Bishop Fellay to meet with Cardinal Levada in September
#21
Remember a few months ago there was news that there was a big breakthrough in the SSPX negotiations? But, then it turned out to be a false alarm? Maybe there was a breakthrough, but it just took time to mesh everything out? 

I am still skeptical though and will be praying hard for this. 
Reply
#22
(08-21-2011, 04:27 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Remember a few months ago there was news that there was a big breakthrough in the SSPX negotiations? But, then it turned out to be a false alarm? Maybe there was a breakthrough, but it just took time to mesh everything out? 

I am still skeptical though and will be praying hard for this. 
I am wondering if the "false alarm" was really a test to see what the reaction from the modernists would be to any breakthroughs. The Holy Father has done this before with the instruction on SP and he has done it when reintroducing traditional practices. Remember the coat of arms that appeared at the angelus that featured a Triregnum? It appeared once and disappeared. Surely he has many gifts given to him that are never publicly shown. He tested the waters by having the new arms show to get the popular buzz about it. This was done as well with the fiddleback chasubles. The holy father wore one once for epiphany, then after some time to let the image get out, he started wearing them more often.
Reply
#23
To speculate for a moment, it  could very well be that the SSPX will take a "bad deal." I don't see the Holy Father admitting that any strong action will be taken to fight against the errors the Church has been marinated in since the Council. 

The Holy Father has stated that he should have taken steps to separate Williamson from the other 3 bishops.  Why would he abandon that strategy for any future dealings?

But that's not necessarily a bad thing. God has a way of turning men's own plans aroundon them.

Bishop Fellay and De Gallereta could accept canonical regularity and Bishop Williamson and Tissier de Mallerais consecrate new bishops and take a hefty percentage of SSPX priests with them. 

And the process continues of the SSPX gradually leavening the Church by forming good priests and feeding them back into the system outside of the grips of the modernists. 
Reply
#24
Well, I think the big deal here is who appoints Bishops for the SSPX to carry on their Society? If it's Rome then I would not take any deal. If Rome allows the SSPX to consecrate their own Bishops and gives them unconditional jurisdiction then if Bishop Williamson or any of the SSPX Bishops broke off I would officially call them protestants.

The SSPX can do a lot more good when they get full faculties and Catholics will have no reservations going to them for Mass and the other sacraments.

I will be praying and attempting to do some fasting as my diabetes allows for this meeting.

May God's will and not man's will be done.

Reply
#25
(08-21-2011, 10:59 PM)Petertherock Wrote: May God's will and not man's will be done.

Amen.  Pray
Reply
#26
(08-21-2011, 10:59 PM)Petertherock Wrote: Well, I think the big deal here is who appoints Bishops for the SSPX to carry on their Society? If it's Rome then I would not take any deal. If Rome allows the SSPX to consecrate their own Bishops and gives them unconditional jurisdiction then if Bishop Williamson or any of the SSPX Bishops broke off I would officially call them protestants.

The SSPX can do a lot more good when they get full faculties and Catholics will have no reservations going to them for Mass and the other sacraments.

I will be praying and attempting to do some fasting as my diabetes allows for this meeting.

May God's will and not man's will be done.

No way are they going to allow SSPX Bishops to consecrate their own bishops. 
Reply
#27
(08-21-2011, 11:05 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-21-2011, 10:59 PM)Petertherock Wrote: Well, I think the big deal here is who appoints Bishops for the SSPX to carry on their Society? If it's Rome then I would not take any deal. If Rome allows the SSPX to consecrate their own Bishops and gives them unconditional jurisdiction then if Bishop Williamson or any of the SSPX Bishops broke off I would officially call them protestants.

The SSPX can do a lot more good when they get full faculties and Catholics will have no reservations going to them for Mass and the other sacraments.

I will be praying and attempting to do some fasting as my diabetes allows for this meeting.

May God's will and not man's will be done.

No way are they going to allow SSPX Bishops to consecrate their own bishops. 


