Author Topic: Why the resistance will fail (Read 15061 times)

dreamtomorrow · « **on:** February 09, 2014, 01:58:29 PM »

B. Williamson isn't leading (he didn't leave-they forced him, maybe he'd still be there if it were up to him. He also purposefully didn't sign the recent declaration because it endorsed a seminary, which he is against) , we need him to go out and convince priests/superiors. The signatures bore no fruit and more than one was retracted. B. Fellay isn't going to sign agreement because he's getting what he wants without it and if there had been agreement people may have reacted so SSPX superiors are going to go the slow route. Also because majority of resistance supporters do and will continue to go to SSPX chapels until they see heresy which they won't. How you maintain hope?

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2014, 02:05:14 PM »

Pray to God and our Blessed Mother for guidance.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2014, 02:26:33 PM »

Fail to do what? Fail to set up another organized priestly society, like the SSPX? In that sense, it will fail to a degree.

The true faith cannot disappear, so in a generic sense "resistance" to modernist errors will not fail. It just might not come with a nice home-schooling network, regular mass times, regular worship space or a drive to mass under an hour.

+ABL never wanted a bishop to be SG, because of the confusion it causes the faithful. I'm sure this, in part, has motivated H.E. Williamson's "hands off" approach.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2014, 02:42:57 PM »

Depends on the area, too.

Someone posted on here today that there were ten people at their Resistance mass today. I wasn't counting, but we probably had forty, maybe more.

And of course, there are priests all across the world. It is certain that there is a significant (though not majority) dissent towards Fellay & Co.

It also depends on what you mean by "the Resistance." If meant just generally to refer to those priests who have left or been expelled from the SSPX (as well as the faithful who have left), it's not like now that they're not affiliated with the SSPX that they just all fall into the same group by the fact.

Those who have left are unified in that they do not want to deal with heretics in Rome. But after that, more division begins. There are disagreements to organization. Should "the Resistance" be worldwide, with a superior general? Or should there be different chapters, governing themselves according to location, each with a provincial head? Or should it be entirely informal, with worldwide mass-circuits? Then of course you have the ecclesiastical differences, as there are sedevacantists, non-sedevacantists, anti-sedevacantists, etc. It seems to me that at least in the American Resistance, sedevacantist priests wouldn't be welcome to join with Fr. Pfeiffer, at least according to Fr's emphatic anti-sedevacantism. In South America, would sedeplenist priests be welcome to aid the sedevacantist priests? And then, of course, since each area is co-ordinated by laypeople (exception in Bostn, KY, I suppose) there are naturally personality conflicts since there isn't even a figurehead of authority in the group.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2014, 04:19:43 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Fail to do what? Fail to set up another organized priestly society, like the SSPX? In that sense, it will fail to a degree.

The true faith cannot disappear, so in a generic sense "resistance" to modernist errors will not fail. It just might not come with a nice home-schooling network, regular mass times, regular worship space or a drive to mass under an hour.

+ABL never wanted a bishop to be SG, because of the confusion it causes the faithful. I'm sure this, in part, has motivated H.E. Williamson's "hands off" approach.

These are no times for “hands off” approach. ABL consecrated four bishops in 1988. What would he do today with the Roman apostates openly attacking doctrine? Bishop Williamson has to follow his own conscience, but if he is serious about defending the faith, at the very least he should consecrate bishops for every traditional order to insure their continuance without any compromise in the future. Those orders can also administer Confirmation to the faithful. If H.E. dies without doing a magnanimous deed such as consecrating bishops, his omission would have been much greater than ABL's, had he not consecrated the four. May +Williamson fulfill his duties in a manner pleasing to God and beneficial to His Church.