Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Bishop Fellay Says Talks Will Continue With Rome and Requests 50,000,000 Acts of Penance

(Zaitzkofen) The Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X confirmed last Saturday that the talks with Rome are to continue, and announced a new Rosary crusade. It should serve the spiritual preparation for the centennial commemoration of the apparitions of Fatima in 1917, which will take place in the coming year.
The Rosary Crusade was announced at the ordinations in Zaitzkofen. It will be held until August 22, 2017 from 15 August 2016th
The prayer of the Rosary should be connected to acts of penance. Bishop Fellay spoke of "50 million acts of penance". More details will soon be announced.
Zaitzkofen, in the Regensburg Diocese, is the seminary of the SSPX for the German-speaking  and adjacent areas. On July 2, Bishop Fellay ordained there three new priests.
In his homily, the Superior General confirmed that the talks between the SSPX and the Vatican will continue. Bishop Fellay explained that the salvation of souls is the ultimate goal of the Catholic Church and thus also of the Fraternity. That objective is "higher" than a canonical recognition of the Fraternity.
But nothing is more important than the Catholic faith and the unconditional acceptance of this belief for the salvation of souls. "Without [Catholic] faith no one can be saved," Bishop Fellay said, as he made serious allegations against the ecclesiastical authorities: "Since the council, the defense and the propagation of the faith became something of secondary importance."
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: fsspx.de (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG
 Print Article

39 comments:

  1. Saint Jacinta Marto is speaking through Bishop Fellay.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Remnant on the communique. "Bishop Fellay Stands Strong in Defense of Tradition"

    Yeah! A really strong stand! Sure, Remnant. So nothing changed between Rome and the SSPX.

    Olson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Id say that telling the Church it has abandoned its mission since the second Vatican council is pretty strong stand.

      Delete
  3. I seriously don't understand what is wrong with dissenters of sspx. The communiqué simply makes clear the stance of the sspx, her SG and all districts' superior. Yet on the other hand, when the Vatican wants to seek rapprochement or talks with the sspx, especially coming from the Pope, Jorge Bergoglio, and the various heads delegated by Pope Francis, how can the sspx say no? The sspx just has to be extremely careful, and stick to her principles of preserving the Faith and Tradition, especially that of dictrine, the Tridentine Mass and the Sacraments. If the dissenters, especially those pro-S.O. camp people want a total cut-off of communication, that would be adhering to the sedevacantist position of not acknowleding the authority of the supreme authority on earth. True, Pope Francis does give the impression of an apostate, but his election in the 2013 conclave was public, acknowledged by all the cardinal electors and even pope emeritus. The situation in the Church is now a total chaos. If one wants to dispute the legitimacy of his election 3 years ago, it will never end as cardinal electors are sworn to secrecy in a conclave. In truth, only God and the saints and angels in heaven know.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am not SSPX, but I'll do my part.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't understand why they even have these stupid talks unless Fellay is secretly a traitor who's going to abandon the SSPX to the Vat 2 wolves who will probably treat them like the FFI. The Vat 2 church is not going to abrogate the heresies of Vat 2----they are the foundation of the Novus Ordo religion.

    I briefly attended the SSPX until I found out they NO LONGER conditionally re-ordain Novus Ordo priests who come into their order. Archbishop LeFebvre firmly believed that the new Vat 2 ordination rite is doubtful and that the new Vat 2 bishop consecration rite (which closely resembles the Anglican bishop consecration rite and which was condemned) is definitely invalid. He also held to the possibility of sedevacantism. And now we have a "pope"
    who was "ordained" in the dubious Vat 2 ordination rite.

    So why would the SSPX change their policy on this and stop conditionally re-ordaining Novus Ordo priests? Makes no sense unless they are slowly moving to the dark side.

    My sedevacantist chapel is comprised mainly of ex-SSPX members who left for these very reasons.

    Seattle Kim

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Bishop Fellay needs to realize there are many SSPX parishioners who are concerned about this very issue.
      This isn't 1984 and the average pew sitter in non novus ordo chapels is much more alert due to info avilable on internet.

