Author Topic: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson (Read 2783 times)

Matthew · « **on:** April 05, 2017, 07:46:57 AM »

Reflections on a Staggering Development
April 4, 2017Sean Johnson
Uncategorized

[NB: There remains some confusion as to whether the Vatican’s new pastoral guidelines are mandatory for all SSPX marriages, or, whether they are merely an option for the scrupulous. The SSPX’s brief communique does nothing to clarify the ambiguity. However, an intelligent poster on the French Resistance Forum (“Gillou47”) has this to say, which seems reasonable to us:

“It is this first sense which reflects the spirit of the letter, it is all [marriages…]

To the extent possible, the delegation of the Ordinary to attend the marriage will be given to a priest of the diocese (or at least to a fully-fledged priest) to receive the consent of the parties in the rite of the Sacrament which, The liturgy of the Vetus ordo, takes place at the beginning of the Holy Mass; Will follow the celebration of the Holy Mass by a priest of the Fraternity.

In case of impossibility or if there is no priest in the diocese who can receive the consent of the parties, the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties directly to the priest of the Fraternity who will also celebrate the Holy Mass, reminding him that He has the duty to send to the Diocesan Curia as soon as possible the docuмentation which attests the celebration of the Sacrament.” http://resistance.vraiforum.com/t174-Le-pape-autorise-la-FSSPX-c-l-brer-des-mariages-licites-et.htm

Given this interpretation of Cardinal Muller’s pastoral guidelines, we offer the following commentary. If subsequent clarifications should show this interpretation to have been wrong, we reserve the right to amend our conclusions. -SP]

[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}]

Today, the Rorate Coeli blog published a letter by Cardinal Muller (approved by Pope Francis) which announced the issuance of “pastoral guidelines” for the performance of diocesan marriages in SSPX chapels, and in response, the earth has wobbled on its axis.
The implications arising from this latest Roman maneuver are so staggering as to alarm all but the most hardcore “accordistas,” and with the benefit of a few hours’ reflection, these seem the most significant consequences:

Subjection to, and Entanglement in, the Dioceses:
According to Cardinal Muller, the preposterous and unimaginable has become the new normal in SSPX chapels: Diocesan clergy will show up to witness/preside over your marriages, and then step aside while the SSPX priest performs the nuptial Mass:
“the Local Ordinary is to grant the delegation to assist at the marriage to a priest of the Diocese (or in any event, to a fully regular priest), such that the priest may receive the consent of the parties during the marriage rite, followed, in keeping with the liturgy of the Vetus ordo, by the celebration of Mass, which may be celebrated by a priest of the Society.”
Note that there is no “opt-out” provision here: If you attend an SSPX chapel, you will be married by a conciliar cleric (presuming one is available).
Questions which arise from these pastoral guidelines:[/size][/font][/size][/font][/size]

Will this conciliar cleric even be a validly ordained priest? If the alleged purpose of issuing these guidelines was to alleviate the doubt of the faithful regarding the validity of their SSPX marriages, doesn’t the introduction of this new uncertainty run contrary to the stated motive?
Regarding the validity of ordination for these conciliar clerics, presuming they were not validly ordained, does the Church have the authority to send laymen to witness marriages (and even if they did, would not such SSPX marriages be even more liberal than the craziest Novus Ordo mariage?)?
The faithful are now directly subjected to the diocesan clergy for the reception of their sacraments. True, in marriage, it is the couple who actually performs the sacrament, with the priest merely witnessing for validity. But they are now dependent upon the good graces of the local bishop to permit it.
The SSPX clergy are directly subjected to the diocesan authority in the administration of the sacrament of marriage: They must appeal to the local ordinary to request a conciliar delegate in every instance.
Note the humiliation the SSPX clergy are subjected to in these pastoral guidelines: They are made to admit (at least implicitly) by their very actions, that they have not the ability to validly witness marriages in being made to call for the local modernist to assist in this capacity, regardless of any interior/exterior protestations to the contrary.
Suppose an SSPX cleric, resenting this imposture, refuses to appeal to the local bishop. Shall he be disciplined by the Society?
Suppose the faithful rightly resent this imposture, and refuse to permit a conciliar priest to witness their marriage: Shall they be compelled to participate in the SSPX’s capitulation, or be told to go elsewhere to receive the sacrament?
How long until the dioceses make their approval/permission dependent upon what they consider acceptable (i.e., outrageous) marriage preparation classes?

