Author Topic: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON  (Read 5859 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Incredulous

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4815
  • Reputation: +5596/-454
  • Gender: Male
Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
« Reply #60 on: May 16, 2019, 09:28:25 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • For judeo-masonics... it's just a "naturally" comfortable way to shake hands  :jumping2:


     
                       The Gorby shake


                      The good jew & bad jew shake


                             B16 & Brit a-hole shake


                          The Bursar & B16 shake
                                     


                       The two-jew, "I know you" shake.



        The "Destroyer clown" who shakes em all down... shake.


    "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 Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17896
    • Reputation: +9996/-4557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #61 on: May 16, 2019, 09:42:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, +Fellay's handshake picture is slightly different than the others, since his thumb is not actually making contact and pressing into the back for the hand.


    Offline homeschoolmom

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 134
    • Reputation: +87/-14
    • Gender: Female
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #62 on: May 16, 2019, 09:56:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote from: Incredulous on Yesterday at 11:45:23 PM
    Thanks for the feedback HMS.

    Pardon the Wiki source, but it was the quickest click. Papal bans on Freemasonry

    The Church has been very adamant in it's excommunication of Freemasons.  
    So if Msgr. Fellay is crypto-masonic it would present some big problems for the Society.

    Canon Law from 1917 details it and even the modern "jew-popes" had trouble erasing the penalties.
    Although they tried their best to undermine and/or dilute them.

    Thank you! I'm sorry I must still be missing something though. Excommunicated sacraments are illicit but still valid, no?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17896
    • Reputation: +9996/-4557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #63 on: May 16, 2019, 09:57:27 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • "The idea that Bp. Fellay is a Freemasonic plant is tenable" BUT NOT LEFEBVRE!  lol

    We have absolutely no indication of +Lefebvre being a Freemason.  Even with +Fellay, it's little more than pure speculation also, except with the latter there's the little problem of what is motivating him to effectively destroy the SSPX.  +Lefebvre could have, in collaboration with the Vatican Modernists, taken the SSPX lock-stock-and-barrell right back into the Novus Ordo.  Before +Lefebvre came onto the scene, the Traditional movement was just a scattered number of rogue independent priests most of whom would have simply died out.  There would have been very little to "control" in said "controlled opposition".  +Lefebvre largely ramped up said opposition in the first place.  I doubt that there would be more than a couple thousand Traditional Catholics scattered around the world had it not been for Archbishop Lefebvre.  So I'm failing to see how speculation that he was a Freemason is even remotely plausible.

    Offline homeschoolmom

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 134
    • Reputation: +87/-14
    • Gender: Female
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #64 on: May 16, 2019, 10:00:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, +Fellay's handshake picture is slightly different than the others, since his thumb is not actually making contact and pressing into the back for the hand.

    I noticed that too. It's uncomfortably close, but it doesn't show the same pressure on the knuckle. And +Fellay's thumb is making no contact at all. Unless this was snapped just as they were letting go. 


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17896
    • Reputation: +9996/-4557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #65 on: May 16, 2019, 10:04:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank you! I'm sorry I must still be missing something though. Excommunicated sacraments are illicit but still valid, no?

    Correct.  Excommunication has no effect on the validity of the Sacraments.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17896
    • Reputation: +9996/-4557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #66 on: May 16, 2019, 10:06:59 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I noticed that too. It's uncomfortably close, but it doesn't show the same pressure on the knuckle. And +Fellay's thumb is making no contact at all. Unless this was snapped just as they were letting go.

    Right.  Perhaps Benedict XVI was applying the handshake (as a test?) and that's how +Fellay's hand ended up in response.  Or else it was just an awkward limp-wristed handshake by one or both men  :laugh1:.

    What strikes me more about the picture is the giddy smile on +Fellay's face ... as if he's star-struck, like a teenage girl shaking hands with one of The Beatles back in the day.  It suggests a significant degree of human respect ... and not merely reverence for the Office he believes that Benedict held.  And that actually suggests that the two are NOT in fact Masonic co-conspirators.  I get the impression that +Fellay's giddy about finally having "hit the big time" ... no doubt fantasizing about wearing that white cassock some day.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4568
    • Reputation: +2776/-1261
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #67 on: May 16, 2019, 10:16:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.ourladyisgod.com/images/eBooks/Alta-Vendita.pdf

