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] 3 4 5

Author Topic: SSPX rumor  (Read 3181 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: SSPX rumor
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2021, 02:56:56 PM »
Are the SSPX parishioners that far gone, that fully transformed into sheep that they don't think *at all* anymore?

Do they wear masks for the rest of their lives, even in their car, as well? Despite all the reasons not to? Might as well not think at all anymore.

I was just thinking about all those memes which succinctly capture the truth, contradictions, etc. on various issues -- but do those memes actually ever convert anyone or wake them up? Most of the time the answer is No, because they literally don't care about the truth. They just want to experience carnal pleasure, and live their easy lives of convenience. That's it.

How does someone thumb up his nose at such clear, evident truths? They must have done something to merit that punishment from God.
Logged

Offline ByzCat3000

Re: SSPX rumor
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2021, 03:41:30 PM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on July 18, 2021, 02:51:13 PM
Going "full hypocrite" wouldn't stop them.
I still don't think its inherently hypocritical TBH.  Its obvious that there are some circuмstances where consecrations without papal mandate are justified and others where it wasn't.  Theoretically one could have thought that when Williamson did his consecrations the situation in the Church wasn't as bad as it is now.  Maybe that's a naive position but I don't see how its inherently contradictory.

Furthermore, one could in good faith (again, even if naive) have possibly thought back in 2017 that it was possible for the SSPX to gain formal recognition by Rome *without* acknowledging the NO/V2 (perhaps they envisoned some sort of "agree to disagree" type thing) but one could see this latest act by Francis as ruling out that possibility.

I don't wanna go off hearsay but I saw someone on FB at one point say they asked Bishop Fellay if they'd do another set of consecrations and supposedly he said the SSPX would do it if the alternative was being left with no bishops, or something like that.

To be clear I respect Bishop Williamson a lot and think he's an asset to the Church.   I just think its possible to disagree with his decision without being an indulter.

(And I say that as someone who's increasingly coming around to the idea that he may just have been thinking further ahead/seen the writing on the wall myself)
Logged

Offline Incredulous

Re: SSPX rumor
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2021, 03:53:08 PM »
Quote from: Matthew on July 18, 2021, 02:47:36 PM
By who?

Without a papal mandate? Like +ABL did in 1988, or Bp. Wiliamson did in the mid 2010s?

Certainly not Bp. Fellay and the other two bishops. They came out condemning the 3 consecrations done by +Williamson in the mid-2010s.
He'd have to be going for "full hypocrite".


It's a weird, untimely rumor... but that's what makes it a curiosity.   

I wouldn't rule it out in that SSPX/newChurch relations area at a pivotal juncture.

A bishopric for a "controlled" priest could be part of the window dressing for prelature, or similar sinister accord.


 European invasive species Vulpes vulpes (a.k.a. red fox)
Logged

Offline Maria Auxiliadora

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX rumor
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2021, 04:09:55 PM »
Quote from: Minnesota on July 18, 2021, 01:51:30 PM
I've heard a rumor through some channels that Fr. Pagliarani, the Superior General, might be consecrated a bishop soon. How true do you think it is?

IF true, it would mean that Francis has chosen him to be the (trusted) bishop from the SSPX ranks to lead the Prelature. Remember that the new leadership had to be ratified by Francis. This MAY be the time to corral all the indult communities into the SSPX's Prelature. UNA VOCE MALTA had announced  around three years ago that the hybrid missal was coming (worse than previously expected to be) and that only the SSPX would keep the 1962 Missal and only for a couple of years but eventually adopt the new missal. Could this be the time?
Logged

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: SSPX rumor
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2021, 04:22:04 PM »
Quote from: ByzCat3000 on July 18, 2021, 03:41:30 PM
I still don't think its inherently hypocritical TBH.  Its obvious that there are some circuмstances where consecrations without papal mandate are justified and others where it wasn't.  Theoretically one could have thought that when Williamson did his consecrations the situation in the Church wasn't as bad as it is now.  Maybe that's a naive position but I don't see how its inherently contradictory.


I disagree with your disagreement. You're in the minority here.

Allow me to put this "opinion" you're defending -- the one you're saying isn't blatant hypocrisy -- into words:

"The 1988 consecrations were great. The 2021 consecration of Fr. Pagliarani was great. But those consecrations done by +Williamson a few years earlier, under similar circuмstances and for the same reason? TOTALLY NOT LEGIT. The Church was practically flourishing at that time, under the beneficent tutelage of good Pope Francis. Consecrations without papal mandate during that time were TOTALLY unnecessary, totally schismatic, except for the one done just a few years later under the same Pope. That one was great."

Yeah, I'm going to have to call out anyone holding the above-described opinion as being stupid in the extreme. Nothing personal.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
« previous next »