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

Author Topic: Italy: Meeting of Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X  (Read 35833 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Italy: Meeting of Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X
« Reply #65 on: November 11, 2011, 12:43:56 AM »
Quote from: hollingsworth
Quote
Bishop Fellay recently bragged that he could "lead home(!)" 450 priests and 200 seminarians.

Quote
So I find this remark very troubling, but very revealing, of the present intentions of Bishop Fellay.


.

Now is the time to keep an eye on what Max Krah is doing. I have a sneaky suspicion that they Krah, Fr's Phlugger and Nely and Bishop Fellay and of course rome don't really care who follows them back. With all those new businesses that were opened up with only Krah and Bishop Fellays signature on them, they probably have taken control where all the SSPX property goes.
They surely would have thought that out after what happened way back with the nine that left with the SSPX property

Italy: Meeting of Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X
« Reply #66 on: November 11, 2011, 11:01:34 AM »
Can you elaborate regarding these new businesses?


Italy: Meeting of Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X
« Reply #67 on: November 11, 2011, 06:53:20 PM »
Quote from: Diego
Can you elaborate regarding these new businesses?

 
I can but it will take time. It happened when Maxy Krah came on the scene back in 2009. Below is a quote from an Eddie D in 2009.

(Quote)January 19, 2009
One day before Fr. Schmidberger’s press release, Maximilian Krah was appointed as delegate to the Board, and manager, of the company Dello Sarto AG. The Chairman of the company is Bishop Bernard Fellay and the Board Members are First Assistant, Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, and the SSPX Bursar General, Fr. Emeric Baudot.

The purpose of the company is stated as being (Google translation):
“Advice on asset management issues and the care and management of assets of domestic and foreign individuals, corporations, foundations and other bodies, in particular of natural or legal persons which the Catholic moral, religious and moral teaching in its traditional sense of obligation and see, and the execution of projects for the mentioned persons, as well as advising on the implementation of these projects; whole purpose of description according to statutes.”

In other words, Dello Sarto AG appears to be an investment company that speculates, one has to assume, with SSPX funds in financial and other markets in the search for profits for various SSPX projects. But is it possible to get involved in today’s financial markets without being exposed to the risk and/or practice of usury?

The company was commercially registered on January 13, 2009 and issued 100 shares at 1,000 Swiss francs, giving it an initial capital of 100,000 Swiss francs.

As far as the checkbook is concerned, Maximilian Krah and Bishop Fellay alone are enabled individually to issue a payment of funds, while Frs. Pfluger and Baudot are required to obtain a co-signature to do so. Krah is not a cleric, but exercises greater financial powers than the First Assistant or Bursar. (unquote)

He is also on the board of other companies belonging to SSPX

Italy: Meeting of Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X
« Reply #68 on: November 14, 2011, 02:55:29 PM »
Father Christian Bouchacourt
Letter in various languages.

Quote
Original Spanish

Martínez, 12 de octubre de 2011


Fraternidad Sacerdotal San Pío X
Distrito América del Sur
El Superior

Estimados Padres,

Recién volví de Roma hace unas horas y quiero comunicarles algunas noticias relativas a la reunión a la que fuimos convocados por nuestro Superior General, Mons. Fellay. Se trataba de una reunión de información.

Según decía el comunicado que se publicó, concurrieron a la misma los miembros del Consejo General, todos los Superiores de Distrito y tres de los cuatro obispos.

En efecto Mons. Williamson no fue a Albano. También había sido convocado a la reunión, pero Mons. Fellay había añadido dos condiciones: que cierre su blog y mantenga el secreto sobre el contenido del preámbulo que Roma entregó a la FSSPX. Mons. Williamson no accedió por lo menos a una de las dos condiciones, y por el mismo hecho renunció a participar de la reunión en Albano.

La sesión se desenvolvió en tres tiempos. En primer lugar Mons. Fellay presentó un balance histórico de las relaciones con Roma. En segundo lugar Mons. de Galarreta y el Padre de Jorna hablaron de las discusiones doctrinales en Roma. Por último se presentó el preámbulo doctrinal proporcionado por la Congregación para la Doctrina de la fe, firmado por el Cardenal Levada.

No es necesario que recuerde los hechos históricos relativos a nuestras relaciones con Roma. Uds. ya los conocen en lo esencial. Respecto a las discusiones doctrinales, se estudiaron cuatro temas capitales: el Novus Ordo Missae, la libertad religiosa, la eclesiología –Lumen Gentium, el “subsistit in” y la colegialidad–, el Magisterio y la Tradición.

