Rorate Caeli

Events


Five new priests were ordained for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) today, in Wigratzbad, Bavaria, by Bishop Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary of Karaganda (Kazakhstan). Pictures available at Schola Sainte Cécile.

Congratulations to the new priests, their families, and the Fraternity!

40 comments:

New Catholic said...

Congratulations also to the priests ordained in Zaitzkofen, Bavaria, for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X. Yes, yes, we all know that the Fraternity is still in an imperfect situation, but this is a moment of joy for the new priests and for their families.

If you have a link to pictures of the Zaitzkofen ordinations, please post it here.

NC

Paul Haley said...

Yes, yes, we all know that the Fraternity is still in an imperfect situation, but this is a moment of joy for the new priests and for their families.

And this imperfect situation continues despite the supreme law of the Church - the salvation of souls. I find it inconceivable that the Holy Father allows this situation to continue after remitting the excommunications. Again, I must ask the Holy Father with all due respect: what crime are the FSSPX ordinands guilty of?

Mornac said...

Lots o' photos here: http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/index.php?option=com_phocagallery&view=category&id=847&Itemid=48

Peter Haddad said...

Who is this OTHER BISHOP???? Note Fellay.... but the other one??????


http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/images/phocagallery/Weihen/2009/priesterweihe_ztkf_09/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_0012.jpg

Gideon Ertner said...

Deo gratias!

Congratulations to the priests and to their coming flocks!

Te Deum laudamus...

Joe B said...

I just wonder what added joy being ordained by the head bishop of one's own order would bring, and it saddens me every time I see these FSSP priests without a bishop of their own order, even after all these years of faithful service. No bishop of their own to stand toe to toe with the other bishops they must serve on a daily basis. Why are they still treated this way?

I guess we all know the answer to that one - because they are unwelcome adoptees.

May God bless them all, and the Holy Father, with heroic sanctity. We love you, FSSP.

smarty said...

We can certainly-and should-pray for the SSPX and anyone else separated from Vatican for any reason.This has been considered a "grave matter" by one of our recent Popes, but I do feel that Lefebvre was a good man and did what he felt was the right thing to do in the wake of Vatican II.

Of course a lot of Protestants have had good intentions in separating from us even if their churches are a lot different from the Roman Catholic church than the Lefebvrites. I don't expect total Christian unity to take place until all Christians are in Heaven, but we can certainly pray for the SSPX.

I've been attending a Mass said by an FSSP priest since February. I also attended an SSPX Mass over 30 years ago. I think these Masses are beautiful and I'm glad that our Bishop arranged for an FSSP to say Mass in our diocese. I found out our Bishop ordained the FSSP himself.

We can pray that an FSSP becomes a bishop. It's my understanding that most bishops are diocesan priests, but a few of them are members of religious communities. In fact we use to have an auxiliary bishop who was a Holy Cross priest in our diocese.

Our FSSP explained to me that he was sort of between being a diocesan and a religious priest. He said he only had to say one vow, not all 3 like the religious. I don't see why there can't be an FSSP bishop. Maybe it just hasn't happened yet.

Anonymous said...

Peter Haddad: Who is this OTHER BISHOP???? Note Fellay.... but the other one??????


http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/images/phocagallery/Weihen/2009/priesterweihe_ztkf_09/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_0012.jpg


It's not a SSPX bishop! Who's that? But it looks like did not take part in the ceremony.

FSSP had to look for a bishop in Kazakhstan? Are there no local bishops or what?

Peter said...

http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/index.php?option=com_phocagallery&view=category&id=850&Itemid=72

Beautiful!!!! Te Deum laudamus!!! Bishop Müller probably had very bad sleep today.

Anonymous said...

Joe B
Maybe in time there will be Bishops drawn from the 'ranks' of the FSSP. I would view the present 'lack' of one as non-problematic. Working within the Church and with HER other non-liberal newer orders have served well under secular Bishops - I think here e.g. of Opus Dei, Franciscans of the Immaculate, Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, SOLT etc. The former now do have some raised to the Episcopocy. I am no expert on this but think that a long look back into Church history will show that new orders founded by those later canonised often followed such a pattern and not the model your comment suggests of straight into a structure centered around a Bishop of their own order.

Anonymous said...

Either FSSP or FSSPX would be most welcome in my Gobi-desert like liturgical environment. These priests bring more than just liturgical sanity, they are Catholic identity in a Protestant or worse, secular, aspiritual mileu.

Peter said...

The preservers of the Catholic doctrine are incomparable to the Protestants.

The "Lefebrites", as you call them by this derogatory term, have always been in the Roman Catholic Church. There's no "Lefebrite church", nor ever was. They were far less "separated" in the worst times than the German or French bishops are now.

It's the influential group of leftists, liberals and modernists who have denied communion with SSPX, not the SSPX who has denied communion to anybody.

