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

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"  (Read 5803 times)

1 Member and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Incredulous

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9587
  • Reputation: +9334/-1013
  • Gender: Male
SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
« on: January 12, 2026, 09:22:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Yesterday, Sunday, Jan 11th. a distinguished SSPX priest from a Mission chapel pulpit in PA expressed doubt about Pope Bob cooperating with the Consecration of new SSPX Bishops.

    And hinted the Society may have to self Consecrate.

    Has anyone heard of the SSPX running afoul with Pope Bob?
    Logged
    "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 Twice dyed

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 942
    • Reputation: +351/-32
    • Gender: Male
    • Violet, purple, and scarlet twice dyed. EX: 35, 6.
    Re: SSPX hinting - Fr. Gleize early 2025
    « Reply #1 on: January 12, 2026, 10:40:57 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • I posted something last May, but here is an excerpt: AI Translate.
    "...We deny this first premise in that it affirms that the conferred consecration even without jurisdiction constitutes an infringement of the divine right ....

    – IV – The state of necessity.

    If the consecration of a bishop without jurisdiction, carried out against the will of the Pope, usually represents an infringement of ecclesiastical law alone, it constitutes in the present case and as such no more and no less than an act of disobedience, that is to say a serious injustice, the injustice consisting here in not giving back to the authority what is due to it, because of the common good. Therefore, extraordinary circuмstances may call for such consecration, precisely for the purposes of justice, when the authority abuses its power and seriously endangers the common good, that is to say when there is what is referred to as a "state of necessity". Because of this state of necessity, there is no injustice and therefore no disobedience to consecrate bishops - without giving them jurisdiction - against the will of the Pope. Indeed, the state of necessity is one where it is the Pope himself who commits injustice, by denying members of the Church the opportunity to give themselves real good pastors. The seriousness of this injustice obliges any bishop in the Church to refuse the Pope what would be a false obedience (and in reality a true complicity in injustice) and thus authorizes him to give the members of the Church the true good shepherds they need, and to consecrate bishops for this, without giving them ordinary jurisdiction. The so-called substitution jurisdiction, if there is one, will only be the answer given by these bishops to the needs of the souls who come to ask them for the administration of true sacraments and the preaching of the doctrine of true faith.

    Ultimately, everything rests on this state of necessity and on the right assessment of the present circuмstances.

    - "Do you have an apostolic mandate? [Requests the ceremonial of the consecration of bishops, June 30, 1988.]

    - "We got it! [Answers Bishop Lefebvre.]

    - " Let's read it! ”

    – “We have it from the Roman Church which, in its fidelity to the holy traditions received from the apostles, commands us to faithfully transmit these holy traditions – that is to say the deposit of faith – to all men, because of their duty to save their souls. Since the Second Vatican Council until today, the authorities of the Roman Church have been animated by a spirit of modernism, acting against the Holy Tradition, - "they no longer support sound doctrine, diverting the hearing from the truth, to turn to fables" as St. Paul said to Timothy in his second epistle (IV, 3-5) - we believe that all the penalties and censures carried by these authorities have no weight". [Mgr Lefebvre, Text of the mandate read on June 30, 1988" in Fideliter No. 65, September-October 1988), p. 11.]

    Abbot Jean-Michel Gleize

    Source: Rome Courier No. 687 of June 2025
    Logged
    The measure of love is to love without measure.
                                     St. Augustine (354 - 430 AD)

    Online Maria Auxiliadora

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1463
    • Reputation: +1388/-144
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #2 on: January 12, 2026, 08:07:14 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on January 12, 2026, 09:22:17 AM
    Yesterday, Sunday, Jan 11th. a distinguished SSPX priest from a Mission chapel pulpit in PA expressed doubt about Pope Bob cooperating with the Consecration of new SSPX Bishops.

    And hinted the Society may have to self Consecrate.

    Has anyone heard of the SSPX running afoul with Pope Bob?