Nuestros contradictores no buscaron responder nuestros argumentos sino que permanentemente intentaron demostrar que no existe ninguna ruptura con la Tradición. Reconocieron que la libertad religiosa, la colegialidad, etc. son nociones nuevas, pero –según dijeron– contenidas implícitamente en la Tradición y explicitadas por el Concilio Vaticano.

El clima de las discusiones fue cordial, lo cual no impidió que cada uno manifestara francamente sus posiciones. Nuestros contradictores permanecieron herméticos a nuestros argumentos, por los menos exteriormente.

El texto del docuмento entregado a Mons. Fellay y a sus Asistentes sigue siendo confidencial. Sin embargo puedo comunicarles algunos elementos relativos a su contenido. Tiene dos partes: un preámbulo doctrinal y un breve proyecto de solución canónica para la FSSPX.

El preámbulo se basa sobre el protocolo de acuerdo que en su momento su propuso a Mons. Lefebvre, pero en forma más restrictiva.

Se nos pide reconocer a la luz de Tradición católica al Vaticano II y a las enseñanzas posteriores de los Papas hasta el día de hoy. Además deberíamos aceptar, por un lado, el Catecismo de la Iglesia Católica, que constituye un compendio de la doctrina conciliar, y por otro, el Código de Derecho Canónico publicado en 1983, con una aplicación adaptada a la disciplina particular otorgada a la FSSPX.

Asimismo deberíamos reconocer la legitimidad del Novus Ordo. Según las explicaciones de los canonistas del Vaticano, la palabra “legitimo” quiere decir “legal”… Esta no es la acepción recibida comúnmente.

Después seguiría una profesión de fe y un juramento de fidelidad.

Por último, si firmásemos este preámbulo, se nos otorgaría una prelatura personal, parecida a la estructura canónica del Opus Dei.

Queda claro que este preámbulo, con el contenido que tiene, no puede ser firmado, aunque se le aporten modificaciones. La situación de la Iglesia conciliar, las declaraciones del Papa en Alemania, el próximo encuentro en Asís manifiestan que la situación no es apropiada para firmar semejante docuмento. Nos encontraríamos aplastados por el sistema, tal como lo fueron las congregaciones “motu propio”.

Mons. Fellay mandará su respuesta dentro de unas semanas, y tal vez publicará una declaración doctrinal que no tendrá nada que ver con la que se nos presentó y no será aceptada por Roma.
Aunque existe una apertura canónica por parte de Roma, la situación doctrinal en la Iglesia no ha cambiado.

Roma nos necesita, necesita que nos reunamos con ellos para demostrar que el Vaticano II no está en ruptura con la Tradición, y para neutralizar el ala progresista que anhela una ruptura manifiesta con la Tradición. Está claro que no podemos seguir este camino. Debemos mantenernos firmes y esperar que Roma dé nuevos pasos. Roma retrocede cada vez más, pero todavía no lo suficiente.

¡Por lo tanto el combate continúa! Les pido que mantengan la confidencialidad sobre el contenido de esta circular. Uds. pueden informar a sus fieles que no se firmó nada y que la situación sigue siendo idéntica a la que teníamos antes del 14 de septiembre. Cuando yo visite sus prioratos les proporcionaré más detalles respecto a la situación presente.

Por último quiero contarles que el lunes pasado fui a Roma para rezar ante la Cátedra de San Pedro. También llegué a subir la Scala Santa, pidiendo a Nuestro Señor que alcance a cada uno de nosotros, los sacerdotes del Distrito, la fidelidad inquebrantable al combate llevado por Mons. Lefebvre por el bien de las almas, de la Iglesia y de la Tradición. Pensar en la tragedia que vive la Iglesia de hoy debe estimular nuestro celo por la santificación de las almas que fueron entregadas a nuestro cuidado.

Les aseguro mi oración fraterna en los Corazones de Jesús y María.
Padre Christian BOUCHACOURT





English Translation

Wednesday 12th October, 2011

Dear Fathers,

I just arrived from Rome a few hours ago and I want to share with you some news concerning the meeting that we were summoned to by our General Superior Bishop Fellay. It was an informative meeting.