[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}][size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
Barring the swift and unambiguous repudiation by Menzingen of Cardinal Muller’s pastoral guidelines for marriages in SSPX chapels, the entanglement of the SSPX in the conciliar Church is now official, even if incomplete: The dioceses are now directly involved in the administration of sacraments at SSPX chapels.
For a traditional Catholic priest or layman to consent to such a requirement is absolutely unenforceable and unacceptable, and no Catholic can be compelled to obey such guidelines. So long as this new abomination remains the official policy in SSPX chapels (which, in the absence of a clear repudiation, is the necessary presumption), we no longer recommend the reception of the sacrament of matrimony at SSPX chapels so long as this policy remains in place.
The psychological damage, and deleterious consequences for the quality of the faith for those who would subject themselves to such conditions is simply too much; the spirit will be broken, and the second offense/compromise will be much easier. Such persons will have prepared themselves for subsequent falls.
We are obliged to say Non Possumus!

Reading Between the Lines:
The ostensible motive given for these new pastoral guidelines is to alleviate the alleged qualms of conscience said to be roiling within the bowels of SSPX clergy and faithful over their doubts about the validity of the marriages they are witnessing or receiving.
Who are these doubting clergy and laymen?
How does Rome know anything about them?
The only knowledge Rome has about the mindset of Society laymen comes from 20 years of “discreet but not secret” conversations with Menzingen. If, therefore, Rome has concluded that SSPXers are writhing in doubts about the validity of their sacraments, I would say those doubts were entertained and conveyed more by Menzingen and SSPX superiors, than by the average layman. The writings of Fathers Pfluger, Simoulin, Schmidberger, and others corroborate that thought: It is the SSPX hierarchy who is torn by doubts, not the average layman in the pews.
We wonder whether this assignment of doubt to the laity over the validity of SSPX marriages is really their own psychological projection, though they dare not admit it. Have 20 years of gravely imprudent contacts convinced them of their own defectiveness, and of a conviction that their symptoms (i.e., doubt) can only be cured by a practical accord ,even if it means coming under the thumb of heretical bishops, cardinals, and pope?
We think so.
But note what is not addressed in the pastoral guidelines: The validity of past SSPX marriages. In fact, you are meant to notice the guidelines’ omission to deal with that issue. Why? Because if you are not yet doubting the validity of your marriage, they want you to start doubting it.
In other words, Rome is saying to the world: “SSPX marriages are invalid. We have not sanated [made sound/valid] their past marriages, nor will we. In fact, we have granted annulments whenever faced with one at a tribunal on that ground alone. And even going forward, you will still need one of our conciliar clowns for the sacrament to be valid.”
Menzingen’s lack of repudiation quietly (but clearly) responds: “Yes, we are worried that this is all true.”
The strategy here is to inculcate doubt, so as to facilitate a willingness to support the practical accord.
But there is another stratagem subsisting within the first: The guidelines seem designed to weed out all remaining SSPX hardliners (clergy and lay) as part of what Fr. Pfluger once referred to as the “purification” of the SSPX. Unlike Bishop Fellay (whom Pope Francis said is “a man he can work with”), those who cannot be worked with (i.e., those who will not permit themselves to be conditioned) will be made to seek options elsewhere, little by little, one sacrament at a time. Not by force, as in 2012-2014, but by choice: The new SSPX is being made to be less appealing to those still grounded in doctrine, and not affected by appeals to legalism.
“If the salt lose its savor…”
Finally, and it cannot be emphasized enough, what must be retained is that by not opposing these pastoral guidelines, and submitting to them, Menzingen is implicitly acknowledging the invalidity of its own marriages (and this in turn helps facilitate the conciliar motive of inculcating doubt about the validity of the sacrament in the clergy and laity, as a means of garnering support for the canonical agreement).
Why else would Menzingen submit to such guidelines, unless it doubted the validity of its sacrament?

Conclusion:
Menzingen’s acceptance of the pastoral guidelines announced by Rome today represent its most serious compromise to date: The expulsion of Bishop Williamson to facilitate the practical accord; the Letter of the Three Bishops which announced the plans of Menzingen; the scandalous response of the Letter of the General Counsel; the signing of the infamous April 15, 2012 Doctrinal Declaration: None of these represent as serious a threat to the quality of faith of the SSPX clergy and laity as the pastoral guidelines released today:
Where those other instances pertained to Menzingen, or the SSPX generally, they did not impact the rank and file clergy and laity so directly, immediately, and concretely as do these pastoral guidelines. These guidelines, however, make those who will continue to avail themselves of marriages at SSPX chapels under such conditions directly complicit in the compromise of the Society, and in their own personal lives.
For this reason, we can no longer support marriages at SSPX chapels so long as these guidelines remain unrepudiated, except in the case of grave spiritual necessity (which dispenses from all legal considerations……but which also requires no conciliar witness for validity). Outside of this, we are obliged to exclaim:
Non Possumus![/font][/size][/size][/font][/size][/font][/size]

http://sodalitium-pianum.com/reflections-on-a-staggering-development/

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #1 on:** April 05, 2017, 09:31:12 AM »

Great analysis.