    I came across this article today:

    https://infovaticana.com/en/2026/01/08/the-fsspx-does-not-rule-out-new-episcopal-consecrations-even-without-a-pontifical-mandate/

    But when +Williamson consecrated +Faure, they said this:

    Quote
    https://sspx.org/en/news/no-comparison-1988-faures-consecration-5676

    The Society of St. Pius X denounces this episcopal consecration of Fr. Faure, which, despite the assertions of both clerics concerned, is not at all comparable to the consecrations of 1988. All the declarations of Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure prove abundantly that they no longer recognize the Roman authorities, except in a purely rhetorical manner."

    Are the SSPX members putting pressure on the leadership? Or is the SSPX trying to put pressure on the Vatican? If they are serious about considering consecrating bishops without a pontifical mandate, they should apologize to the "resistance" and all the bishops consecrated by + Williamson. But they won't consecrate because they would loose all the conservatives they have gained from their compromise.
    Logged
    The love of God be your motivation, the will of God your guiding principle, the glory of God your goal.
    (St. Clement Mary Hofbauer)

    Offline Giovanni Berto

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1508
    • Reputation: +1210/-90
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #3 on: January 12, 2026, 09:30:42 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • My guess it that they say this and they say that. When they finally do something, with or without Bob's approval, people won't be surprised and they will lose fewer faithful. At this point they are all about manipulation and social engineering.
    Logged

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9587
    • Reputation: +9334/-1013
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #4 on: January 13, 2026, 10:53:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora on January 12, 2026, 08:07:14 PM

    I came across this article today:



    Are the SSPX members putting pressure on the leadership? Or is the SSPX trying to put pressure on the Vatican? 
    The article confirms it. Thanks!


    The SSPX motivation :confused:

    I doubt they trust Pope Bob and  need some leverage. 

    If their two aging Bishops go down, they've been effectively decapitated as the largest TLM order or association.
    Logged
    "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 Seraphina

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4632
    • Reputation: +3483/-373
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #5 on: January 13, 2026, 06:25:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • +Bp.s Fellay and Garaletta need to practice this fully vested, holding croziers and wearing mitres.  The scroungy tank top and shorts would be undignified.

    Logged

    Offline SimpleMan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5212
    • Reputation: +2040/-249
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #6 on: January 13, 2026, 06:45:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Seraphina on January 13, 2026, 06:25:02 PM
    +Bp.s Fellay and Garaletta need to practice this fully vested, holding croziers and wearing mitres.  The scroungy tank top and shorts would be undignified.
    You've lost me here.  Practice what?  And where did the tank top and shorts come in to the discussion?
    Logged

    Offline Seraphina

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4632
    • Reputation: +3483/-373
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #7 on: January 13, 2026, 08:19:58 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SimpleMan on January 13, 2026, 06:45:23 PM
    You've lost me here.  Practice what?  And where did the tank top and shorts come in to the discussion?


    Sorry! Am in fingers to 12 year old tablet combat. Picture wouldn’t copy.
    The SSPX needs to get new leaders and BACKPEDAL to their fighting spirit of the 1980’s and 1990’s.  But they’ll probably have to use the bishops they have left. 
    +Bp. Fellay is probably still young enough to perform the stunt. His Excellency is good at maneuvering. +Bp. Garaletta? I’m not at all sure. I’ve heard his health isn’t that great. Maybe two husky deacons can hold him steady like Aaron and Hur held Moses’s arms up while battling the Amalekites. 
    Logged

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1960
    • Reputation: +519/-148
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #8 on: January 15, 2026, 06:40:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora on January 12, 2026, 08:07:14 PM
    I came across this article today:

    https://infovaticana.com/en/2026/01/08/the-fsspx-does-not-rule-out-new-episcopal-consecrations-even-without-a-pontifical-mandate/

    But when +Williamson consecrated +Faure, they said this:

    Are the SSPX members putting pressure on the leadership? Or is the SSPX trying to put pressure on the Vatican? If they are serious about considering consecrating bishops without a pontifical mandate, they should apologize to the "resistance" and all the bishops consecrated by + Williamson. But they won't consecrate because they would loose all the conservatives they have gained from their compromise.
    I think its internally consistent even though its a different principle than you hold to.