SSPX never broke communion with the Pope, nor with the Catholic Church, and had never an intention to break, as it would be totally pointless.

The beauty of the liturgy is of lesser concern to me. It is true that NOM was designed to be ugly and harsh (or at least to avoid beauty as much as possible), but even the most sophisticated form of the Roman Rite (well, maybe except for the Papal Masses and their specific elements before the devastation instituted by Paul VI) will never be as beautiful and touching as the Byzantine Divine Liturgy.

LeonG said...

I congratulate FSSP.

However, 21 SSPX to 5 FSSP in spite of their indult status has a very significant message to give to the observer of events. Compromise with the conciliarist process has its own costs. One factor demonstrates that the indultarian attempt to eliminate SSPX has failed.

FSSP cannot have it both ways and grow and develop more impressively unless it defends more clearly the need to celebrate The Latin mass of All Times.

Anonymous said...

Whoever this bishop is, he definitely took part in the ceremony.

http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/images/phocagallery/Weihen/2009/priesterweihe_ztkf_09/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_dsc_0044-1.jpg

See him with his right raised (the rightmost man on the lower level). So he blessed the newly ordained priests.

Anonymous said...

I find it very unedifying to see that a congratulatory article for the fact that the Church now has more priests has turned into nothing but the old rants with very little charity. Can't you people just be grateful for once?

Long-Skirts said...

More truly Good Shepherds!! Deo Gratias!!!

HOW MANY SEASONS

How many seasons
Have come and gone.
Many a sunset,
Many a dawn.

Many communions,
Many processions,
Many a sin, I have
For confessions.

How many seasons,
A second in time,
Where anguished, we wait,
No reason or rhyme.

Fish live in water,
In water, comply.
Time, we are biding,
Or too fast…goes by.

We do not relish
Our world like the fish
Who swims in his pond
While we pray and we wish.

How many seasons
Will time be our friend?
When we realize we’re made
For the world without end!

Oliver said...

The FSSP of course is just an attempt at a mirror image of the SSPX and it will be contained strictly within the walls of the new order. Merely a liturgical smoke-screen, it lacks the sharp edge of traditionalism with its theological and doctrinal grounding. The SSPX receives its innate power by being outside the modernist church. Pray that it stays that way.

Anonymous said...

"The beauty of the liturgy is of lesser concern to me. It is true that NOM was designed to be ugly and harsh (or at least to avoid beauty as much as possible), but even the most sophisticated form of the Roman Rite (well, maybe except for the Papal Masses and their specific elements before the devastation instituted by Paul VI) will never be as beautiful and touching as the Byzantine Divine Liturgy."

The NOM (Novus Ordo Missae of Paul VI), was designed as we all know by the infamous Archbishop Anibale Bugnini and his cohorts, a gang of radical modernists, ecumenists, and also Protestants. Together, they concoccted the Novus Ordo.
To their credit, the Synod of Bishops meeting in Rome in 1967 rejected it upon watching a preliminry celebration on it. Some even called it "non-Catholic". Paul VI to his discredit, after afew tweeks of the Novus Ordo, approved it.
Not many people know, but the Novus Ordo presented to the Bishops at the Synod of 1967, was even MORE Protestant looking and sounding than what we finally got in 1969!! Some last minute adjustments were made to satisfy some Bishops and Papal concerns. But if there had been no complain or concerns, the Novus Ordo as originally shown was much more Protestant in outlook (if that's possible).
The NOM was designed to be ugly, bare, sparce, plain, because that is what the typical Lutheran, Anglican, Methodist etc. service is. The reason for the NOM in the first place was to appeal to Protestants. Thus, it had to look, feel, and sound Protestant. And it does. Some modern parish Churches look in the inside 100% Protestant. Lutheran, Episcopalian, or Methodist. Eeven Baptist (and that's going very far from our Catholic tradition).

The Byzantine Liturgy is beautiful.
But there is nothing taht can surpass a solemn Pontifical High Mass in the Tridentine Rite celebrated with the accompaniment of Baroque choir and brass. Palestrina and Monteverdi etc.
Or one of the Masses by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

Regarding FSSP and bishops:

I still recall many discussions over the Internet and in Catholic Traditionalist publications regarding "Protocol 1411" nearly a decade ago, and I distinctly remember the question of the elevation of FSSP members to the episcopacy being tied to their willingness to celebrate the Novus Ordo. This is not a dead issue: keep in mind that, last year, Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos once again tried to persuade the FSSP to at least concelebrate during the Chrism masses in their respective dioceses. Camille Perl, who is the one who really runs the show in PCED, is known to have advocated that the FSSP should turn biritual.

To put it mildly, Rome is not, apparently, comfortable with elevating a priest who is not willing to offer the NOM.

Even Bishop Rifan has concelebrated the Novus Ordo several times. On the other hand, the ICRSP seems to have moved away from biritualism after having practiced this in the 1990's in some French parishes.