    It's not necessary to prove that +Fellay is or isn't a freemason.  Just like those who wrote the "Alta Vendita" said, they do not necessarily want a pope who is a freemason, but only a pope who believes the "revolutionary and humanitarian" principles; "a pope according to our needs".  So it is with +Fellay.  He is a leader in the new-sspx who fits the freemasonic bill.
    .
    p.s.  That was one handshake in the list of many.  What about all the other times they met?  Maybe +Fellay knew the cameras were present and didn't want to make it obvious?  He has to worry because many Trads are aware of this stuff, while +Benedict and everyone else knows that the sheeple have no idea, so they can be more relaxed.  Either way, it doesn't matter.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17896
    • Reputation: +9996/-4557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #68 on: May 16, 2019, 12:49:53 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.ourladyisgod.com/images/eBooks/Alta-Vendita.pdf

    It's not necessary to prove that +Fellay is or isn't a freemason.  Just like those who wrote the "Alta Vendita" said, they do not necessarily want a pope who is a freemason, but only a pope who believes the "revolutionary and humanitarian" principles; "a pope according to our needs".  So it is with +Fellay.  He is a leader in the new-sspx who fits the freemasonic bill.
    .
    p.s.  That was one handshake in the list of many.  What about all the other times they met?  Maybe +Fellay knew the cameras were present and didn't want to make it obvious?  He has to worry because many Trads are aware of this stuff, while +Benedict and everyone else knows that the sheeple have no idea, so they can be more relaxed.  Either way, it doesn't matter.

    Right.  Either way he appears to be doing their bidding, and that's what counts.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23022
    • Reputation: +20180/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #69 on: May 16, 2019, 01:00:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What strikes me more about the picture is the giddy smile on +Fellay's face ... as if he's star-struck, like a teenage girl shaking hands with one of The Beatles back in the day.  It suggests a significant degree of human respect ... and not merely reverence for the Office he believes that Benedict held.  And that actually suggests that the two are NOT in fact Masonic co-conspirators.  I get the impression that +Fellay's giddy about finally having "hit the big time" ... no doubt fantasizing about wearing that white cassock some day.

    You're absolutely right. He's proud and excited about what he is "going to accomplish" by bringing the SSPX into the Conciliar fold. He is delusional and FULL of vainglory. He's all about fame, numbers, accomplishments.

    You know how they say "God's ways are not our ways?" Well, the poster child for "our ways" is the human prudence and "wisdom" shown constantly by +Fellay. Other men of God have their projects and ideas too -- which might turn out to be unsuccessful. But at least the latter is thinking along the same lines as God -- using His means, using the science of the Saints -- they are at least in the same ballpark. Bishop Fellay's projects, ideas, and ways are 100% worldly-minded and have no chance of being blessed or approved by God. Compromise? Ignoring/suppressing the truth? Smearing one's enemies? Propaganda and lies? Branding agencies? Hollywood marketing? Sorry, that's about as far from God's ways as you can get!

    +Fellay thinks he's so much greater than the Archbishop, and he couldn't be more wrong! He isn't 1/1000th the man +ABL was.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23022
    • Reputation: +20180/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #70 on: May 16, 2019, 01:09:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • We have absolutely no indication of +Lefebvre being a Freemason.  +Lefebvre could have, in collaboration with the Vatican Modernists, taken the SSPX lock-stock-and-barrel right back into the Novus Ordo.  Before +Lefebvre came onto the scene, the Traditional movement was just a scattered number of rogue independent priests most of whom would have simply died out.  There would have been very little to "control" in said "controlled opposition".  +Lefebvre largely ramped up said opposition in the first place.  I doubt that there would be more than a couple thousand Traditional Catholics scattered around the world had it not been for Archbishop Lefebvre.  So I'm failing to see how speculation that he was a Freemason is even remotely plausible.

    This bears repeating.

    Even his enemies only suggest he was invalidly consecrated by a Freemason (of course, they ignore the fact of the TWO OTHER CO-CONSECRATORS, but I digress).

    I've never heard even the wildest, left-field sedevacantist ever suggest that +Lefebvre himself was a Freemason. And that's saying something, because I've seen and heard just about everything from lunatics on the Internet.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3004
    • Reputation: +1653/-976
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #71 on: May 16, 2019, 01:17:23 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4568
    • Reputation: +2776/-1261
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #72 on: May 16, 2019, 01:30:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • My bad.  I just posted the link to the site that had the book for free.  Notice to all - I wouldn't browse around that site.  Have no idea what is on it.