True. Can't imagine why anyone wouldn't trust the Curia to appoint bishops though.  Rolling eyes


~~~~~
The next five SSPX bishops...

Village People
Reply
#28
(08-21-2011, 10:59 PM)Petertherock Wrote: Well, I think the big deal here is who appoints Bishops for the SSPX to carry on their Society? If it's Rome then I would not take any deal. If Rome allows the SSPX to consecrate their own Bishops and gives them unconditional jurisdiction then if Bishop Williamson or any of the SSPX Bishops broke off I would officially call them protestants.
The SSPX can do a lot more good when they get full faculties and Catholics will have no reservations going to them for Mass and the other sacraments.
I will be praying and attempting to do some fasting as my diabetes allows for this meeting.
May God's will and not man's will be done.

The criteria for how you judge the SSPX should not be how sweet a deal the SSPX should accept, it should be the state of necessity in the Church.  If Rome allows the SSPX to function as it always has but with canonical faculties, that means nothing.  It is Rome that needs to do something about a problem that has it's source in Rome. 

The problems in the Church only grew when then SSPX was initially formed and had full canonical faculties.  All LeFebvre and the SSPX can ever do, or could ever do was provide a holding action in small places. 

The issue is not traditionalism per se,  it is not canonical regularity,  it's not even the TLM.  The issue is the failure of  Rome to sufficiently address the errors plagueing the Church, confirming the brethren in the whole truth of the Catholic faith and the failure to defend the faithful against the abuse within the clergy itself. 

The Holy Father could make the entire SSPX Cardinal-elector bishops but unless the "deal" contains concrete action to put the modernists and their errors out of the Church unambiguously,  it would a bad deal.  I would rather see concrete action and the dissolution of the SSPX  than the Zoo concept for traditionalists.

Reply
#29
(08-21-2011, 11:46 PM)Roger the Shrubber Wrote:
(08-21-2011, 11:05 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-21-2011, 10:59 PM)Petertherock Wrote: Well, I think the big deal here is who appoints Bishops for the SSPX to carry on their Society? If it's Rome then I would not take any deal. If Rome allows the SSPX to consecrate their own Bishops and gives them unconditional jurisdiction then if Bishop Williamson or any of the SSPX Bishops broke off I would officially call them protestants.

The SSPX can do a lot more good when they get full faculties and Catholics will have no reservations going to them for Mass and the other sacraments.

I will be praying and attempting to do some fasting as my diabetes allows for this meeting.

May God's will and not man's will be done.

No way are they going to allow SSPX Bishops to consecrate their own bishops. 


True. Can't imagine why anyone wouldn't trust the Curia to appoint bishops though.   Rolling eyes


~~~~~
The next five SSPX bishops...

Village People

They don't really need bishops. As long as they have a deal that someone will ordain their clergy they don't really need bishops.  Could also be one of those things where the elected head of the society isn't guaranteed to be made a bishop but usually is. 
Reply
#30
(08-21-2011, 11:05 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(08-21-2011, 10:59 PM)Petertherock Wrote: Well, I think the big deal here is who appoints Bishops for the SSPX to carry on their Society? If it's Rome then I would not take any deal. If Rome allows the SSPX to consecrate their own Bishops and gives them unconditional jurisdiction then if Bishop Williamson or any of the SSPX Bishops broke off I would officially call them protestants.

The SSPX can do a lot more good when they get full faculties and Catholics will have no reservations going to them for Mass and the other sacraments.

I will be praying and attempting to do some fasting as my diabetes allows for this meeting.

May God's will and not man's will be done.

No way are they going to allow SSPX Bishops to consecrate their own bishops. 

Why not? They have four bishops, and the ceremony only takes three. Why fly in three Novus Ordo bishops (who probably have a lot of other things to do, not to mention their lack of expertise at celebrating the traditional rites) and have them perform a ceremony that all of the SSPX bishops would be attending anyway?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)