As related in the published statement, the General Council members, all the District Superiors and three of the four bishops attended the meeting.

Indeed Bishop Williamson did not go to Albano. He had been summoned for the meeting, but Bishop Fellay had added two conditions: to close his blog and to keep secret the content of the preamble that Rome delivered to the SSPX. He didn’t agree to at least one of the two conditions, and because of this, he could not take part in the Albano meeting.

The session unfolded in three stages. First of all, Bishop Fellay presented an historical assessment of the relations with Rome. Secondly, Bishop de Galarreta and Father Jorna spoke about the doctrinal discussions in Rome. Finally, the doctrinal preamble provided by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, signed by Cardinal Levada, was presented.

It is not necessary to relate the historical facts concerning our relations with Rome. You already know the essentials. Regarding the doctrinal discussions, four cardinal topics were studied: the Novus Ordo Missae, Religious Liberty, Ecclesiology - Lumen Gentium, the "subsistit in" and Collegiality - the Magisterium and Tradition.

Our opponents did not seek to answer our arguments but constantly tried to show that there is no break with Tradition. They recognized that Religious Liberty, Collegiality, etc. are new notions, but - as they said – they are implicitly contained in Tradition and are made explicit by the Second Vatican Council.

The climate of the discussions was cordial, but it did not prevent each party openly manifesting their positions. Our opponents remained closed to our arguments, at least outwardly.

The text of the docuмent given to Bishop Fellay and his Assistants remains confidential. But I can tell you some elements of its content. It has two parts: a doctrinal preamble and a brief project of canonical solution for the SSPX.

The preamble is based on the Protocol of Agreement that was once proposed to Archbishop Lefebvre, but in more restrictive form.

It is asked of us to recognize Vatican II in the light of Catholic Tradition and of papal teaching to the present day. In addition we should accept, on the one hand, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which constitutes a Compendium of the Council Doctrine, and on the other hand, the Code of Canon Law published in 1983, with an application adapted to the particular discipline granted to the SSPX.

Likewise we have to recognize the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo. According to the explanations of the canonists of the Vatican, by the word "legitimate" they want to mean "legal" … This is not the commonly received meaning.

Then would follow a Profession of Faith and an Oath of Loyalty.

Finally, if we would sign the preamble, there would be granted to us a Personal Prelature, similar to the canonical structure of Opus Dei.

Clearly, this preamble with its content cannot be signed even though modifications can be made to it. The situation of the Conciliar Church, the pope's remarks in Germany, the next Assisi meeting show that the situation is not appropriate to sign such a docuмent. We would be crushed by the system, as were the "motu propio" congregations.

Bishop Fellay will send his response in a few weeks, and perhaps he will respond with a doctrinal statement that has nothing to do with the one presented to us, one which will not be accepted by Rome.

Though a canonical opening exists on the part of Rome, the doctrinal situation in the Church has not changed.

Rome needs us, it needs us to meet with them in order to prove that Vatican II is not breaking with Tradition, and to neutralize the progressive wing which yearns to rupture with Tradition. Clearly we cannot continue this way. We must stand and wait for Rome to make new steps. Rome recedes more and more, but still not enough.

So the battle continues! I ask you to maintain the confidentiality of the contents of this circular. You can tell the faithful that nothing was signed and that the situation remains identical to what we had before September 14th. When I visit your priories I will provide more details about the situation.

Finally I want to tell you that last Monday I went to Rome to pray before the Chair of Saint Peter. Also I managed to climb the Holy Steps, asking Our Lord to give to each of us, the priests of the District, unwavering loyalty to the combat undertaken by Archbishop Lefebvre for the good of souls, for the Church and for Tradition. To think about the tragedy through which the Church of today lives must stimulate our zeal for the sanctification of all the souls that are dedicated to our care.

I assure you of my fraternal prayers in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary.
Father Christian BOUCHACOURT



Italian Translation

Mercoledi 12 ottobre 2011

Cari Padri,
Sono appena arrivato da Roma poche ore fa e voglio condividere con voi alcune notizie circa l'incontro cui siamo stati convocati dal nostro Superiore Generale Mons. Fellay. E’ stato un incontro informativo

Come riferito nel comunicato pubblicato, i membri del Consiglio generale, tutti i Superiori di distretto e tre dei quattro vescovi hanno partecipato alla riunione.