Quote

The guidelines seem designed to weed out all remaining SSPX hardliners (clergy and lay) ... those who cannot be worked with (i.e., those who will not permit themselves to be conditioned) will be made to seek options elsewhere, little by little, one sacrament at a time. ...The new SSPX is being made to be less appealing to those still grounded in doctrine, and not affected by appeals to legalism.

For those who 'wake up' and leave the sspx due to these changes, it is a great blessing and mercy from God. Keeping the Faith, upholding doctrine and holding to catholic principles is our primary duty. God will provide the sacraments and the graces necessary for salvation - just not from the society. The sspx is now officially 'red lighted' in my opinion.

josefamenendez · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2017, 10:09:39 AM »

Soooo.... I wonder if Bergoglio will give a "blanket retroactive approval" to all those already married under the SSPX, or will they have to have some kind of renewal of vows ( remarriage?) with a consilliar priest present?
This is going to be very messy if the SSPX doesn't reject this outright.

Stubborn · « **Reply #3 on:** April 05, 2017, 11:18:53 AM »

Quote

From the SSPX website.

The Society of Saint Pius X conveys its deep gratitude to the Holy Father for his pastoral solicitude as expressed in the letter from the Ecclesia Dei Commission, for the purpose of alleviating “any uncertainty regarding the validity of the sacrament of marriage”. Pope Francis clearly wishes that, as in the matter of confessions, all the faithful who want to marry in the presence of a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X can do so without any worries about the validity of the sacrament. It is to be hoped that all the bishops share this same pastoral solicitude.

Here is the only lie that one really needs to expose the whole ambiguous NO farce.

The purpose is not, after +45 years of SSPX marriages without a NO delegation, "to alleviate any uncertainty regarding validity." The purpose is to make the mountain come to Mohamed......The crooks in Rome must be growing impatient waiting for the official deal, they have got to do something to dismantle the SSPX, so the crooks are being thanked for inviting themselves right into the camp

This is enough to make my blood boil.

The SSPX priests are supposed to be teaching and explaining why such uncertainty is a false concern and completely unwarranted - and why it goes hand in had with why the SSPX exist in the first place! - as they used to teach and explain since the 1970s no?

WTH are they doing "conveying deep gratitude" to the pope for putting NO enemies in a position of authority to validate anything, especially, of all things, validate the sacrament(s).

The sacraments! Of all things!! One of the main reasons the SSPX used to preach that we avoid the NO like the plague is precisely because there is every reason to believe the NO sacraments are not only invalid, but a NO "delegation" wouldn't know a valid sacrament if it kicked them in the arse! EEerrrrrrrr!! Idiots!!

mw2016 · « **Reply #4 on:** April 05, 2017, 02:03:49 PM »

There is a frightening development I've noticed in SSPX parishes:

The parishioners seem totally unaware of ANY news at all related to the deal...

Recently, I've noticed my SSPX friends were unaware of the Church purchase in Rome.

They were unaware of Bp. Williamson's announcement that he would consecrate Fr. Zendejas.

They are unaware of the marriage development and Fr. Wegner's statement.

I wonder if anything will be said this Sunday from their puplits regarding the marriage situation.

Stubborn · « **Reply #5 on:** April 05, 2017, 04:32:14 PM »

Quote from: mw2016 on April 05, 2017, 02:03:49 PM

There is a frightening development I've noticed in SSPX parishes:

The parishioners seem totally unaware of ANY news at all related to the deal...

It's sickening to see those lousy SOB traitors say they have deep gratitude for placing the enemy within!

You are right, it's like the 70s again - all signs point to the sheeple, who put their blind trust in the SSPX being fooled again. St. Pius X nailed it when he said: "...for they double the parts of rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error; and since audacity is their chief characteristic".

