CathInfo.com

It’s a disappointing fact.

I will find the citation; can’t recall if it was confirmed in the Biography or somewhere else.

I remember it slightly hurting my esteem for Archbishop Lefebvre when I learned this (ie., caving in to the desires of Swiss benefactors, which implies he did it for money).

We all make mistakes (and that one came back to destroy his SSPX), but he still deserves to be recognized as the savior of the faith, and because of that as one of the greatest saints of all-time, in my opinion.

Agreed.

And let's face it -- as I said above, this isn't about the man +Fellay. I don't hate him personally. I hate the new direction of the new SSPX, and I hate the neo-SSPX as an organization. We are allowed to hate -- even REQUIRED to hate -- error and evil in the abstract.

Therefore I don't hate any individual priests or laity who are part of (or who attend) the SSPX. However, if the SSPX as an organization depended on me for life, it would be shut down. If the SSPX were drowning, I'd throw it a nice, heavy anchor.

Their whole position and strategy (that of the FSSP) repulses me as a man. I hate compromise, I hate lies, I hate ignoring truths. I hate pandering to certain apostate groups which have been fighting the Church since the Acts of the Apostles. And I hate everything the modern world stands for. Every last thing. I do renounce it, and all its pomps, and all its display. Yes, I chose those words on purpose. I renounce the Modern World (a.k.a. "the city of Man") the same way I renounce Satan, because they are interchangeable. That's also why I hate Vatican 2!

Besides the % of priests in the SSPX who are in agreement with the new direction (personified by +Fellay) there are also THE OTHER TWO BISHOPS who have done nothing substantial to put the SSPX back on the straight and narrow. As I asked above, are THEY Freemasons too?

That's why this line of thinking ("Is Bp. Fellay a Freemason?") is rather misguided and even stupid.

As if non-Freemasons can't sin, fall, be deceived, etc.?

It smacks of the error discussed in 1984: "Eurasia is now our enemy. Therefore they are the ultimate evil. But if they are the devil, there's no way we (good guys) were EVER allies with them. Thus we were ALWAYS at war with Eurasia. Get out the old newspapers and history books, and make changes to the historical record if necessary!"

So long story short, +ABL's first choice -- Bp. Williamson -- turned out to be his best choice.

Quote from: SeanJohnson on Today at 12:58:57 PM

It’s a disappointing fact.

I will find the citation; can’t recall if it was confirmed in the Biography or somewhere else.

I remember it slightly hurting my esteem for Archbishop Lefebvre when I learned this (ie., caving in to the desires of Swiss benefactors, which implies he did it for money).

It'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?

About 1/3 of the SSPX priests feel and see things like +Fellay does.

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.