Infatti il vescovo Williamson non è andato ad Albano. Era stato convocato per l'incontro, ma Mons. Fellay aveva aggiunto due condizioni: chiudere il suo blog e mantenere segreto il contenuto del preambolo che Roma ha consegnato alla FSSPX. Lui non era d'accordo ad almeno una delle due condizioni e per questo non poteva prendere parte alla riunione di Albano.

La sessione si è svolta in tre fasi. Prima di tutto, Mons. Fellay ha presentato una valutazione storica dei rapporti con Roma. In secondo luogo, Mons. de Galarreta e Padre Jorna hanno parlato delle discussioni dottrinali a Roma. Infine è stato presentato il preambolo dottrinale fornito dalla Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede, firmato dal cardinale Levada.

Non è necessario fare una relazione sui fatti storici dei nostri rapporti con Roma. Sapete già l'essenziale. Per quanto riguarda le discussioni dottrinali, quattro temi cardine sono stati studiati: il Novus Ordo Missae, la libertà religiosa, l’Ecclesiologia (Lumen gentium, il "subsistit in" e la collegialità), il Magistero e la Tradizione.

I nostri interlocutori (usa la parola contradictores, avversari n.d.t.) non hanno cercato di rispondere alle nostre argomentazioni, ma hanno costantemente cercato di dimostrare che non c'è nessuna rottura con la Tradizione. Hanno riconosciuto che libertà religiosa, collegialità, ecc sono concetti nuovi, ma - come dicevano - sono implicitamente contenuti nella Tradizione e sono resi espliciti dal Concilio Vaticano II.

Il clima delle discussioni è stato cordiale, ma non ha impedito che ogni parte manifestasse apertamente le proprie posizioni. I nostri avversari sono rimasti chiusi alle nostre argomentazioni, almeno esteriormente.

Il testo del docuмento consegnato Mons. Fellay ei suoi assistenti rimane confidenziale. Ma posso dirvi alcuni elementi del suo contenuto. Ha due parti: un preambolo dottrinale e un breve progetto di soluzione canonica per la FSSPX.

Il preambolo è basato sul Protocollo di Accordo che una volta fu proposto a Mons. Lefebvre, ma in forma più restrittiva
Viene chiesto a noi di riconoscere il Concilio Vaticano II alla luce della Tradizione cattolica e dell'insegnamento del Papa ai giorni nostri. Inoltre dovremmo accettare, da un lato, il Catechismo della Chiesa Cattolica, che costituisce un Compendio della Dottrina del Concilio, e d'altra parte, il Codice di Diritto Canonico pubblicato nel 1983, con un'applicazione adatta alla particolare disciplina concessa al FSSPX.

Allo stesso modo dobbiamo riconoscere la legittimità del Novus Ordo. Secondo le spiegazioni dei canonisti del Vaticano, con la parola "legittimo" vogliono dire "legale" ... Questo non è il significato comunemente ricevuto.

Poi seguirebbe una Professione di Fede e un Giuramento di Fedeltà.

Infine, se firmassimo il preambolo, ci sarebbe concessa una Prelatura personale, simile alla struttura canonica dell'Opus Dei.

Chiaramente, questo preambolo con il suo contenuto non può essere firmato anche se è possibile apportare modifiche ad esso. La situazione della Chiesa Conciliare, le dichiarazioni del Papa in Germania, il prossimo incontro di Assisi mostrano che in questa situazione non è opportuno firmare tale docuмento. Verremmo schiacciati dal sistema, come lo furono le congregazioni "motu propio".

Mons. Fellay invierà la sua risposta in poche settimane, e forse lui risponderà con una dichiarazione dottrinale che non ha nulla a che vedere con quello presentato a noi e che non sarà accettata da Roma.

Anche se esiste un'apertura canonica da parte di Roma, la situazione dottrinale della Chiesa non è cambiata.

Roma ha bisogno di noi, ci deve incontrare al fine di provare che il Vaticano II non è in rottura con la Tradizione, e per neutralizzare l'ala progressista che anela alla rottura con la Tradizione. Chiaramente non possiamo continuare su questa strada. Dobbiamo fermarci e aspettare che Roma faccia nuovi passi. Roma si allontana sempre di più, ma ancora non abbastanza.

