A new course for the SSPX
#1
[Image: CQZsHZL.png]

The latest Reign of Mary article gives the reader a clearer vision of the SSPX milieu: justifying the Econe consecrations, criticising mis-steps under Bishop Fellay, and offering suggestions for the Society's future and its relations with the Resistance. Don't miss this interesting and informative article!

"Generating a stir in traditional circles, Reign of Mary seeks to confront false traditionalism and help re-establish a truly Christian civilisation."

Twitter - @reignofmary1
Discord - https://discord.gg/hzmwZxC
Reply
#2
It bothers me when the SSPX people get all high and mighty about "wishy-washy" and "pseudo" traditionalists. Give me a break. But best wishes for the Society, none-the-less. I hope all goes well in the days ahead.
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
[-] The following 2 users Like JacafamalaRedux's post:
  • Some Guy, The Tax Collector
Reply
#3
I'm confused. If SSPX isnt schismatic, how do you propose that the FSSP is then?
[-] The following 2 users Like HeadRusch's post:
  • jovan66102, Melkite
Reply
#4
I feel that the comments on the forums allied to the so-called SSPX Resistance are most unfavorable to the new SSPX SG. Perhaps they no longer trust anything about the organisation given Bishop Fellay's long tenure as the boss during which the talks with Rome were on and off all the time
Reply
#5
FE forums isn't a place to advertise one's own site or link people to content elsewhere. It's a place of discussion about various issues.

Part of the way the forum keeps afloat is by ad revenue, meager as that is, and throwing out free advertising is not really what we're about here.

The rules are pretty clear about this : 


Quote:2. Don't just post URLs with no summaries, no effort at explaining what the URLs link to. Preferred is the posting of entire articles (or, if they're extremely long, their relevant parts) -- and especially preferred is the posting of articles accompanied by some of your own commentary. It makes things much more interesting and stimulates responses! And please cite sources! 

If you think we may be interested in reading an article even on another site, then post it here, so we can discuss it here. If it is long and you want to avoid taking up a huge swath of screen space, then post some significant relevant chunks with the link to the whole thing.

This has the double benefit of generating traffic to your site and allow us to discuss.

Having read the article, however, it effectively says nothing meaningful.

Any article that suggests Msgr Williamson should be "restorted to his rightful place" when he openly called for the deposition of his superior and disobedience of Society members to the superior, and consistently refused legitimate orders from them, is not worthy of the paper (or pixels) on which it's written, since it clearly has no connection with reality and Christian Virtue.
[-] The following 3 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • Dominicus, Florus, jovan66102
Reply
#6
(07-17-2018, 07:37 AM)Jacafamala Wrote: It bothers me when the SSPX people get all high and mighty about "wishy-washy" and "pseudo" traditionalists. Give me a break. But best wishes for the Society, none-the-less. I hope all goes well in the days ahead.

The author of that article is clearly not an SSPX "person", so I wouldn't attribute such words to the Society.

As above, the author thinks that Msgr Williamson has a "rightful place" in a group he's been condemning as liberal (despite in a 2015 conference both calling the Novus Ordo intrisically evil and harmful, but suggesting it's fine for people to attend the Novus Ordo and can even build one's Faith).

Grain of Salt with this one.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#7
You totally misunderstood my post. Advertising is not the issue here. The issue is that the SSPX has mistreated Bp. Williamson. Do you deny this?
Reply
#8
(07-17-2018, 07:57 PM)Mark Williams Wrote: You totally misunderstood my post. Advertising is not the issue here. The issue is that the SSPX has mistreated Bp. Williamson. Do you deny this?

Well you did post a non-descript link without the text that we could discuss here, meaning if we wanted to discuss it, we had to visit that site, and thus bump their ad revenue, while using this free platform as the means to do so.

As regards your question : Yes, nego simpliciter.

A member of a religious society who goes on public record calling for the illicit deposition of his major superior is arguably a canonical crime, not only a serious public sin. Punishment is only fitting for such. 

A fitting canonical remedy is to warn the person to retract their comments and make restitution publicly, then face some penance to repair. If recalcitrant, then to expel such a person from their congregation is a necessary fitting penalty. That is what happened in the case of Msgr Williamson.

If a member of a religious society refuses to follow the rules of the society as regards communications, by running a public circular letter or blog which is prohibited, then he is also guilty of a canonical crime and justly punished. If he refuses the punishment and the correction, and is recalcitrant in ending this violation of the rules, he is justly punished by expulsion. This also happened with Msgr Williamson who had, since his removal as seminary Rector continued a public circular letter/blog, which was prohibited by the SSPX rules which he approved as a member of the 2006 General Chapter which issued such rules and confirmed previous rules made by the Superior General and his General Council during the 1990s.

This was a canonical crime because Canon Law demands that members of a religious institute have approval for what they publicly publish. It was this public letter, among other venues, in which he called for the illicit deposition of the Superior General (which the 2012 "Business Chapter" from which he was excluded for his crimes, did not have standing to change).

That is not mistreatment. If anything the superiors of the SSPX erred in allowing Msgr Williamson such latitude and not clamping down on his insubordination and criminal actions previously.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#9
(07-17-2018, 01:24 AM)Mark Williams Wrote:
[Image: CQZsHZL.png]

The latest Reign of Mary article gives the reader a clearer vision of the SSPX milieu: justifying the Econe consecrations, criticising mis-steps under Bishop Fellay, and offering suggestions for the Society's future and its relations with the Resistance. Don't miss this interesting and informative article!

"Generating a stir in traditional circles, Reign of Mary seeks to confront false traditionalism and help re-establish a truly Christian civilisation."

Twitter - @reignofmary1
Discord - https://discord.gg/hzmwZxC

Please quit advertising your blog here. If your going to post your articles then at least talk about them instead of blatant advertising.

I honestly doubt anyone here is going to be pulled into reading it by saying stuff like "Don't miss this interesting and informative article!". If anything it just makes you sound rather conceited.
Surréxit Dóminus vere, Alleluia!
[-] The following 1 user Likes Dominicus's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#10
I pray every day for a reconciliation between the SSPX and the Holy See.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)