The audacity of the NO to not only push themselves in and literally invite themselves to the feast as some sort of guardians of the same sacrament which they've mocked, slandered and blasphemed since V2 is bad enough, but to see the SSPX welcome the opportunity of having them and thanking them for it on top of it with such ignorant BS speaks volumes. +Fellay will go down as the wimpy traitor who killed the SSPX if he does not speak up and tell the Romans with celestial clarity to get the H out of the temple, and now!

Stubborn · « **Reply #6 on:** April 05, 2017, 04:33:14 PM »

Quote from: Truecharity on April 05, 2017, 11:59:08 AM

Quoted for future reference.

The new CI has a "Bookmark" function now - you may want to use that.

wallflower · « **Reply #7 on:** April 06, 2017, 06:41:59 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn on April 05, 2017, 11:18:53 AM

The SSPX priests are supposed to be teaching and explaining why such uncertainty is a false concern and completely unwarranted - and why it goes hand in had with why the SSPX exist in the first place! - as they used to teach and explain since the 1970s no?

WTH are they doing "conveying deep gratitude" to the pope for putting NO enemies in a position of authority to validate anything, especially, of all things, validate the sacrament(s).

Yes they used to be very strong on this point since it's the whole and only reason for their existence. Not only that but in addressing VII errors and all that that entails they were effectively teaching the Faith to the faithful. How many of us would know about supplied jurisdiction without them? The NO priests sure as heck aren't about to teach it. It's true it didn't convince everybody but it's truth and those who have ears to hear will hear.

But now that in the minds of +Fellay and co. their reason for being has shifted to saving Rome by their traditional prowess, I suppose these details are just not important anymore. Keeping up appearances and worrying about what the mainstream thinks of them (those who know nothing of supplied jurisdiction and don't want to know) becomes what's important. Now the whole world will know the SSPX is valid. Great! To them it's a win. Never mind that people think it now for the wrong reasons or that the move ensnares the SSPX to the usually-very-unfriendly diocese. The fact they've been valid all this time, the fact that this is a huge teaching opportunity for the faithful and whoever in the world is interested by this, becomes a little detail they can afford to let go. I really hope they come out with more of a statement regarding supplied jurisdiction because the groveling and playing along is really sickening. If they don't, then I hope there are individual priests still left out there who will take advantage of this massive opportunity to teach the truth.

cosmas · « **Reply #8 on:** April 07, 2017, 09:04:36 AM »

Why did Fr.Angles ever waste his time writing a paper on Supplied Jurisdiction if they are now going back on their words. This was written to let us know that our marriages and confessions were okay ,because of the Crisis in the church. You tell me , is the Crisis over ? This is a real cruel joke Bishop Fellay is pulling on everyone. Its not one bit funny. Rome has gotten 1000 times worse. Because of Romes rotten to the core liberalism they are giving us a supposed ' Mercy " inviting us back in. This is part of their so called Ecuмenism. Ilive in Saint Marys I was never polled to see if my conscience bothered me about Supplied Jurisdiction. If my confession was valid. The Pius x Leadership has forgotten what the fight was all about or they never believed in what Archbishop Lefebvre was trying to do. The fight for the TRUE FAITH will go on possibly without SSPX leadership.

Mr G · « **Reply #9 on:** April 11, 2017, 08:15:39 AM »

Quote from: mw2016 on April 05, 2017, 02:03:49 PM

They are unaware of the marriage development and Fr. Wegner's statement.

I wonder if anything will be said this Sunday from their puplits regarding the marriage situation.

CORRECTION: The statement was originally from DICI (HQ) and not from Fr. Wegner (US District). But your observation is also what I experience too. No talk at all about this situation with marriages.
Although, those outside the SSPX are talking about it, Michael Matt and the folks at the Remnant are against deal and now this marriage maneuver:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3134-sspx-marriage-the-lefebvre-problem
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/3135-merciful-pope-arrests-sspx-marriages-liberates-public-adulterers
I wonder with such vocal opposition, if he will ever be invited to speak at an Angelus Press Conference again.

mw2016 · « **Reply #10 on:** April 11, 2017, 10:57:35 AM »

It was announced in the Sunday bulletin that Fr. Pfluger will be in PHX on April 23rd to discuss it. That ought to be interesting. Someone should film his talk and post it to youtube.

http://carvecreative.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/04092017.pdf

Marlelar · « **Reply #11 on:** April 11, 2017, 11:22:52 AM »

Quote from: mw2016 on April 11, 2017, 10:57:35 AM

It was announced in the Sunday bulletin that Fr. Pfluger will be in PHX on April 23rd to discuss it. That ought to be interesting. Someone should film his talk and post it to youtube.

