Author Topic: Whose turn to be consecrated Bishop? (Read 8539 times)

Matthew · « **on:** November 28, 2016, 05:06:42 PM »

Just look at this:

Quote

On March 19, 2015, Bishop Williamson consecrated Bishop Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil.[14] Father Faure was one of the first members of the Society of St. Pius X and was even initially considered for the Episcopacy by Marcel Lefebvre in the 1988 Consecrations, though Faure turned down the selection; Alfonso de Galarreta was chosen in his place. Faure served the Society as District Superior of both Argentina and Mexico for many years.[15] While both had already been expelled from the Society, the SSPX condemned the consecration.

On March 19, 2016, one year after the 2015 Consecration, Bishop Williamson consecrated Bishop Miguel Ferreira da Costa, aka Fr Thomas Aquinas, at the same place. The SSPX did not comment the new consecration.

Apparently March 19 is the time to consecrate a Bishop, at least for His Excellency Bishop Williamson.

So the 10 million dollar question: who is next?

Just a few months until March 19, 2017...

Incredulous · « **Reply #1 on:** November 28, 2016, 05:45:13 PM »

March 2017 you say... ? :scratchchin:

Perhaps His Excellency should consecrate multiple Bishops, to give Catholic Tradition a hedge ?

In another post, we learn that 2017 has many zio-anniversaries for the celebrating Rothschild elite:

Why, if I was sentimental Rothschild, my ideal date in 2017 might be March 11, Purim.

This is the holiday when Jєωs celebrate being delivered from their enemies—and celebrate slaughtering them.

Matthew · « **Reply #2 on:** November 28, 2016, 06:18:52 PM »

The question is: What episcopal candidates are left, who haven't already been ordained?

Are there any other older priests that +Lefebvre considered consecrating -- and if so, are they still A) alive and B) still faithful to Tradition (including since 2012, when the SSPX set out on its false path back to Modernist Rome).

In that category, I wouldn't be surprised if the number was 0.

If this is the case, we might have to look to the next generation of priests: those formed in one of +ABL's seminaries, who are still faithful to Tradition, but who were too young (or not yet a priest) in 1988 to be considered for consecration.

I am not going to put out any names, since I'm A) the owner of CathInfo and B) the coordinator of St. Dominic's Chapel. Anything I say would automatically have a political dimension. Know what I mean?

I'll let you guys have the fun speculating.

Franciscan Solitary · « **Reply #3 on:** November 28, 2016, 06:21:39 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Just look at this:

Quote
On March 19, 2015, Bishop Williamson consecrated Bishop Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil.[14] Father Faure was one of the first members of the Society of St. Pius X and was even initially considered for the Episcopacy by Marcel Lefebvre in the 1988 Consecrations, though Faure turned down the selection; Alfonso de Galarreta was chosen in his place. Faure served the Society as District Superior of both Argentina and Mexico for many years.[15] While both had already been expelled from the Society, the SSPX condemned the consecration.

On March 19, 2016, one year after the 2015 Consecration, Bishop Williamson consecrated Bishop Miguel Ferreira da Costa, aka Fr Thomas Aquinas, at the same place. The SSPX did not comment the new consecration.

Apparently March 19 is the time to consecrate a Bishop, at least for His Excellency Bishop Williamson.

So the 10 million dollar question: who is next?

Just a few months until March 19, 2017...

This puzzle must be one of the best Christmas presents ever:

And a joyful Advent everyone!!!

Franciscan Solitary · « **Reply #4 on:** November 28, 2016, 07:02:56 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

The question is: What episcopal candidates are left, who haven't already been ordained?

Are there any other older priests that +Lefebvre considered consecrating -- and if so, are they still A) alive and B) still faithful to Tradition (including since 2012, when the SSPX set out on its false path back to Modernist Rome).

In that category, I wouldn't be surprised if the number was 0.

If this is the case, we might have to look to the next generation of priests: those formed in one of +ABL's seminaries, who are still faithful to Tradition, but who were too young (or not yet a priest) in 1988 to be considered for consecration.

I am not going to put out any names, since I'm A) the owner of CathInfo and B) the coordinator of St. Dominic's Chapel. Anything I say would automatically have a political dimension. Know what I mean?

I'll let you guys have the fun speculating.

Were this lowly Franciscan to be greatly indulged, the choice might fall on Fr. Cyprian Rodriquez, O.S.B., legitimist Prior of Our Lady of Guadalupe Monastery in Silver City New Mexico.

Of course politics may never allow it, but at least one can always dream...

St Ignatius · « **Reply #5 on:** November 28, 2016, 07:30:28 PM »

Quote from: Franciscan Solitary

Were this lowly Franciscan to be greatly indulged, the choice might fall on Fr. Cyprian Rodriquez, O.S.B., legitimist Prior of Our Lady of Guadalupe Monastery in Silver City New Mexico.

Of course politics may never allow it, but at least one can always dream...

From someone who who was close friends with Fr Cyprian for many years, I'd agree. But, unfortunately, Fr Cyprian is in the clutches of the neo-SSPX and Fr Cyprian would also have to shed his disdain towards Bp Williamson.

Matthew · « **Reply #6 on:** November 28, 2016, 08:06:52 PM »

I don't think it involves too much partisanship or speculation to insist that the next Resistance bishop candidate be... in the Resistance.

Frankly, anything else would be pretty crazy. Suggesting a priest from the Novus Ordo, Indult, neo-SSPX, etc. is fine for "pipe dreaming", but it's never going to happen.

