I would set my alarm for early tomorrow morning to hear the first news out of the Vatican but I am betting this is just another Pfeiffer/Hewko inspired bust so I'll stick with my beauty sleep.

Please note that the Resistance priest at the origin of this thread has nothing to do with OLMC in Kentucky. When I started the thread, I have not mentioned anything that could suggest this priest was from North America or any other English Speaking country. Although I speak three languages, I have reported the facts here, in English, because CathInfo is a good and widely frequented forum, as was exemplified by the debunking of the con artist and fraud Ambrose William Moran. So I wanted to give CathInfo this new "scoop".

I really have to protect the identity of the Resistance priest, because he has promised the diocesan priest not to reveal his name. And knowing who is the Resistance priest, and where he resides in the world, would allow the diocesan bishop to know the source of the leak from the November priest meeting, especially since the priest in question is an "Indult" priest. This priest could then be in big trouble.

But, as I said before, I know these two priests very well, and I can assure you that what I presented last Thursday are true facts. Bishop Schneider said these things as being true facts. But I cannot, of course, guarantee that what he said will happen. Maybe bishop Schneider has been misled, or has been trying to mislead us (he had to know a leak was bound to happen...). I cannot say. Or something happenned between July and now which the bishop is not aware of. Once again, I cannot say.

I just thought I would reveal this to the cathInfo people, and ask for prayers for the Society. That is all there is to it.

God bless.

No problem, Patricius.  Tomorrow morning, this rumor will be resolved.

I hope it happens. It will just be confirmation that anybody can fall and the SSPX is NOT the Church. But then again I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't go through. I can imagine a sizeable number of priests threatening bishop Fellay with schism. I am not certain the king will risk his empire.

Patricius, I appreciate that you shared the information with us.  I believe what you reported to us regardless of how it works out.  I never would have imagined that I would be living through, all over again, what transpired after Vatican II.  In a way I hope that something definitive is announced soon so that all of the undecided or sceptical people will no longer be left wondering which way to go.  They will be face to face with the facts and will have to either compromise or leave and that includes the clergy as well.  

Thanks, AJNC. God bless you. Also, don't mean to be a party spoiler, but I genuinely have no more inside information on this matter than has been released publicly. :) Dear TKGS, I just sent you a PM.

Just did a brief check anyway, but there doesn't seem to be anything up on the SSPX website, on DICI, Rorate, Vatican Insider etc regarding this yet. I personally doubt that anything formal will be announced today. Let's wait and see.

I have been looking too. I haven't seen anything on Zenit, Catholic News Agency, or Catholic World New. Could it be that this story about a "deal" was a lie?

Maybe some people think I should say "I am sorry, it was only a rumor after all"?

I am not sorry. I have only reported a conversation between two serious priests about what Bishop Schneider actually said in November at a priest meeting. I asked for prayers to have the deal scrapped.

Maybe people did pray, and the deal was scrapped. Then I thank you all and the BVM.

But you also have to remember that Bishop Schneider said that the deal has been signed last July.

One thing I didn't mentioned last Thursday was that the bishop also said to the priests that the visitations of the SSPX seminaries by himself, cardinal Brandmüller, and others, were concluded positively, and that the official reports given to the Pope by these visitors were all very laudatory.

The only thing that didn't happen was the official announcement that was supposed to happen today. It doesn't mean the July deal has been scrapped. Maybe bishop Fellay considers the annoucement would have been too soon, and he wants to better prepare SSPX members. Who knows?

One day we will know.

God bless you all.

Stone the false prophet!
 :heretic: :roll-laugh1:

 :cheers:

Well, we weren't given an announcement today, but we had the best barn-burning anti-Conciliar Church, anti-Vatican II sermon, from one of those young priests many are sure are so ill-formed, that I have heard in a long, long time. And he got very specific and detailed. It could have come from the mouth of Archbishop Lefebvre himself. I wanted to stand up and cheer. But I did get tears in my eyes.

Thank you Oh Immaculata!  

Good for him.

I have to point out that this isn't InThisSign or anything else associated with Fr. Pfeiffer and his "red light the SSPX and any other priest that doesn't submit to me" position. I would go further and say that MOST on CathInfo tend to agree that such a red-light position is borderline schismatic (if not outright schismatic) and not a Catholic stance.

It's not about the individual priests. I'm sure many of them are nice, holy, sincere, etc. Just like many priests in 1969. But when you approach a crossroads, when a crisis approaches, everyone has to make a choice. Sometimes an entire organization falls. Such is the case with the SSPX today. It's the organization I (and the entire Resistance) opposes. Not the individual priests and laity, except insofar as they push the pro-Vatican 2 agenda.

This priest could be great in many ways. Too bad his anti-Vatican 2 stance goes against the organization he's currently a member of and owes obedience to.

Eventually he will have to make a choice. Become an independent/Resistance priest, or compromise and become Indult with the rest of the SSPX.