Criticize Fellay and be DENIED communion??
#11
1983 Canon 220 Wrote:No one is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy.
The commentary on this says:
Quote:The canon protects one's reputation from illegitimate harm. … To protect the common good (see c. 223) and the Church itself, individuals may act, even though they might thereby damage someone's reputation. The motivating force of such an action should be a desire to protect another value, for example, the good reputation of the Church or of other individuals and not to ruin one person's reputation; … the code presents various options to safeguard reputations and to ensure that penalties are inflicted only as a last resort.
Did Bp. Fellay invoke less severe penalties first?
Reply
#12
(10-20-2012, 03:55 AM)Geremia Wrote:
1983 Canon 220 Wrote:No one is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy.
The commentary on this says:
Quote:The canon protects one's reputation from illegitimate harm. … To protect the common good (see c. 223) and the Church itself, individuals may act, even though they might thereby damage someone's reputation. The motivating force of such an action should be a desire to protect another value, for example, the good reputation of the Church or of other individuals ad not to ruin one person's reputation; … the code presents various options to safeguard reputations and to ensure that penalties are inflicted only as a last resort.
Did Bp. Fellay invoke less severe penalties first?

Makes no never mind. Unless a person falls under one of the punishments outlined in Canon 1364-1398, he cannot be denied Communion.
Reply
#13
Mmmm.
But can anyone say for sure that it is an official edict of some sort from +F and not a Chinese whisper going around which is intended to make poor ole +Bernie look worse than he is?
Reply
#14
(10-20-2012, 04:35 AM)Oldavid Wrote: Mmmm.
But can anyone say for sure that it is an official edict of some sort from +F and not a Chinese whisper going around which is intended to make poor ole +Bernie look worse than he is?

There's a thought!
Reply
#15
The later posts in that thread at IA are serious and looks and also curious to me. Does anyone know what this refers to? Who is Dawn Marie?

"
QUOTE (PATRICIUS @ Oct 19 2012, 11:55 PM)



Another important announcement:

I'm closing Ignis Ardens, permanently. None of this is good for my health and the news that Dawn Marie is the visionary is just proof to me that the Society has gone nuts.

I'll give it a week or two, then it's curtains.

This is nothing to do with Menzingen or the District Superior. It's my decision, not theirs.

I'd like to thank members past and present for all their contributions.

PATRICIUS. "

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=11056&st=225

C.
Reply
#16
(10-20-2012, 03:22 AM)Geremia Wrote: Towards the end of his 2 hour Adelaide speech this past June, he basically said that the internet is awful. If he lived in Gutenberg's era, he would've said the printing press is awful!

Come on, Bp. Fellay, stop being so obscurantist! It's only hurting the SSPX's relations to its faithful.

I disagree with you here, Geremia. I think in context he was suggesting that the Internet was/is horrible during the talks. The troublemakers, who by far make the most noise, take over the Internet forums with their propaganda and many who read them innocently are deceived. If +Fellay indeed wants to shut down the forums, I understand completely his reasoning. Just look at CathInfo now, and how Ignis Ardens was 4 weeks ago.
Reply
#17
I have been shocked by some of the comments I've seen about Bishop Fellay lately.  The level of disrespect has appalled me.  I'm trying to ignore all the rumours but I have been praying for him for ages and continue to do so.
Reply
#18
I don't see how they are any more or less appaling than calling Williamson a holocaust denier.  Much depends on whether the rumors are true or not.

I have never been of the opinion that Fellay was going to sell out to Rome. I always thought he would consider any deal on its merits and on whether it seeme d likely that Rome genuinely wanted a fair relationship and for Tradition to be restored.

The secret doctrinal preamble was a massive error however which created an environment where distrust and rumor could thrive.  Williamson gets modern communications and produces a blog and videos. Fellay behaves like a secretive Swiss banker and nowadays that won't wash with people.

Apologies for the lack of titles I am on a smart phone on a runway.
Reply
#19
(10-20-2012, 10:22 AM)ggreg Wrote: I don't see how they are any more or less appaling than calling Williamson a holocaust denier.  Much depends on whether the rumors are true or not.

Yes, or a hand-grenade, or a piece of uranium.

Quote:I have never been of the opinion that Fellay was going to sell out to Rome.

To me, it always depends on what is meant by "sell out to Rome."  Apparently one man's "sell-out" is another man's "no-strings-attached" deal.  (not speaking of you here, ggreg)

Quote: I always thought he would consider any deal on its merits and on whether it seemed likely that Rome genuinely wanted a fair relationship and for Tradition to be restored.

From all evidence, he was ready to make a deal with a "Rome" that still holds abominable Assisi gatherings (now including atheists), a Pope who praises Martin Luther and thinks "The Second Vatican Council is a true sign of God, a deal where future SSPX works may be possible only with the permission of the modernist bishop in diocese.  (In other words, a Rome that obviously did not want Tradition to be restored.)  The only thing that stopped him was when the Pope made it a requirement that they actually "agree to Vatican II." 

Quote:The secret doctrinal preamble was a massive error however which created an environment where distrust and rumor could thrive.   Fellay behaves like a secretive Swiss banker and nowadays that won't wash with people.

Exactly.
Reply
#20
(10-20-2012, 05:47 AM)Cetil Wrote: The later posts in that thread at IA are serious and looks and also curious to me. Does anyone know what this refers to? Who is Dawn Marie?

"
QUOTE (PATRICIUS @ Oct 19 2012, 11:55 PM)



Another important announcement:

I'm closing Ignis Ardens, permanently. None of this is good for my health and the news that Dawn Marie is the visionary is just proof to me that the Society has gone nuts.

I'll give it a week or two, then it's curtains.

This is nothing to do with Menzingen or the District Superior. It's my decision, not theirs.

I'd like to thank members past and present for all their contributions.

PATRICIUS. "

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=11056&st=225

C.

That's a shame, IA had some very interesting and unique posts, what's all this about a visionary though? And why close a forum over it?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)