before making.
    It implies he did it for money. It's a fact. Now that is an extremely grave implication. It casts an aspersion on the character of Archbishop Lefebvre.
    Is it not more likely that Archbishop Lefebvre, a man whose whole life gives testimony that he was a man of rare principle, considered that the request had merit and that there was a certain young priest who was eminently suited to such a high calling? Can we not think of other reasons that reflect well on the Archbishop rather than tarnish his reputation with such certainty?

    That Archbishop Lefebvre only initially intended to consecrate 3 bishops is docuмented on the SSPX.org website here:

    "On February 2nd, the Archbishop announces in Flavigny before television cameras that he will consecrate three bishops on June 30th."

    http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/a_short_history_of_the_sspx-part-5.htm

    That Fr. Fellay was not among these initial candidates comes from a personal email from Bishop Williamson here:

    "Upon information and belief, it was the Archbishop's friend, Attorney Roger Lovey, who asked on behalf of the Archbishop's Swiss drivers all over Europe, for a fourth priest from Switzerland to be added to the three priests already chosen to be consecrated bishops. The Archbishop agreed out of gratitude to his drivers. Fr Bernard Fellay seemed to be the best suited, and the rest is history."

    To do something in gratitude is not the same as doing it for money.  And I suppose you could suspect that I am fraudulently attributing this quote to Bishop Williamson, or made it up myself (but in that case, you could simply write to Bishop Williamson to verify).  Or, you could question the source of Bishop Williamson's information.  But if he is going to tell it to me, it is going to be the truth.  For me, his word suffices.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #18 on: May 13, 2019, 07:22:27 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • That Archbishop Lefebvre only initially intended to consecrate 3 bishops is docuмented on the SSPX.org website here:

    "On February 2nd, the Archbishop announces in Flavigny before television cameras that he will consecrate three bishops on June 30th."

    http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/a_short_history_of_the_sspx-part-5.htm

    That Fr. Fellay was not among these initial candidates comes from a personal email from Bishop Williamson here:

    "Upon information and belief, it was the Archbishop's friend, Attorney Roger Lovey, who asked on behalf of the Archbishop's Swiss drivers all over Europe, for a fourth priest from Switzerland to be added to the three priests already chosen to be consecrated bishops. The Archbishop agreed out of gratitude to his drivers. Fr Bernard Fellay seemed to be the best suited, and the rest is history."

    To do something in gratitude is not the same as doing it for money.  And I suppose you could suspect that I am fraudulently attributing this quote to Bishop Williamson, or made it up myself (but in that case, you could simply write to Bishop Williamson to verify).  Or, you could question the source of Bishop Williamson's information.  But if he is going to tell it to me, it is going to be the truth.  For me, his word suffices.

    More related history:

    Fr. Laisney, in his book “Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican: 1987-1988,” supplies a reference to a May 3 confidential letter of Archbishop Lefebvre in which the latter supplies the names of 4 candidates to be considered for the consecration of a single bishop.

    Interestingly, Fr. Laisney reveals that of the four names submitted on May 3, only two ended up being among those consecrated in June.

    https://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_I/1988-05-03.htm

    This definitely implies that two new candidates emerged between February and May.

    Who were the two new names?

    And what was the reason for their inclusion?

    It is mentioned elsewhere that Archbishop Lefebvre initially chose Fr. Faure, but when he declined, the Archbishop deferred to Fr. de Galarreta.  

    Is this the explanation for one of the two new names?  Not sure.
    And is the email of Bishop Williamson above the explanation for the other?

    Not sure.

    Note also the good will implicit in Archbishop Lefebvre’s negotiations with Rome on this point:

    As mentioned elsewhere in Fr. Laisney’s book, it is decided that Archbishop Lefebvre will settle for a single bishop if one should be granted, but otherwise he will consecrate several bishops (“If you’re going to die for a dime, you might as well die for a dollar”).
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #19 on: May 13, 2019, 07:36:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That Archbishop Lefebvre only initially intended to consecrate 3 bishops is docuмented on the SSPX.org website here:

    "On February 2nd, the Archbishop announces in Flavigny before television cameras that he will consecrate three bishops on June 30th."

    http://archives.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/a_short_history_of_the_sspx-part-5.htm

    That Fr. Fellay was not among these initial candidates comes from a personal email from Bishop Williamson here:

    "Upon information and belief, it was the Archbishop's friend, Attorney Roger Lovey, who asked on behalf of the Archbishop's Swiss drivers all over Europe, for a fourth priest from Switzerland to be added to the three priests already chosen to be consecrated bishops. The Archbishop agreed out of gratitude to his drivers. Fr Bernard Fellay seemed to be the best suited, and the rest is history."

    To do something in gratitude is not the same as doing it for money.  And I suppose you could suspect that I am fraudulently attributing this quote to Bishop Williamson, or made it up myself (but in that case, you could simply write to Bishop Williamson to verify).  Or, you could question the source of Bishop Williamson's information.  But if he is going to tell it to me, it is going to be the truth.  For me, his word suffices.
    We need to learn who the lawyer Roger Lovey really was and who he was connected to?