    SSPX Resistance believes there's *Technically* a Pope but for all practical intents and purposes there is not a pope.  In other words, no papal approval is needed for things like consecrations... ever

    Mainstream SSPX Is more like Lefebvre in 1980 or so.  Mainstream SSPX believes consecrations without papal approval are justified *only* as a last resort.  Only if they would be left without any bishops otherwise.  So when SSPX already had three bishops who were significantly younger, they thought Williamson doing consecrations was unnecessary, but in 2025 with Bishop Tissier and Williamson dead, there might be more of an absolute necessity to consecrate bishops.

    I don't see this position as inherently more absurd than anything else.  I think *all* of you have serious problems with Vatican I, but I'm not gonna hijack the forum arguing that point.
    Logged

    Offline LakeEnjoyer

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 79
    • Reputation: +46/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #9 on: January 15, 2026, 09:19:48 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on January 15, 2026, 06:40:40 AM
    I think its internally consistent even though its a different principle than you hold to.

    SSPX Resistance believes there's *Technically* a Pope but for all practical intents and purposes there is not a pope.  In other words, no papal approval is needed for things like consecrations... ever

    Mainstream SSPX Is more like Lefebvre in 1980 or so.  Mainstream SSPX believes consecrations without papal approval are justified *only* as a last resort.  Only if they would be left without any bishops otherwise.  So when SSPX already had three bishops who were significantly younger, they thought Williamson doing consecrations was unnecessary, but in 2025 with Bishop Tissier and Williamson dead, there might be more of an absolute necessity to consecrate bishops.

    I don't see this position as inherently more absurd than anything else.  I think *all* of you have serious problems with Vatican I, but I'm not gonna hijack the forum arguing that point.


    Was the consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) in 1991 a "last resort"?
    Logged

    Offline Kephapaulos

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1962
    • Reputation: +525/-23
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #10 on: January 15, 2026, 09:35:48 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • I know things should not always be rushed, but I feel like I wish the SSPX would simply do the consecrations already and get it done and over with. There is too much deliberation and "prudence." That is actually effeminate. I have been guilty pf it myself. As even in the secular world, they say to make a decision and learn from the consequences. We can't be waiting all decade if supposedly the SSPX still claims to be faithful to "Operation Survival." It's getting ridiculous. Lack of common sense and direct action except, like the Vatican, if it hurts their fantasy world and coffers. 
    Logged
    "Non nobis, Domine, non nobis; sed nomini tuo da gloriam..." (Ps. 113:9)

    Offline LakeEnjoyer

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 79
    • Reputation: +46/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #11 on: January 15, 2026, 11:37:33 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Kephapaulos on January 15, 2026, 09:35:48 AM
    I know things should not always be rushed, but I feel like I wish the SSPX would simply do the consecrations already and get it done and over with. There is too much deliberation and "prudence." That is actually effeminate. I have been guilty pf it myself. As even in the secular world, they say to make a decision and learn from the consequences. We can't be waiting all decade if supposedly the SSPX still claims to be faithful to "Operation Survival." It's getting ridiculous. Lack of common sense and direct action except, like the Vatican, if it hurts their fantasy world and coffers.

    Agreed especially in light of the fact they're slowly approaching "now or never" territory
    Logged

    Online Maria Auxiliadora

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1463
    • Reputation: +1388/-144
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #12 on: January 15, 2026, 02:59:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on January 15, 2026, 06:40:40 AM
    I think its internally consistent even though its a different principle than you hold to.

    SSPX Resistance believes there's *Technically* a Pope but for all practical intents and purposes there is not a pope.  In other words, no papal approval is needed for things like consecrations... ever

    Mainstream SSPX Is more like Lefebvre in 1980 or so.  Mainstream SSPX believes consecrations without papal approval are justified *only* as a last resort.  Only if they would be left without any bishops otherwise.  So when SSPX already had three bishops who were significantly younger, they thought Williamson doing consecrations was unnecessary, but in 2025 with Bishop Tissier and Williamson dead, there might be more of an absolute necessity to consecrate bishops.

    I don't see this position as inherently more absurd than anything else.  I think *all* of you have serious problems with Vatican I, but I'm not gonna hijack the forum arguing that point.