Quindi la battaglia continua! Vi chiedo di mantenere la riservatezza del contenuto di questa circolare. Si può dire al fedele che nulla è stato firmato e che la situazione rimane identica a quella che avevamo prima del 14 settembre. Quando visiterò i vostri priorati vi fornirò maggiori dettagli sulla situazione

Infine, vorrei dirvi che Lunedi scorso sono andato a Roma per pregare davanti alla Cattedra di San Pietro. Inoltre sono riuscito a salire la Scala Santa, chiedendo al Signore di dare a ciascuno di noi, i sacerdoti del Distretto, incrollabile fedeltà al combattimento intrapreso da Mons. Lefebvre per il bene delle anime, per la Chiesa e per la Tradizione. Pensare alla tragedia che coinvolge la Chiesa di oggi vive deve stimolare il nostro zelo per la santificazione di tutte le anime che sono state date alle nostre cure.

Io vi assicuro la mia preghiera fraterna ai Cuori di Gesù e Maria.
Padre Christian BOUCHACOURT



French Translation

Mercredi, le 12 octobre, 2011

Chers Pères,


Je viens d’arriver de Rome il y a quelques heures et je veux vous faire part de ce qui s’est passé à la réunion à laquelle nous avons été convoqués par notre Supérieur Général, Mgr  Fellay. C’était une réunion d’information.


Selon la déclaration qui a été publiée, les membres du Conseil général, tous les Supérieurs de District et trois des quatre évêques ont assisté à la réunion.


En effet, Mgr Williamson ne s’est pas rendu à Albano. Il avait été convoqué pour la rencontre, mais Mgr Fellay avait ajouté deux conditions: qu’il ferme son blog et qu’il garde secret le contenu du préambule que Rome avait donné à la FSSPX. Il n’était pas d’accord sur au moins une des deux conditions, et, de ce fait, il n’a pas pu participer à la réunion d’Albano.


La session s’est déroulée en trois étapes. Tout d’abord, Mgr Fellay a présenté une évaluation historique des relations avec Rome. Deuxièmement, Mgr de Galarreta et l’abbé Jorna ont parlé des discussions doctrinales à Rome. Enfin, le préambule doctrinal fourni par la Congrégation pour la Doctrine de la Foi, signé par le Cardinal Levada, a été présenté.


Il n’est pas nécessaire de relater les faits historiques concernant nos relations avec Rome. Vous connaissez déjà l’essentiel. En ce qui concerne les discussions doctrinales, quatre sujets importants ont été étudiés : Le Novus Ordo Missae, la liberté religieuse, l’ecclésiologie – Lumen Gentium, le «subsistit in» et la collégialité – le Magistère et la Tradition.


Nos adversaires n’ont pas cherché à répondre à nos arguments mais ont constamment essayé de montrer qu’il n’y a pas de rupture avec la Tradition. Ils ont reconnu que la liberté religieuse, la collégialité, etc. sont des notions nouvelles, mais – comme on dit – elles sont implicitement contenues dans la tradition et sont rendues explicites par le Concile Vatican II.


Le climat des discussions était cordial, mais il n’a pas empêché chaque parti de manifester ouvertement ses positions. Nos adversaires sont restés fermés à nos arguments, du moins extérieurement.


Le texte du docuмent donné à Mgr Fellay et ses adjoints reste confidentiel. Mais je peux vous exposer quelques éléments de son contenu. Il comporte deux parties: un préambule doctrinal et un bref projet de solution canonique pour la Fraternité.


Le préambule est basé sur le protocole d’accord qui fut une fois proposé à Mgr Lefebvre, mais sous une forme plus restrictive.

Il nous est demandé de reconnaître le Concile Vatican II à la lumière de la Tradition catholique et de l’enseignement du pape à l’époque actuelle. En outre, nous devrions accepter, d’une part le Catéchisme de l’Église Catholique, qui constitue un Compendium de la Doctrine du Concile, et d’autre part le Code de Droit Canonique publié en 1983, avec une application adaptée à la discipline particulière accordée à la FSSPX.


De même, nous devons reconnaître la légitimité du Novus Ordo. Selon les explications des canonistes du Vatican, par le mot «légitime» ils veulent dire «légal» ... Ce n’est pas le sens communément reçu.


Puis suivrait une profession de foi et un serment de loyauté.

Enfin, si nous voulions signer le préambule, il nous serait accordé une prélature personnelle semblable à la structure canonique de l’Opus Dei.