    The Resistance collectively figured-out in 2009, that the SSPX sponsored the attorney, financier and politician Max Krah, for an eMBA.  When caught, Menzingen tried to spin that Maxie was a just nice Catholic lawyer, hired by Fr. Schmidberger's recommendation, (we assume) and listed on all their EU corporate docuмents. 


    But, it is very clear now that "Max-babe" is a Zionist operative.

    So the common sense questions on Bp. Fellay's qualifications are: 

    1. Did the young Father Fellay even have pastoral assignments or experience?
    2. We know unlike +W, he was without a college education.

    Even +W has acknowledged +ABL's seminary managerial misjudgements.

    We know now, it was a "bad decision".



    It would seem, (through smiling ʝʊdɛօ-masonic eyes), that Fr. Fellay's best Apostolic qualification was that of being the SSPX "money handler".
    "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 SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #20 on: May 13, 2019, 08:12:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Of course I wouldn’t know, but I don’t think there’s much behind Mr. Lovey.  According to all accounts, he was an honorable man, and the fact of his friendship with Archbishop Lefebvre speaks to that.

    Interestingly, it seems he died in the same hour that his son (Fr. Lovey) was ordained a priest.  Equally interesting is that this was the only priestly ordination performed by Archbishop Lefebvre after the 1988 consecrations.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31182
    • Reputation: +27095/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #21 on: May 13, 2019, 08:34:33 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree, This seems awfully optimistic. I would hazard to guess the amount to be closer to half.

    NO! You're totally missing an important point:
    1/2 of them don't care, and will go whichever way the wind blows.

    Another 1/3 is positively leaning in the new direction. Probably less than 1/6th is conservative or has any kind of strong feelings for sticking with +ABL's old SSPX.

    It's even more complicated -- because many are conservative and want to stick with +ABL, but they are ignorant about what that means!

    I don't think more than 1/3 is actively desiring a change towards Modern Rome.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #22 on: May 13, 2019, 09:35:03 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Most things in life are the 80/20 rule.  20% are highly engaged in a movement, organization, philosophy, etc (i.e. leaders).  The rest of the 80% are followers and will listen to the arguments on both sides but aren't able to fully and independently think for themselves.  (This is not a knock against them; God just designed most people to be followers.  Not everyone can be a leader.  Each has specific duties and responsibilities.  An organization will die for lack of leadership or a lack of good followers.  Both are essential.)
    .
    In the case of the sspx, when +ABL was alive, you had a clear leader of a small organization and he was, de facto, the full 20% of leadership.  Their organization ran pretty smoothly because the vision was clear, the rule of the organization was simple, and with few exceptions (i.e. "the nine" or the priests who left for the fssp), there was no challenge to +ABL's leadership or purpose.
    .
    Once +Fellay was elected a 2nd time as SG, I think that's when he and his buddies decided to make some changes.  I guess we'll never know why +Fellay decided to sell his soul to new-rome (until we're in heaven), but putting aside the reasons, it is clear that he has embarked on a path of change.  +Williamson was going to be the obvious roadblock in all of this, so he was exiled from Winona and then kicked out all together.  It's suprising that the other 2 bishops were won over so easily to +Fellay's side, yet Frenchmen and South Americans have never been known to have a lot of backbone or leadership qualities, ha ha.
    .
    (It could be that +Fellay is also a patsy who is following a hidden leadership group within the new-sspx.  Much like the president of a country is told what to do by unelected cabinet members who really run things decade after decade.  This is probably the most likely scenario.  The idea that +Fellay could navigate the cunning, slow, progressive liberalization of the sspx over the past 10 years, in which priest after priest has been slowly trained to spit out the same message from the pulpits across the whole world, is naive.  Certainly there are multiple people involved in this operation of liberalization.  To change an organization from within is a hallmark of communism/Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ; this expertise is not learned overnight.  There are experts involved, for sure.  +Fellay does not strike me as an expert on much of anything, ha ha, except that of lying and political double-speak.  Again, where did he learn these skills?  He wasn't always like this.)
    .
    So we have now the former 20% of +ABL's leadership split between +Fellay and +Williamson.  The rest of the 80% of priests and laity are left to decide whom to follow, with many changing their minds constantly, based on the day, the newest sermon, the weather or any other sentimental reason.  As far as numbers go, certainly the new-sspx is winning and the resistance seems to have reached a high point (as far as growth from new-sspx'ers, not a high-point in future growth).  If the new-sspx keeps their slow, steady walk towards new-rome, they won't lose too many more priests/people.  Only if there is a scandal or some turbulence will *some* wake up and see that the resistance is correct.  (Just like in our own spiritual lives...unless God sends us stress and misery, we will not change).
    .
    But, the resistance is quality over quantity!  It is full of good, passionate, engaged people who care about the Faith!  This is what God wants!  The new-sspx is full of lukewarmness and compromise.  These types of people will never accomplish anything; they are too asleep and lethargic to act.
    .
    Let us all pray for a scandal, some turbulence, some pain for the new-sspx, that those who are of good-will can be woken up from their slumber.  The resistance (and the rest of Trad-dom) does not need numbers but we do need quality people.  Let us pray that God will wrestle out the last few souls from the new-sspx's rotting apple, before it's too late!