If the Universal Apostolic Administration is not forthcoming (knock on wood!), I would like to see Rome at least appoint "ordaining bishops" who will offer the TLM exclusively, ordain priests for the Trad congregations, and who will go around the world conferring the sacraments and presiding over important ceremonies for Trad communities, just as Rome used to appoint a Greek Catholic "ordaining bishop" whose sole task was to reside in Rome and ordain the Greek Catholic seminarians there.

If you've noticed, though, the FSSP already has, in Archbishop Wolfgang Haas of Vaduz, a sort-of "ordaining prelate" as he is the one who frequently presides over first tonsure, minor order and subdiaconal ordinations in FSSP Europe. In the USA it's Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, whom the Trad movement seems to have forgotten.

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

"It's not a SSPX bishop! Who's that? But it looks like did not take part in the ceremony."

Are we sure that he's not a cathedral canon of some sort? Some European cathedral canons dress almost exactly like bishops.

Anonymous said...

I don't think that's a canon. I'm not aware that there are any chapters that have a purple mozzetta and biretta, nor does that look like the kind of pectoral cross that canons usually wear. Curiously, he's not wearing a bishop's choir cassock, but neither is Bishop Fellay, for some reason.

Could it be Bishop Koch of Basle, whose recent comments about the Council were mentioned by Fr, Zuhlsdorf? It's difficult to tell from the photographs.

In any event, for any non-SSPX bishop to have assisted at these ordinations is remarkable. And this bishop certainly did participate in the ceremony. Other photographs show him sitting in choir, and this one clearly shows him in stole with raised hand, having obviously just laid hands on the ordinands: http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/images/phocagallery/Weihen/2009/priesterweihe_ztkf_09/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_dsc_0044-1.jpg

Perhaps this gives some credence to the idea of tacit approval by the Holy See for the ordinations to go ahead. Has anyone heard further comments from the German bishops since the ordinations took place, incidentally?

Peter said...

"It's not a SSPX bishop! Who's that? But it looks like did not take part in the ceremony."

Are we sure that he's not a cathedral canon of some sort? Some European cathedral canons dress almost exactly like bishops.


He may also be a honorary canon. But since SSPX has (probably) no canons I think he must be some official clergyman welcomed by the SSPX, in good standing with Rome. Or maybe even with German bishops?

But why he has found himself there?

Anonymous said...

Congratulations to the FSSP and FSSPX.

Feast of St. Peter and St. Paul Monday, June 29

A special day for the FSSP.

I pray the Holy Father would speak in favor for all the traditional orders.

Doppili

LeonG said...

"Even Bishop Rifan has concelebrated the Novus Ordo several times..."

This implies it is exemplary behaviour which is a contestable position.

LeonG said...

Peter there is nothing wrong at all with SSPX. The Confraternity has absolutely nothing to reproach itself for: the fact John Paul II (RIP) caved in to episcopal pressures not to make necessary concessions to the traditionalists speaks like a mighty wind. The fact the NO is an embarrassing shambles and most often un-Catholic, especially in its basic conception of liturgical protestantisation then it is Rome which should be apologising to the faithful for having undermined their faith in and through the modernist liturgical rite.

All considerations being taken into account, SSPX are being very noble and maintaining immense integrity notwithstanding.

Picard said...

I know, a little bit of topic, but I would like to correct

PKTP

in a little thing (but I think You, Mr. PKTP, will be happy for this correction because it promotes Your own argument [see discussion to Schmidberger-Interview!])

So, an a.a. (under c. 371) is NOT (per se) provisional/temporary.

You seemed to have confused it with the bodies mentioned in c. 371, § 1. There you have the "NOT YET constituted as diocese - in dioecesim NONDUM constituta" - but these are NO a.a.´s but in §1 it is only dealt with so called apostolic vicariates and prefectures.

Only § 2 deals with a.a.´s - and does NOT have the NONDUM but simply says: in dioecesim NON erigitur.

So it is NOT temporary/provisional [per se] - in contrary to the bodies mentioned in § 1!!

So Parmenides (see discussion of the Schidberger-Interview) is totaly wrong (re a.a. as "temporary by definition") - and You were right in essence but also wrong in quoting § 1 (that realy speaks about only temporary constitution/errection) - because it does NOT deal with a.a.´s. at all!

But McF: PKTP has shown with many quotations that a a.a. or something like that was really offered by Rome - as Bf. Fellay himself (quoted by PKTP) confirmed (see quotes by PKTP [Schmidberger-Interview]!!!).
So no doubt on that.

(Well, and I for my own know from a well-informed source - but no, I am not allowed to name the source - that it really was this offering by/ from Rome - at least untill this year...)

Anonymous said...

Bishop Fellay spoke about Rome sending observers,perhaps the mystery man is that 'observeror' and participant as well.