His Excellency* would take it as a sign he's not to consecrate any more bishops, if those were his only choices!

And do you really think ANY priest still part of the neo-SSPX wants to be consecrated a Bishop for the Resistance? They'd be immediately kicked out of the neo-SSPX if they did that. And if they were OK with that, then why haven't they left yet?

I realize that "priests in the Resistance" really narrows it down.
But it is what it is.

* And not just Bishop Williamson, either. I don't think the other 2 Resistance bishops would ever consider consecrating some totally untested priest who hasn't even served 1 day as a priest in the Resistance.

josefamenendez · « **Reply #7 on:** November 28, 2016, 09:37:01 PM »

Fr Zendejas should be Bishop for the North American continent, if only we had more priests to replace him (although he may be literally irreplacable)

Franciscan Solitary · « **Reply #8 on:** November 29, 2016, 01:01:38 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

I don't think it involves too much partisanship or speculation to insist that the next Resistance bishop candidate be... in the Resistance.

Frankly, anything else would be pretty crazy. Suggesting a priest from the Novus Ordo, Indult, neo-SSPX, etc. is fine for "pipe dreaming", but it's never going to happen.

His Excellency* would take it as a sign he's not to consecrate any more bishops, if those were his only choices!

I realize that "priests in the Resistance" really narrows it down.
But it is what it is.

* And not just Bishop Williamson, either. I don't think the other 2 Resistance bishops would ever consider consecrating some totally untested priest who hasn't even served 1 day as a priest in the Resistance.

Please listen carefully and attentively to the following sermon by Fr. Cyprian:

There are true resisters against the Great Apostasy of the Novus Ordo even beyond the miniscule ranks of the official Resistance. Let us not hold passing political quarrels above the eternal interests of the Church of Rome. Fr. Cyprian is certainly not the only true Catholic priest currently worthy of being raised to the episcopal honours, but he is one of them. Fr. Reto Ney, the founder of Gloria TV, would also be quite profoundly worthy as well.

Bishop Williamson is responsible for the interests of the entire Catholic world, not only those of his own immediate circle. The most powerful men on earth are currently looking to him to set the example.

The Resistance Bishops are playing in the Biggest Leagues now.

Noblesse oblige.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #9 on:** November 29, 2016, 05:00:18 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

The question is: What episcopal candidates are left, who haven't already been ordained?

Fr. Zendejas and Fr. Pierre-Marie O P.

Since the Dominicans have Bishop Faure, well...

Matthew · « **Reply #10 on:** November 29, 2016, 08:18:08 AM »

I should also point out, that right now, the Resistance is TIED with the neo-SSPX in terms of # of bishops.

It will be psychologically significant when the Resistance rises ABOVE her SSPX roots and has:

A) 4 bishops, just like the classic SSPX. This will show that her scope and mission are the same.
B) 1 more bishop than the neo-SSPX -- they are more alive and growing. Vitality is there.
C) the neo-SSPX will seem like a "wounded" or dying version of the classic SSPX, since they only have 3 bishops. They are on the way down, the Resistance is on the way up.

Matthew · « **Reply #11 on:** November 29, 2016, 08:24:42 AM »

As an aside, we should all be thankful to Bishop Williamson that we have 3 bishops in the Resistance today, rather than 1 or 0.

Imagine if the Archbishop had consecrated another French priest (for example) in 1988 instead of +W. The not-Williamson candidate would have been more like +Fellay, +de Mallerais or +de Galarreta. The Resistance would currently be "up a crick without a paddle" right now. But that's all academic, because God's Providence wouldn't have allowed that.

But just look at how +Williamson does his job -- he does what needs to be done. He's a true man, true prelate, and true leader -- a credit to the Church.

While the other bishops are tied to their SSPX security blanket, attached to the past SSPX glory, hoping against hope that the inevitable won't happen, we have ONE BISHOP who girds his loins and acts like a man...like Archbishop Lefebvre.

A true Bishop lives in the present and plans for the future. He isn't nostalgic for his old friends, his old Founder (+ABL), or the past glory of his organization. He looks FORWARD to how to best build up the Church, and prepare for the future glory of Heaven -- for himself, his priests, and his Faithful. And he prepares and works for the earthly reign of Christ the King and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which is certainly not in the past, but in the future!

Many have said it before, and I'll say it again. The Archbishop chose wisely when he chose +Williamson as his FIRST candidate for Bishop. The facts themselves state my assertion: +Williamson acts more like +ABL than any of the other 3. That is to say, acting heroic in this confusing and dark era of the Church.

To be more accurate, the Archbishop was docile to the inspirations of the Holy Ghost and listened to the Third Person of the Holy Trinity when He inspired him to notice and choose Fr. Richard Williamson -- because things this important don't happen by accident.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #12 on:** November 29, 2016, 09:52:56 AM »

Ambrose Moran?

Matthew · « **Reply #13 on:** November 29, 2016, 10:13:57 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Ambrose Moran?

?

Uh...no.

The world needs a bishop who is honest and NOT a con-man.

Arvinger · « **Reply #14 on:** November 29, 2016, 10:44:17 AM »

Another reason why more Episcopal Consecrations are needed is the reality that the chastisement predicted by Our Lady in the covered-up part of the Third Secret of Fatima and in Akita can't be too far away in the future (possibly 2017 or 2029). Right now the bishops are free to travel around the world for Ordinations and Confirmations, but after the major chastisement that might not be the case - our modern technology, airplanes etc. might be destroyed or useless, in which case we need bishops spread around different parts of the world.