http://carvecreative.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/04092017.pdf

I have to be out of town on family business so will be unable to make it

Please let me know if it is recorded/posted anywhere or post your own notes.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #12 on:** April 11, 2017, 11:04:01 PM »

Quote from: cosmas on April 07, 2017, 09:04:36 AM

I live in Saint Marys -- I was never polled to see if my conscience bothered me about Supplied Jurisdiction. If my confession was valid. The Pius x Leadership has forgotten what the fight was all about or they never believed in what Archbishop Lefebvre was trying to do. The fight for the TRUE FAITH will go on possibly without SSPX leadership.

.
It seems to me that +Fellay doesn't care whether your conscience bothered you about supplied jurisdiction or whether your confession was valid.
.
If you look at what he actually said, and what he would intend its effect to be, he is effectively informing you of what he would HAVE you think. And it is your job as an obedient and submissive follower of his, to do and think what he expects of you. So he says you're concerned with validity, therefore you don't have any voice in saying otherwise. HE SPEAKS FOR YOU.
.

Mr G · « **Reply #13 on:** April 13, 2017, 02:46:24 PM »

From Non Possumus: (not the best translation)

http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/2017/04/tornielli-confirma-que-la-fsspx-y-roma.htm
TORNIELLI CONFIRMS THAT THE FSSPX AND ROME PREPARE A NEW DOCTRINAL STATEMENT

FUENTE (la negrita y los comnetarios en rojo son de NP. Título original: "Lefebvristas: para el anuncio de la prelatura es necesario más tiempo")

SOURCE (the bold and comnetarios in red are from NP. Original title: "Lefebvristas: for the announcement of the prelature it is necessary more time")

No se prevé el acuerdo a corto plazo - el superior de la Fraternidad, Fellay, todavía no ha firmado la declaración doctrinal.

No short-term agreement is envisaged - the Superior of the Fraternity, Fellay, has not yet signed the doctrinal statement.

ANDREA TORNIELLI

CIUDAD DEL VATICANO - Con la extensión de la facultad de confesar licita y válidamente establecida para los sacerdotes de la FSSPX al final del Jubileo de la misericordia, y después con la decisión de esta semana de volver lícitas y válidas los matrimonios que celebren los sacerdotes lefebvristas, el Papa Francisco ha dado dos pasos significativos en favor del grupo tradicionalista, pensando en ambos casos en los fieles que siguen la Fraternidad.

VATICAN CITY - With the extension of the faculty of confessing bids and validly established for the priests of the SSPX at the end of the Jubilee of Mercy, and then with this week's decision to make lawful and valid marriages celebrated by Lefebvrist priests , Pope Francis has taken two significant steps in favor of the traditionalist group, thinking in both cases of the faithful who follow the Fraternity.

Los contactos son constantes y continúan, y algunas fuentes han hablado de una posible aceleración, suponiendo un inminente anuncio de la concesión de la Prelatura Personal durante el viaje que el Papa hará a Fátima el próximo 12 y 13 de mayo , con ocasión del centenario de las apariciones marianas que han influenciado la historia del siglo XX.

The contacts are constant and continue, and some sources have spoken of a possible acceleration, supposing an imminent announcement of the concession of the Personal Prelature during the trip that the Pope will make to Fatima next 12 and 13 of May , on the occasion of the centenary of The Marian apparitions that have influenced the history of the twentieth century.

Sin embargo, la situación no ha cambiado respecto a hace unos meses .

However, the situation has not changed from a few months ago .

El superior general de la Fraternidad, el obispo Bernard Fellay, todavía no ha firmado la declaración doctrinal modificada y simplificada, que contiene la professio fidei, y que es considerada por la Congregación para la Doctrina de la fe y de la Pontificia Comisión Ecclesia Dei, como el necesario paso previo a que se active el procedimiento jurídico que hará posible el pleno retorno a la comunión de la FSSPX .

The Superior General of the Fraternity, Bishop Bernard Fellay, has not yet signed the modified and simplified doctrinal statement which contains the professed fidei, which is considered by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, As the necessary prior step to activate the legal procedure that will make possible the full return to the communion of the SSPX .

[Una cosa es absolutamente segura: esa "declaración doctrinal modificada y simplificada" será un docuмento redactado con deliberada ambigüedad , a fin de dejar conformes a ambas partes.