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5662
    • Reputation: +3083/-143
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
      • Julian Moore
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #73 on: May 16, 2019, 01:36:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I've never heard even the wildest, left-field sedevacantist ever suggest that +Lefebvre himself was a Freemason. And that's saying something, because I've seen and heard just about everything from lunatics on the Internet.
    I have heard it claimed that Lefebvre was indeed a Freemason like his Bishop Lienart. They go further and say the SSPX from the beginning was controlled opposition set up by the Freemasons to take over opposition to Vatican II and neutralize it and make sure it came to nothing so in their mind Fellay was the true successor of Lefebvre and is just doing what he was supposed to do, submit to Vatican II after enough time had passed that it was acceptable to most of the priests and laity who go to SSPX Masses. I believe some more extreme sedevacantists (like home-aloner types) believe this. Don't have any links but I have heard it before (One can hear anything on the internet, though I think the numbers who believe this are small).
    I Love Watching Butterflies . . ..

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23022
    • Reputation: +20180/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: IS HE OR ISN'T FELLAY A FREEMASON
    « Reply #74 on: May 16, 2019, 02:53:46 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have heard it claimed that Lefebvre was indeed a Freemason like his Bishop Lienart. They go further and say the SSPX from the beginning was controlled opposition set up by the Freemasons to take over opposition to Vatican II and neutralize it and make sure it came to nothing so in their mind Fellay was the true successor of Lefebvre and is just doing what he was supposed to do, submit to Vatican II after enough time had passed that it was acceptable to most of the priests and laity who go to SSPX Masses. I believe some more extreme sedevacantists (like home-aloner types) believe this. Don't have any links but I have heard it before (One can hear anything on the internet, though I think the numbers who believe this are small).

    Just thinking of an idea doesn't make it a good idea. Forget about likely or unlikely; it has to actually MAKE SENSE. It has to ADD UP.

    Ladislaus made the best point above. Why would the bad guys found an organization which does TONS of good, saves TONS of souls, creates 10000X the opposition they started out with, just to "control the opposition"?

    But where would that leave the REAL controlled opposition? -- FSSP, ICK, Indult groups, etc.  None of them would have had to exist if it weren't for their desire to control the Faithful's desire for Tradition in a "controlled opposition" kind of setting. These groups were created to compete with, and redirect Catholics into, away from the SSPX.

    Keep in mind that most sedevacantists and Indulters today also owe their Catholic Faith to +ABL and his work. Think of the widespread example and presence of the SSPX, even up to the present day. How many Indulters and Sedes did the SSPX help generate as well? More people come INTO Tradition than go OUT OF it, thanks to the SSPX. The number of scattered independent chapels in 1970 is so small, it's not even worth mentioning. Even most independent chapels and sede chapels owe "what they have" to +ABL, his work, his consecrations, his ordinations, his seminaries, etc.

    If the SSPX was designed as a vehicle to destroy Tradition, then that was the stupidest plan, and the most epic fail EVER.

    If every Catholic going UP a step towards pure, uncompromised practice/knowledge of Catholic Tradition earned 1 point
    And every Catholic stepping down towards apathy and attendance at the Novus Ordo subtracted 1 point

    +ABL would be net positive IN THE MILLIONS.

    Yes, the SSPX took over many independent chapels, but guess what? The priests saying Mass at those chapels DIED and the parishioners got continued weekly Mass instead of being Home Alone, joining the Indult, or going back to the Novus Ordo. How does that help the Conciliar "cause"? In almost every case, the Boards of those independent chapels brought in the SSPX because they had no other choice.

    It's not like legions of "true" (Sedevacantist, for purposes of this argument) priests were put out of work or put on the sidelines while the SSPX took over everything. No, the SSPX usually replaced "nothing" with SSPX, or "Conciliar" with SSPX. They changed lead into gold, never the other way around.

    The SSPV owes EVERYTHING to the SSPX -- its Orders, its training, most of its initial chapels and real estate, etc. The Nine were trained and ordained by +ABL's organization.

    But the hypothesis you describe above? Only a bitter, angry, emotional sore loser Sedevacantist could actually believe that. Because even from a Sede perspective ("anything less than sedevacantism is controlled opposition"), +ABL left the Church WAY better off than when he arrived on the scene. If he were a Freemason, why would he work against the Freemasons so vigorously, and bear so much fruit?

    But you see, the Pharisees were equally emotional and stupid. Logic didn't stop them from accusing Our Lord from being possessed -- even though He was casting out devils and destroying the devil's kingdom left and right. So I shouldn't be surprised, I guess.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16