    Offline Mega-fin

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 371
    • Reputation: +249/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #23 on: May 13, 2019, 09:40:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • NO! You're totally missing an important point:
    1/2 of them don't care, and will go whichever way the wind blows.

    Another 1/3 is positively leaning in the new direction. Probably less than 1/6th is conservative or has any kind of strong feelings for sticking with +ABL's old SSPX.

    It's even more complicated -- because many are conservative and want to stick with +ABL, but they are ignorant about what that means!

    I don't think more than 1/3 is actively desiring a change towards Modern Rome.
    I would say this is even high. A lot of people I know personally don’t “like it” but the same people have told me that they would go to the FSSP but it’s further away, or the Indult, but there’s not enough community, etc. From what I’ve seen, people at the SSPX parishes I know are more interested in coffee after Mass and beer at so and so’s house, and the hockey game then what is going on with Tradition. So much for the Church Militant. More like the church passive. 
    Please disregard everything I have said; I have tended to speak before fact checking.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31182
    • Reputation: +27095/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #24 on: May 13, 2019, 09:45:07 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree, the percentages are up for debate, and we'll never know for sure. It's hard to nail that down.

    However, the point (which can't be disputed) is this: when calculating the % pro- classic SSPX position, and the % pro-Modernist Rome, you have to take into account the large % of SSPX Faithful who are followers, apathetic, who will go along with whatever the SSPX leadership does.

    This large % is anywhere from 50% up to 90%. One can debate the specifics, but not the general principle.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Mega-fin

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 371
    • Reputation: +249/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #25 on: May 13, 2019, 11:00:49 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree, the percentages are up for debate, and we'll never know for sure. It's hard to nail that down.

    However, the point (which can't be disputed) is this: when calculating the % pro- classic SSPX position, and the % pro-Modernist Rome, you have to take into account the large % of SSPX Faithful who are followers, apathetic, who will go along with whatever the SSPX leadership does.

    This large % is anywhere from 50% up to 90%. One can debate the specifics, but not the general principle.
    Absolutely. But how many people these days in SSPX parishes know what the position of the Archbishop was?
    Please disregard everything I have said; I have tended to speak before fact checking.


    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #26 on: May 13, 2019, 11:09:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • It's hard to determine the influences that +ABL was under and we hope for the best concerning his intentions.  

    What is it exactly that's hard to determine regarding the influence that +ABL was under? Why would you question his intentions? 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31182
    • Reputation: +27095/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #27 on: May 13, 2019, 11:37:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Absolutely. But how many people these days in SSPX parishes know what the position of the Archbishop was?
    That's the problem. Most don't care to do any kind of reading/research to find out -- they just gobble up whatever seeds and acorns the SSPX priests thrown at them. 
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline homeschoolmom

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 148
    • Reputation: +103/-14
    • Gender: Female
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #28 on: May 13, 2019, 11:46:56 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • NO! You're totally missing an important point:
    1/2 of them don't care, and will go whichever way the wind blows.

    Another 1/3 is positively leaning in the new direction. Probably less than 1/6th is conservative or has any kind of strong feelings for sticking with +ABL's old SSPX.

    It's even more complicated -- because many are conservative and want to stick with +ABL, but they are ignorant about what that means!

    I don't think more than 1/3 is actively desiring a change towards Modern Rome.

    You're right, I'm sorry, I had completely forgotten all the in-betweens. It's hard to imagine that anyone could possibly be lukewarm about it, but it's true that if 1/3 are actively for the changes, then the remaining 2/3 would be split up in a bunch of other boxes. The: 

    "I don't know", 
    "I don't care", 
    "I'm not paying attention", 
    "I'm confused", 
    "I waver back and forth", 
    "This is over my head", 
    "This is above my pay grade", 

    and finally a small portion would be actively against. That is beside the point that those who positively want the new direction are not all freemasons, I was just struck by the number, completely forgetting there are any positions beyond for or against.   

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41863
    • Reputation: +23919/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #29 on: May 13, 2019, 01:23:55 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Very true.  The other 2 bishops have compromised just as much as +Fellay.

    I'm not sure I agree.  +Tissier had been against the reunification efforts, but then caved.  Left to his own devices, he would not have gone down +Fellay's path.  +Galaretta I barely hear a peep out of.  It almost sounds like he doesn't care one way or the other, and hasn't cared since his consecration.