[One thing is absolutely certain: this "modified and simplified doctrinal statement" will be a docuмent drafted with deliberate ambiguity , in order to conform both parties.

Cuando se critique esa ambigüedad a Mons. Fellay, éste responderá -como ya sucedió con la "declaración doctrinal" del 2012- que el texto de la nueva "declaración doctrional" es prácticamente igual al del protocolo firmado por Mons. Lefebvre en 1988 (obviando, por supuesto, el hecho de que el Arzobispo retractó su firma antes de 24 horas).

When Bishop Fellay criticizes this ambiguity, he will respond, as has already happened with the "doctrinal declaration" of 2012, that the text of the new "docuмent statement" is practically the same as that of Monsignor Lefebvre 's protocol in 1988 (obviating , Of course, the fact that the Archbishop retracted his signature before 24 hours).

Lo único verdaderamente interesante de este artículo es la confirmación de que los traidores acuerdistas que dirigen la Neo-FSSPX y los herejes modernistas que ocupan Roma, trabajan actualmente en afinar la redacción de la "declaración doctrinal" que se requiere para regularizar (o, mejor dicho, neutralizar) a la Fraternidad ]

The only truly interesting thing about this article is the confirmation that the compromising traitors who direct the Neo-FSSPX and the modernist heretics who occupy Rome are currently working on fine-tuning the "doctrinal statement" required to regularize (or, better Said, neutralize) the Fraternity ]

El papa y los dicasterios vaticanos no tienen prisa y no quieren apresurar a Fellay, sabiendo bien que el superior debe hacer frente a las diferencias de opinión interna en la Fraternidad .

The Pope and the Vatican dicasteries are in no hurry and do not want to rush Fellay, knowing full well that the superior must face the internal differences of opinion in the Fraternity .

Además antes de instituir la Prelatura Personal, es previsible que la Santa Sede proceda a informar adecuadamente a las conferencias episcopales involucradas, en los países en los cuales están presentes y operando los lefebvristas.

In addition, before establishing the Personal Prelature, it is foreseeable that the Holy See will appropriately inform the episcopal conferences involved, in the countries in which the lefebvristas are present and operating.

Es conocida la devoción que los seguidores del arzobispo Lefebvre siempre han manifestado para la Virgen de Fátima.

The devotion that Archbishop Lefebvre's followers have always expressed to the Virgin of Fatima is well known.

En el año del centenario está en programa una peregrinación de la Fraternidad.

In the year of the centenary a pilgrimage of the Fraternity is in the program.

Esto ha hecho suponer que justo durante el próximo viaje Francisco pudiera hacer algún anuncio.

This has led to suppose that just during the next trip Francisco could make some announcement.

Pero los tiempos, informaron acreditadas fuentes del Vaticano, todavía no están maduros .

But the times, informed Vatican sources, are not yet ripe .

Además, un anuncio en Fátima, en el día en que con toda probabilidad -la confirmación oficial llegará en el consistorio del 20 de abril- el papa proclamará santos a los dos pastorcitos videntes Francisco y Jacinta Marto, terminarán por poner en segundo plano la celebración del centenario.

In addition, an announcement in Fatima, on the day that in all probability - official confirmation will arrive in the consistory on April 20 - the pope will proclaim saints to the two shepherds seers Francis and Jacinta Marto, will end up putting in the background the celebration Of the centenary.

El regreso de los lefebvristas a la plena comunión, en efecto, sería una noticia de gran resonancia mundial, dado que en definitiva marcaría el fin de la fractura consumada en 1988 con las ordenaciones episcopales ilegítimas presididas por el mismo Mons. Lefebvre.

The return of the Lefebvrists to full communion, in fact, would be a news of great worldwide resonance, since it would mark the end of the fracture consummated in 1988 with the illegitimate episcopal ordinations presided over by the same Monsignor Lefebvre.

Una fractura ya parcialmente sanada con la decisión de Benedicto XVI de revocar la excomunión para los que recibieron la consagración episcopal.

A fracture already partially healed with the decision of Benedict XVI to revoke the excommunication for those who received the episcopal consecration.

l

Author Topic: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson (Read 2783 times)

Matthew

SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Pax Vobis

Re: SSPX Marriages

josefamenendez

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Stubborn

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

mw2016

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Stubborn

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Stubborn

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

wallflower

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

cosmas

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Mr G

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

mw2016

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Marlelar

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Neil Obstat

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson

Mr G

Re: SSPX Marriages - Reflections on a Staggering Development by Sean Johnson