http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/2019/01/dos-informaciones-sobre-futura.htmlDoes this mean that an agreement has now been made officially since the time the Cor Unum was written, as why say "desire" if there was already an agreement. Or does this mean that, like marriages, confessions and ordinations, that the Pope is already normalizing the situation with the SSPX by deeds and actions? If so, this is an ingeniously sinister plan of the Pope because the SSPX can honesty claim they have not made an agreement (so as not to waken up any sleepy dissenters) and yet the Pope continues to give what the SSPX wants and being the grateful nice guys that they are, the SSPX in gratitude wil continue to keep a moderate tone to any criticisms, and in the meantime nature takes it's course to the past of least resistance and the SSPX faithful go along with the flow.
In the Francophone Catholic Fidelity forum (https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&langpair=auto%7Cen&rurl=translate.google.com&sp=nmt4&u=http://resistance.vraiforum.com/t797-Le-dernier-cor-unum-et-la-question-du-sacre.htm&xid=17259,15700022,15700124,15700186,15700190,15700201,15700237,15700242,15700248&usg=ALkJrhicAe1tOn-olfEJzMACLWNydD21-A) we read the following: A priest friend told me that the minutes of the July Chapter were published in the last Cor Unum (internal bulletin of the FSSPX). On the question of consecration, the Chapter declared that "it is desirable to obtain the agreement of Rome to have a bishop" .Another source informs us that "the Pope has approved the consecration of two bishops in the SSPX for the first Sunday after Easter" (April 28).
Does this mean that an agreement has now been made officially since the time the Cor Unum was written, as why say "desire" if there was already an agreement. Or does this mean that, like marriages, confessions and ordinations, that the Pope is already normalizing the situation with the SSPX by deeds and actions? If so, this is an ingeniously sinister plan of the Pope because the SSPX can honesty claim they have not made an agreement (so as not to waken up any sleepy dissenters) and yet the Pope continues to give what the SSPX wants and being the grateful nice guys that they are, the SSPX in gratitude wil continue to keep a moderate tone to any criticisms, and in the meantime nature takes it's course to the past of least resistance and the SSPX faithful go along with the flow.That is exactly what is happening IMO. I don't think anything will wake them up at this point. Those that have not drawn the line by now will never draw the line. They will always say until they change the Mass it is fine to stay with the SSPX and slowly the frog is boiled.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/07/54/2a/07542a69af3ec7623c01c2f9aafd33b2.jpg)
That is exactly what is happening IMO. I don't think anything will wake them up at this point. Those that have not drawn the line by now will never draw the line. They will always say until they change the Mass it is fine to stay with the SSPX and slowly the frog is boiled.Wise men all over the world see this to be true.
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.gamespot.com%2Fuploads%2Foriginal%2F1534%2F15341624%2F2398769-2816409325-lemmi.jpg&f=1)
Yes, the sheep must obediently follow their shepherds and must not question anything, even if they are being led over a cliff.
As a result, those laity who stand up from the crowd and resist will be disciplined and silenced by the SSPX.
So, these two bishops-- NO assigned by Francis? Or from priests already within the SSPX? Or am I misunderstanding?No, most likely, they (the future bishops) would be SSPX priests, approved by the Superior General and Counsel and submitted to Rome for final approval. Similar to what Bishop Fellay described in his Aug. 2016 New Zealand conference. (if you have not seen it, please do, specifically part 6, it is an important conferences. Bishop Fellay gave the entire plan that we see unfolding these past two years. I think he may have given too much information (with too much enthusiasm) as that conference was never widely publicized or quoted by the SSPX media outlets ever since.
At our sspx parish it was made known to the priest that some have been attending a resistance mass,as a result he has expelled a few parishoners, one being in the choir, another an alter boyApparently, the SSPX teaches that it is a society of priests and brothers under Rome, and that the laity are just sheep without any say because the laity do not belong to the SSPX. Yet, the laity must pay tithes to support the SSPX, and if they do not, then they will not receive any services or sacraments. Furthermore, any SSPX parishes, schools, and/or rectories must be deeded by the laity over to the SSPX who must retain title if any sacraments are desired. Therefore, all this real estate can be sold at any time to benefit the SSPX with the request that the laity must locate and build new churches and buildings if they want to receive any sacraments from the SSPX.
