Does Fellay in fact risk being deposed?
Let the games begin!
No, Mr. Arseno.
Rome is still too enamoured with ecumenism for the SSPX to help the situation, it seems they (the Vatican) are on a self-destructive path. They refuse to admit that they erred big time in making reforms to the faith and liturgy instead of reforming the lives of the Bishops, Priests and Laity. I'm an FSSP attendee so i have no bias towards the SSPX but figures don't lie but liars figure, all indications show the collasol failure of the Vatican 2 era. Those who criticize the SSPX should remember it has not been the SSPX which distorted doctrine and has been involved in the sexual scandals.
¡¿The source is Virgo-Maria.org?! It´s a kind of ´flat earth society´Sensationalism in the `catholic´ media, regarding the SSPX, is nothing new.
see what this site (italian versione) says about Tornielli.http://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.com/2011/12/santa-sede-fsspx-tornielli-e-le-sue.html
Bishop Fellay does not risk being deposed.
The SSPX said all along that they expected that the doctrinal discussion would take a long time. I was a little shocked when I heard that the Vatican had already given a document in preparation for canonical regularity without issuing doctrinal clarifications. Such an action would not be illegitimate of itself, but given all the dialogue of the last few years, it really struck me as being too much too quickly. It seemed that it would not be a good means to the desired end.At least, it appears, the SSPX may have avoided a direct refusal of the proposition. This is good, because the rumors of its content suggested that it consisted in things which oblige every Catholic. A direct refusal could have been interpreted as schismatic.May God still grant a solution in the years to come.
"Ma il sito è noto per aver dato, in altre occasioni, informazioni senza fondamento."Boy, I'll say!Around here, we've had lots of fun reading aloud some of its more breathless announcements. Particularly enjoyable several years ago was the string of ritual incantations that surrounded any mention of the name of "Eveque de la Rose Williamson."
The Vatican is surprised that Bishop Fellay would "... ask for clarifications and eventual modifications ...".I am suprised at their surprise.M. Tornielli appears to have been desperate for news if he was trolling the sede newsletters.Joyeux Noel et une bonne et sainte annee et la paradis a la fin de tes jours M. Arseno et tous le monde!('scuse ma mauvais francais!)
Technically there are no big news...We already knew that the FSSPX had in mind to ask for clarification since Msgr. Fellay interview of Nov. 28th. This was then confirmed by Msgr. Fellay in his homily of Dec 8th. I believe that the document was already delivered when Msgr. Fellay pronounced his homily. In fact today Father Lombardi confirmed that the Vatican received some days ago the letter of Msgr. Fellay asking for clarifications.Virgo-maria bullshits are completely fake!Said this we have today one good news: the FSSPX didn't reject the offer of the Pope. They just asked for some clarification.
So I guess the Holy Father has acknowledged the Society has supplied faculties for confessions and marriages, since there is no word that they are still neeeded for valid sacraments.
We must keep in mind that, in addition to the Preamble's response, the Holy See has in its hands a summation of the Society's position. Such a dcoument can also be the basis of a declaration on the status or position of the S.S.P.X.The Pope's health, according to many is declining, and he's 84½ years old. John Paul II signed the decree of erection for the Campos Apostolic Administrtion on Christmas Eve, 2001. That's exactly ten years ago from this coming Saturday. Some thoughts.P.K.T.P.
I'll bet it elicited some surprise in the Vatican and rightly so IMO. You see, folks, there is a chasm of disagreement between the two based on modernist interpretations of the Faith existent since Vatican II - the seeds of which were sown long before that.I'm glad the clarifications were requested by Bishop Fellay even though it prolongs the discussion between the FSSPX and the Vatican. The only bad part IMO is that the Holy See has thus far withheld the granting publicly of canonical jurisdiction and faculties to the FSSPX and, by extension, to many traditional enclaves throughout the world. To me, that just adds to the injustice of the situation when many of those who have jurisdiction and faculties are openly heretical and disobedient. Pray, then, that the holy father will take the bull by the horns and by his own hand grant jurisdiction and faculties without any further delay.
Can someone explain what is meant by "it consists in 'documentation' not a response"? I don't grasp what this is telling us. I take it that what Fellay and the SSPX sent in response wasn't something along the lines, "Dear sirs, we can't accept" but rather they must have sent back the preamble with annotations pointing out what they object to and citations for why. Is that a reasonable conclusion?
The idea that is just "documentation" and not an answer is a misunderstanding of the journalist, that - beside the judgement that this is a non-answer, affirmed that the CDF was waiting for positive or negative answer or for a request for clarification. From what I understand is a request of clarification supported by some documents.
Instead of banishing +Williamson to Outer Siberia, or like ++Bugnini to Iran, he was banished to the UK where he, and his acolytes, plot against +Fellay. They have transferred a 'Wee Free' American equivalent ['Post Falls Catholicism'] to The Province.
It's a conspiracy all right - of Dr. Tornielli's making! Last year on Christmas Day he wrote an article, inventing a new label "tradiprotestante" ... and this is more of the same superficiality, for his own biased reasons - is it lack of discernment or something else? One thing for sure, it is evident that he REALLY loves the FSSPX...Happy Christmas , Dr. Tornielli! No hard feelings - but have you ever considered that you might be missing the mark with these type of articles?
Post a Comment