    ByzCat3000,
    You left this quote out of my reply:  


    Quote
    https://sspx.org/en/news/no-comparison-1988-faures-consecration-5676

    The Society of St. Pius X denounces this episcopal consecration of Fr. Faure, which, despite the assertions of both clerics concerned, is not at all comparable to the consecrations of 1988. All the declarations of Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure prove abundantly that they no longer recognize the Roman authorities, except in a purely rhetorical manner."

    For ABL in 1988, the JPII Prayer Meeting at Assisi was the proximate motivation for consecrating the 4 bishops and the state of necessity was undeniable. When +Williamson consecrated +Faure, it was clear that the SSPX was determined to be “regularized” by Rome. Shortly after, the SSPX was Regularized in Argentina which according to the Legal analysis from the Argentinean lawyer hired by Adelante La Fe/ Rorate Caeli, entails worldwide recognition which could only happen with the signature of the leadership, not to mention the signing of the “doctrinal Preamble” (the “Profession of Faith” & “Oath of Fidelity to the Pope”) that was always absolutely non-negotiable.

    The state of necessity existed during Francis/Bergoglio and even more than 1988 but +Fellay became a member of the Roman Rota  (according to Mr. James Bogle, previous head of Una Voce Int.) and conveniently has the authority to judge the SSPX priests and keep quiet  the crimes that would otherwise be exposed.

    If the SSPX had any principles, they would have continued as they were and consecrate more bishops as needed. Even today, they should not be flirting with the idea but simply DO IT as +Williamson did, giving the Church 6 additional Bishops including +Faure. In fact, if anything else, they should recognize the “Resistant” bishops because (in your opinion) after all, the SSPX leadership “denounced” +Williamson and +Faure because they still had “Three bishops who were significantly younger” in 2015.

    In my opinion, and I hope I’m wrong, they will not do more Episcopal Consecrations because when all the “indult” Masses are gone, the Prelature will be established to corral all the conservatives into it as a controlled opposition and bring them back to the Novus Ordo “reform of the reform” Mass which +Fellay witnessed in an Abbey near Florence in 2012 and was quoted by Cardinal Canizares as saying that “If ABL had seen the Mass as is celebrated in the Abbey near Florence, he would not have taken the step he did”. So, why would +Fellay, still an advisor to the leadership want to take the step that ABL did by consecrating the 4 bishops?

    The new leadership was ratified by Francis, who was not better than Leo and the bishop(s) they get, will also be ratified by Rome. They should not weigh the pros and cons but act decisively.


    Logged
    The love of God be your motivation, the will of God your guiding principle, the glory of God your goal.
    (St. Clement Mary Hofbauer)

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9587
    • Reputation: +9334/-1013
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #13 on: January 15, 2026, 03:14:42 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • The possible SSPX/newChurch discord that perks my interest is that pope Bob might be unexpectedly changing their pre-established ecuмenical relations script.

    The quid pro quo under the Bergolio regime was: He didn't bother the SSPX and they in-turn, were mum about his papal circus.

    It was as if they were at peace.

    But now, the SSPX is getting anxious and they are begining to "message" their faithful that Bob somehow, isn't upholding his end of the deal?
    Logged
    "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

    Online Maria Auxiliadora

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1463
    • Reputation: +1388/-144
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX hinting they will "Consecrate"
    « Reply #14 on: January 15, 2026, 06:24:19 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on January 15, 2026, 03:14:42 PM
    The possible SSPX/newChurch discord that perks my interest is that pope Bob might be unexpectedly changing their pre-established ecuмenical relations script.

    The quid pro quo under the Bergolio regime was: He didn't bother the SSPX and they in-turn, were mum about his papal circus.

    It was as if they were at peace.

    But now, the SSPX is getting anxious and they are begining to "message" their faithful that Bob somehow, isn't upholding his end of the deal?

    I understand. However, the SSPX members who know better, should see this as a blessing in disguise. No good could come from a deal with Rome specially with a Prelature which would be compromised. If the leadership doesn't take decisive action soon, they could join one of the "Resistance" bishops and work with them.Just a thought.
    Logged
    The love of God be your motivation, the will of God your guiding principle, the glory of God your goal.
    (St. Clement Mary Hofbauer)
    Pages: [1] 2
    « previous next »