St. Peter and Paul pray for the regularization of the FSSPX and a good bishop for the FSSP.

Safbe

Picard said...

"It's not a SSPX bishop! Who's that? But it looks like did not take part in the ceremony."

Are we sure that he's not a cathedral canon of some sort? Some European cathedral canons dress almost exactly like bishops.

He may also be a honorary canon. But since SSPX has (probably) no canons I think he must be some official clergyman welcomed by the SSPX, in good standing with Rome."


Well, as I am informed (again by a well-informed source) it was [definitely] no bishop but a franciscan-friar from Croatia and [not definitely, but probably] some sort of honorary-canon or something like that (or perhaps more than that -- but I am not sure on that).

Philomena said...

Congratulations to all the priests ordained in Germany by the Fraternity of St Peter. Best wishes for a happy Feast Day to all FSSP priests for Monday.
Thank you for all the pictures.

Hestor said...

Even Bishop Rifan has concelebrated the Novus Ordo several times. On the other hand, the ICRSP seems to have moved away from biritualism after having practiced this in the 1990's in some French parishes.

Are you sure this is absolutely true ? - I have heard from French speaking Catholics that there are at least two ICKSP priests who concelebrate in two French dioceses to this day. I find it strange that Rome would turn a blind eye to the ICKSP but then come down like a ton of bricks on the FSSP.

The FSSP are good but the one thing that has hampered them is the fact they are controlled by Rome. Other than that, I find them more zealous in promoting traditional Catholicism than the ICKSP, who a lot of people accuse of being only concerned about upholding expensive liturgical tastes.

Anonymous said...

The unknown "bishop" does not seem to have a zuchetto. Why is he wearing a stole and Bishop Fellay is not?

Carlos Antonio Palad said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Carlos Antonio Palad said...

"...but even the most sophisticated form of the Roman Rite (well, maybe except for the Papal Masses and their specific elements before the devastation instituted by Paul VI) will never be as beautiful and touching as the Byzantine Divine Liturgy."


"The Byzantine Liturgy is beautiful.But there is nothing taht can surpass a solemn Pontifical High Mass in the Tridentine Rite celebrated with the accompaniment of Baroque choir and brass. Palestrina and Monteverdi etc.
Or one of the Masses by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart."

Both the Byzantine Divine Liturgy and the Mass of the Classical Roman Rite are irreplaceable expressions of the faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Please stop these silly comparisons.

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

Even Bishop Rifan has concelebrated the Novus Ordo several times..."

LEONG: This implies it is exemplary behaviour which is a contestable position."

Leong:

You never cease to amaze me with your capacity to read things in a malicious and fanciful way.

Anonymous said...

I hadn't noticed the absence of the zuchetto on the unknown prelate before. Perhaps he is a vicar or prefect apostolic. This would be consistent with Picard's information. Perhaps it would also explain why he wasn't wearing a bishop's choir cassock, but was wearing other elements of a bishop's choir dress.

Why Bishop Fellay wasn't wearing a stole when he laid hands on the new priests I have no idea. An oversight? But why was HE not wearing a choir cassock? Some gesture of humility, perhaps?

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

"But why was HE not wearing a choir cassock? Some gesture of humility, perhaps?"


When the late Bishop Salvador Lazo attended SSPX ordinations in Econe he was dressed the same way.

Anonymous said...

The "bishop" who attended this year's ordinations at Zaitzkofen (and also last year's, by the way) has been identified by someone as a Franciscan and cathedral canon of the Byzantine diocese of Krizevci, Croatia. This diocese is said to have had good connections to the SSPX for years.

This is what I read on a German forum: http://kreuzgang.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=9094&start=1328

Peter said...

"The "bishop" who attended this year's ordinations at Zaitzkofen (and also last year's, by the way) has been identified by someone as a Franciscan and cathedral canon of the Byzantine diocese of Krizevci, Croatia. This diocese is said to have had good connections to the SSPX for years."

But Križevci is a Byzantine Rite diocese. I don't know how Byzantine canons look like, but I suppose they look more like Byzantines than Romans, which is not the case. They also did not provide name of that man, nor any other pictures from the Križevci eparchy to support this claim. Also, I have never heard about Croatian clergy friendly towards the SSPX. As far as I know the SSPX is not present in Croatia. So it looks dubious.

Anonymous said...

Whoever this man is it looks like he did take part also in the 2008 ordinations.

http://www.piusbruderschaft.de/images/phocagallery/Weihen/2008/img1215076972/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_1215076875-4.jpg

Which probably means that he's not an observer from Rome.

Florestan said...

I asked a friend who attended the ordinations in Zaitzkofen about the mysterious Bishop. He in turn had asked other people while at the seminary, and the answers ranged from Serbia / Croatia to "some ex-Yugoslav country".