As a result, the society, like parents, do not feel any need to advise the laity, their minor children, of anything they do. After all, the SSPX is a private corporation. Therefore, the SSPX does not have any obligation to reveal any legal agreements with Rome to the laity, and the laity are expected to be silent and obedient, to mind their own business, and not to pry into the dealings of the SSPX.
Yes, the sheep must obediently follow their shepherds and must not question anything, even if they are being led over a cliff.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/07/54/2a/07542a69af3ec7623c01c2f9aafd33b2.jpg)
As a result, those laity who stand up from the crowd and resist will be disciplined and silenced by the SSPX.
Apparently, the SSPX teaches that it is a society of priests and brothers under Rome, and that the laity are just sheep without any say because the laity do not belong to the SSPX. Yet, the laity must pay tithes to support the SSPX, and if they do not, then they will not receive any services or sacraments. Furthermore, any SSPX parishes, schools, and/or rectories must be deeded by the laity over to the SSPX who must retain title if any sacraments are desired. Therefore, all this real estate can be sold at any time to benefit the SSPX with the request that the laity must locate and build new churches and buildings if they want to receive any sacraments from the SSPX.
As a result, the society, like parents, do not feel any need to advise the laity, their minor children, of anything they do. After all, the SSPX is a private corporation. Therefore, the SSPX does not have any obligation to reveal any legal agreements with Rome to the laity, and the laity are expected to be silent and obedient, to mind their own business, and not to pry into the dealings of the SSPX.
Yes, the sheep must obediently follow their shepherds and must not question anything, even if they are being led over a cliff.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/07/54/2a/07542a69af3ec7623c01c2f9aafd33b2.jpg)
As a result, those laity who stand up from the crowd and resist will be disciplined and silenced by the SSPX.
We should develop a list of SSPX priests with potential for the "Pope Bergolio's" stamp of approval.I think of "Monsignor" James Byrnes of Ridgefield, CT (formerly Novus Ordo).
The one who immediately come to mind for me:
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.ig1_4uzni_xX5_HLU5ybMwAAAA%26pid%3D15.1&f=1)
Father Christian Bouchacourt
The SSPX priests who are chosen by the Destroyer Pope, to be Bishops will surely suffer much.
We should develop a list of SSPX priests with potential for the "Pope Bergolio's" stamp of approval.
The one who immediately come to mind for me:
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.ig1_4uzni_xX5_HLU5ybMwAAAA%26pid%3D15.1&f=1)
Father Christian Bouchacourt
I think of "Monsignor" James Byrnes of Ridgefield, CT (formerly Novus Ordo)..
With “Divine Mercy Sunday” just about 12 weeks away and considering all the preparation needed to host such an international event of this magnitude, I would surely think that if this report was true that the SSPX would have released an official communique by now.Not only that, but the Vatican also would have made an announcement.
Who is this “source”? Just gossip without evidence. Very typicalThe "approval" may or may not be gossip, we shall see. But the important thing to note (which is not gossip as it is in Cor Unum, is that the SSPX admits it is still their desire to make an agreement, and for the first time that I know of, they actual state a specific reason. Does anyone know if the desire has been made know to the faithful or is still kept as and internal memo?
The "approval" may or may not be gossip, we shall see. But the important thing to note (which is not gossip as it is in Cor Unum, is that the SSPX admits it is still their desire to make an agreement, and for the first time that I know of, they actual state a specific reason. Does anyone know if the desire has been made know to the faithful or is still kept as and internal memo?We should all think of it as desirable that rhe situation be such that there can be an agreement in which no feels that they have to compromise their consciences.
"the last Cor Unum (internal bulletin of the FSSPX). On the question of consecration, the Chapter declared that "it is desirable to obtain the agreement of Rome to have a bishop" .