Author Topic: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON (Read 34291 times)

cosmas · « **Reply #35 on:** May 13, 2019, 04:25:51 PM »

Ladislaus, its my understanding that it happened after the 2012 Chapter. at the chapter things got heated,Bishop Tissier stood up to Bishop Fellay, also the fact that at the beginning the three Bishops went against Bishop Fellay. He evidently threatened Bishop de Gallerreta and Bishop Tissier. Not long after they were sent away from their countries they were in. They both had a large following in those countries. Haven't heard much of a fight from either of them,now its go along to get along with Rome.
We know what happened to Bishop Williamson,for speaking the Truth.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #36 on:** May 13, 2019, 04:36:35 PM »

I know it's difficult for older people to change, but man, they should just leave and join the resistance. They could go back to their countries, semi-retire, write against Modernism and they'd be taken care of materially and all of that. Easier said than done, I suppose. They'd have to cut ties with all their fraternity friends and such. But, then again, life isn't easy! Have to make sacrifices for the Faith! I pray they can make this decision one day.

Incredulous · « **Reply #37 on:** May 13, 2019, 10:50:09 PM »

Quote from: Meg on May 13, 2019, 11:09:00 AM

What is it exactly that's hard to determine regarding the influence that +ABL was under? Why would you question his intentions?

Have you ever heard the supposition that SSPX was purposefully formed to be the "controlled opposition" to the Conciliar church?
(The ʝʊdɛօ-masonic metric is to instigate the revolution, but always control the opposition to the revolution).

+ABL came in contact with many different groups during the early days of the SSPX.

Please read my previous posts on the benefactors, Princess Pallavicini and Mr. Lovey.

This was before the internet and much of their written history has been scrubbed clean.
What's left of that history is being "re-written" by SSPX propaganda outlets, like Catholic Family News.
You can investigate them and do your own research.

Suffice to say, if we took Bp. Fellay's word that Max Krah, "... is a good Catholic man", the Resistance movement would have been retarded by a few years and Bp. Williamson would probably still be living in the priory attic at Wimbledon.

Meg · « **Reply #38 on:** May 14, 2019, 07:46:17 AM »

Quote from: Incredulous on May 13, 2019, 10:50:09 PM

Have you ever heard the supposition that SSPX was purposefully formed to be the "controlled opposition" to the Conciliar church?
(The ʝʊdɛօ-masonic metric is to instigate the revolution, but always control the opposition to the revolution).

+ABL came in contact with many different groups during the early days of the SSPX.

Please read my previous posts on the benefactors, Princess Pallavicini and Mr. Lovey.

This was before the internet and much of their written history has been scrubbed clean.
What's left of that history is being "re-written" by SSPX propaganda outlets, like Catholic Family News.
You can investigate them and do your own research.

Suffice to say, if we took Bp. Fellay's word that Max Krah, "... is a good Catholic man", the Resistance movement would have been retarded by a few years and Bp. Williamson would probably still be living in the priory attic at Wimbledon.

I'm not going to do research on your accusation of whom influenced +ABL. Obviously you don't want to substantiate your accusation here, though evidently, no one here except me cares that you are anti-Archbishop Lefebvre.

You seem to think that +ABL was under control of Freemasons. Well, that's probably not an unusual belief for a follower of Plinio de Oliveira and Atila Guimaraes. Guimaraes has always been very anti-SSPX from the beginning, and I assume that de Oliveira had also been anti-SSPX. But of course those two held/hold belief that de Oliveira was the true prophet sent by God to restore the Church, and that the SSPX from the beginning was a distraction away from this. Would that be right?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #39 on:** May 14, 2019, 08:22:09 AM »

Quote from: cosmas on May 13, 2019, 04:25:51 PM

Ladislaus, its my understanding that it happened after the 2012 Chapter. at the chapter things got heated,Bishop Tissier stood up to Bishop Fellay, also the fact that at the beginning the three Bishops went against Bishop Fellay. He evidently threatened Bishop de Gallerreta and Bishop Tissier. Not long after they were sent away from their countries they were in. They both had a large following in those countries. Haven't heard much of a fight from either of them,now its go along to get along with Rome.
We know what happened to Bishop Williamson,for speaking the Truth.

Thank you. I wonder what he used to "threaten" the bishops, explusion?

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON (Read 34291 times)

cosmas

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Pax Vobis

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Incredulous

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Meg

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON

Ladislaus

Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON