SSPX: Bishop Fellay – Question Time…
Comments invited…
20May
Related Posts
09Feb
John Cornwell Savages Pope St Pius X…
At my Catholic boarding school in the late 1950s there was... read more
24Dec
Celebrating Christmas…
This Christmas thread is to allow us firstly to reflect on... read more
16Nov
Ecumenical & Inter-Faith Events: Should Catholics Engage in Public Protests?
The following report about Catholics in Argentina who publicly voiced objections... read more
02Jun
Must Catholics Reject Halal Meat?
Click on the picture to read a newspaper report about the... read more
06Jul
Welcome to the new Blog (2013)…
We launch our new blog with this hymn in honour of... read more
05Oct
A Tale of Two Canonisations: Church in future will question their validity – SSPX
Nine years after his death, after an exceptionally rapid process, John... read more
13May
97th Anniversary of Fatima Apparitions: Russia-Ukraine-Consecration…
OPEN LETTER TO POPE FRANCIS Holy Father, The World Needs Your Intervention! Consecrate Russia as... read more
28Aug
Secularism & Corrupt Church Leaders…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Um4IO8xa_k&feature=player_embedded#t=439 Michael Voris calls on corrupt Church leaders to "repent, resign, or... read more
18Nov
Scots Priest Suspended: “Mass Riot” During Bishop’s Announcement…
Parishioners at St John Ogilvie's Church in High Blantyre, Lanarkshire, reacted... read more
12Oct
Miracle of the Sun at Fatima…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBIs8cuIwTo As we prepare to mark the 96th anniversary of the miracle... read more
Comments (20)
It sounds to me like the SSPX is going to regularise soon.
I maybe misspoke in my first comment. This is a link to some people who think the SSPX is being very weak in the crisis and actually shouldn’t regularise.
https://akacatholic.com/sspx-to-be-or-not-to-be-regularized/
Margaret Mary,
I think Louie V. has lost the plot. A Pope cannot “judge himself a formal heretic,” nor will the Society accept a Personal Prelature “from a Pope.” Furthermore, Louie is apparently not aware of the numerous condemnations of AL already issued by the Society.
I’d say Louie’s preference is that the SSPX become as much of an ill-informed hot-head as he is!
(PS: I stopped reading his columns a long time ago…)
RCA Victor,
I agree about Louie V. He seems to be a sedevacantist, as are most of the bloggers posting on his site. He’s definitely lost the plot. I only occasionally ever read his site but that article has put me off once and for all.
MM,
I see others have already commented on the unreliability, to put it mildly, of the akaCatholic blog. It’s wise to ignore anything that smacks of sedevacantism, as it is all too easy to get caught up in their confused thinking.
I don’t think you “misspoke” your first comment – I think there may well be a regularisation soon. Can’t be soon enough for me! And moi!
I checked out Louie V’s site and I concur that he has overstepped himself. To take upon himself the authority to declare Francis a non-Pope is gravely sinful and not Catholic. He declares the Pope “faithless” as though he has insight into the Papal soul.
Bishop Fellay and other Traitional leaning prelates in the Church are very careful in their language when discussing the Pope and his controversies. This is how it should be. There is nothing to be gained by angry outbursts and accusations, which are of the devil. Sedevacantists are generally angry people lost to charity and all moderation in their language. They will not help the Church through this crisis, only cause it more sorrow and endanger more souls. I just don’t read the arguments of these extreme zealots any more.
Athanasius,
Did you ever check out that “Point/Counterpoint” between Louie and John Salza? Apparently John has not made any headway, judging from Louie’s latest.
RCA Victor
No, I didn’t check that but I think you’re spot on there about Louis.
I have always regarded sedevacantists to be very Protestant in their outlook. How can we know that a Pope is not a Pope? Only the church can judge this. We are not allowed to believe it based on subjective private judgement.
Bishop Fellay is a faithful son of the Church, who is wise as a serpent and innocent as a dove. His demeanor displays this. Let us pray for him, that he will do the will of God, for the good of the Church. Honestly, the fact that a regularization has not happened yet is God’s protection, seeing how today’s traditionalists are treated under this Pontificate.
DOTF,
I agree with you about Bishop Fellay – he appears to be very sincere and we should, indeed, pray that he is faithful to the will of God in these very difficult and troubled times.
At Menzingen the SSPX have prepared a nuclear bunker to shield the SSPX bishops and various clergy, in time of Thermo-nuclear war, which is likely to occur during the coming period of chastisement. Nations will be annihilated, as prophesied by Our Lady of Fatima. All the novus ordo bishops will die, having been frazzled and/or irradiated. Bishop Fellay will emerge from the ground and take his rightful place on the Throne of Saint Peter.
What time do you want us to wake you up, Mr Mitty?
NWOIC,
Gerragrip. I really think you need help. Whatever, I’m now realising that you need monitoring, so I’m putting you into moderation. That means, any posts which you submit, will sit in a file until I can be bothered reading them. This will happen only for a couple of days and if I find I have to edit your posts to make them suitable for publication, then you’ll be counted among the “disappeared”. Gerragrip or gerralost. That’s the deal.
NWOIC
The present tragedy unfolding in the Church and the world is not a matter for levity. Immortal souls are on the line, that’s not a cause for making jokes. You also mock the Mother of God, a very dangerous thing to do.
Bishop Fellay has the ‘world on his shoulders’ … I hope he can survive all the pressure. Poor Bishop Fellay. He must be physically exhausted. He is sincere and good. On the marriage thing, it seems that he is saying that the text can be read in two ways, and, the recepients of the Sacrament of Matrimony, need only ask to have a Society priest for a witness. Actually the bride and groom confer upon themselves the Sacrament with their consent.
The original CCC #1623 The Celebration of Marriage does not mention a ‘blessing’
The new CCC #1623 The Celebration of Marriage “for the validity of the sacrament a blessing”
I swear they added that into the newer catechism just in case they could pull it out for something like this. Bop the Society! I’m becoming more than cynical.
I appreciate that Bp. Fellay addressed the lie that the Society hasn’t said much about Amoris Laetiita(for which they assembled an entire folder of articles against: http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/amoris-laetitia-sspx). We see the Society’s charitable, prudent direction of working not just for themselves, but for the good of the Church first. It is entirely beneficial to allow the more orthodox prelates in the “official” Church to oppose these novelties at the very beginning, so as not to automatically handicap them with the “Lefebvrist” label.
Steven,
That’s exactly right and I was impressed with the Bishop’s prudence in pulling back to allow the four Cardinals to take the lead.
Having said that, there is – as you say – there is a solid SSPX correction to AL on the record.
More surprisingly good news about the SSPX – Pope Francis has given permission for the Society to ordain priests without permission of the local ordinary – see Rorate Caeli here (I know they have made mistakes in the past, but let’s hope this is not one of them!)
If the Society priests can hear confessions, officiate at marriages and ordain priests all with the Pope’s approval, what’s the problem? It’s a done deal – they cannot be in an irregular situation if these permissions are in place.
Comments are closed.