De toute évidence, ce préambule avec son contenu ne peut être signé, bien que des modifications puissent y être apportées. La situation de l’Église conciliaire, les remarques du pape en Allemagne, la prochaine réunion d’Assise montrent que la situation n’est pas propice à la signature d’un tel docuмent. Nous serions écrasés par le système, comme le furent les congrégations du «motu propio».


Mgr Fellay enverra sa réponse dans quelques semaines, et peut-être répondra-t-il par une déclaration doctrinale qui n’a rien à voir avec celle qui nous est présentée, celle qui ne sera pas acceptée par Rome.


Bien que l’ouverture canonique existe de la part de Rome, la situation doctrinale dans l’Église n’a pas changé.

Rome a besoin de nous, elle a besoin de nous rencontrer afin de prouver que Vatican II n’est pas en rupture avec la Tradition, et de neutraliser l’aile progressiste qui aspire à une rupture avec la Tradition. Il est clair que nous ne pouvons pas continuer ainsi. Nous devons rester ferme et attendre que Rome prenne de nouvelles mesures. Rome recule de plus en plus, mais pas encore assez.


Donc, la bataille continue! Je vous demande de maintenir confidentiel le contenu de cette circulaire. Vous pouvez dire aux fidèles que rien n’a été signé et que la situation reste identique à ce que nous avions avant le 14 septembre. Lors de ma prochaine visite à vos prieurés je fournirai plus de détails sur la situation.


Enfin je tiens à vous dire que lundi dernier je suis allé à Rome pour prier devant la Chaire de Saint Pierre. J’ai également réussi à gravir la Scala Sancta (le Saint Escalier), pour demander à Notre Seigneur de donner à chacun de nous, les prêtres du district, une loyauté indéfectible pour le combat entrepris par Mgr Lefebvre, pour le bien des âmes, pour l’Église et la tradition. Réfléchir sur la tragédie que traverse l’Eglise d’aujourd’hui doit stimuler notre zèle pour la sanctification de toutes les âmes qui sont confiées à nos soins.


Je vous assure de mes prières fraternelles dans les Cœurs de Jésus et Marie.
Abbé Christian BOUCHACOURT

Italy: Meeting of Superiors of the Society of St. Pius X
« Reply #69 on: November 14, 2011, 05:34:51 PM »
Quote from: pbax
Quote from: Diego
Can you elaborate regarding these new businesses?

 
I can but it will take time. It happened when Maxy Krah came on the scene back in 2009. Below is a quote from an Eddie D in 2009.

(Quote)January 19, 2009
One day before Fr. Schmidberger’s press release, Maximilian Krah was appointed as delegate to the Board, and manager, of the company Dello Sarto AG. The Chairman of the company is Bishop Bernard Fellay and the Board Members are First Assistant, Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, and the SSPX Bursar General, Fr. Emeric Baudot.

The purpose of the company is stated as being (Google translation):
“Advice on asset management issues and the care and management of assets of domestic and foreign individuals, corporations, foundations and other bodies, in particular of natural or legal persons which the Catholic moral, religious and moral teaching in its traditional sense of obligation and see, and the execution of projects for the mentioned persons, as well as advising on the implementation of these projects; whole purpose of description according to statutes.”

In other words, Dello Sarto AG appears to be an investment company that speculates, one has to assume, with SSPX funds in financial and other markets in the search for profits for various SSPX projects. But is it possible to get involved in today’s financial markets without being exposed to the risk and/or practice of usury?

The company was commercially registered on January 13, 2009 and issued 100 shares at 1,000 Swiss francs, giving it an initial capital of 100,000 Swiss francs.

As far as the checkbook is concerned, Maximilian Krah and Bishop Fellay alone are enabled individually to issue a payment of funds, while Frs. Pfluger and Baudot are required to obtain a co-signature to do so. Krah is not a cleric, but exercises greater financial powers than the First Assistant or Bursar. (unquote)

He is also on the board of other companies belonging to SSPX


   Interesting:

1) Who appointed Krah as a delegate to the Board?

2) Why him?

3) What primary purpose does he serve there?

4) What other roles does he play within the SSPX drama (e.g., I remember reading that he was sent to England to heckle Bishop Williamson, and it is not clear to me how such a role could be related to his position as delegate to the Board)?

5) You mentioned when the company was formed, there was a small issuance of stock/shares: So this is a public company?  If so, could I buy all the shares and exercise a controlling influence on the finances of the SSPX?