      Delete
  6. Most likely, the SG of the SSPX has already signed or is soon to sign a deal with Rome, and this request for penance as well as a Rosary Crusade is just a way to bring the Faithful on board with the idea, in having them believe that they've obtained special favor through Our Lady, so that the SSPX will be protected when they reconcile officially. It's a mocking of Our Lady, which is really a wrong thing to do, as well as a manipulation of the SSPX faithful by the SG of the SSPX.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have thought this before but kept my mouth shut.
      You and me can't be the only ones thinking this way.
      Even though I don't belong to the SSPX,deep down I hope we are wrong.With that said,what a way to bring in the Hard line SSPX parishioners who want nothing to do with modern Rome.

      Delete
  7. Does anyone consider the souls being lost through this ongoing battle? On the one hand we have the Modernists in the Vatican & Bishoprics throughout the world and on the other faithful Traditional priesthoods who removed themselves from the authority of the CC because of this takeover. Their followers endlessly & nastily complain about other faithful Catholics who have no access to Traditional priests (the majority in the world have never even seen one, inc. myself) for keeping the faith and continuing to go to the NO Mass ( at which they pray for a return to Tradition) rather than stay at home and not publicly worship their Redeemer. Much and all as we hate it, the CC is HQ in Rome where St. Peter founded it and if one is to be fully Catholic, that is where we must look to, just as the saints before us in their own days of trial.

    The biggest mistake the Protestants made was to leave. If they had remained & fought to make the necessary changes at the time, there would have been no split, no disintegration into sects with their own interpretation of scripture etc. which is still going on to-day. The SSPX & other Traditional Orders need to be regularised in order to be able to spread the Good News to ALL peoples - not just a few lucky ones in the USA or UK. They have, by their obstinacy, been prevented from doing so by NO Bishops much to the consternation of humungous amounts of still Traditional Catholics worldwide. At long last this neglect has, apparently, dawned on Bishop Fellay who now realises what could (and would have) be accomplished if they could get an firm agreement to preach Tradition in the same format as prior to Vatican II. The days of the present incumbents are drawing to a close. They are all old men with Marxist ideas which are directly against Catholicism. Why on earth does anyone think it correct that most of the billion adherents to the CC are to be condemned to their ideology. We are all baptised and therefore have the right to hear the Word of God, have our children catechised & confirmed just as much as anyone else. It doesn't have to mean a takeover of the SSPX - in fact, PF seems to want them as they are (maybe for his own secret intent) but it is the CDF that actually will carry out the rules whether PF or SSPX like it or not. Bishop Fellay said this himself!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What can really be accomplished if the SSPX reconcile? Pope Francis preaches against everything that the SSPX stands for (or used to stand for). You believe that the Pope, who is a modernist in every sense of the word, is sincerely going to allow the SSPX to preach against the Council, as well as all of the modernist errors held by Rome?
      Of course, there's the possibility that the leadership of the SSPX fully intends to STOP criticizing the modernist council (which they've already effectively done), stop criticizing the New Mass (which they've already done), and stop speaking out against the errors of the Pope and most hierarchy (well, they still do speak out at times against the errors of Rome).
      The current leadership of the SSPX has moved far away from the legacy of its founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, and is instead moving toward modernist Rome. It's Rome that needs to reconcile itself with the Catholic Faith (and no, I'm not a sedevacantist, and never will be).

      Delete
    2. Worst Things, Catholic Disco Answers, the Dredgister, the Wanderer, and a host of others will have to change their editorial cant toward the Society in particular and tradition in general, for starters. They'll have to eat years of unjust calumny, because you know they have to obey the man, they're good at blind obedience, and they were none too happy about welcoming tradition after SP, either. It will change a lot of things, except the Society's commitment to the Catholic Faith.

      Delete
    3. I would be more charitable to the publications you fingered, Tancred. Some of them made prudential editorial decisions based on Christ's promise that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church, and they never claimed infallibility, they just tried siling into stormy seas. The Wanderer and the Remnant both started out with the same principles, and I can see the day when they will reunite.

      Delete
    4. The problem probably lies as much in the medium of journalism as it does with laicism. Journalists by their nature and training have a set of best practices that tends to be hostile to tradition,although there are those heroic individuals who somehow manage to turn the guns of modern journalistic inquiry and rhetoric on the beast.

      Delete
  8. SSPX dissenters are they always "rosary counters" in the eyes of Francis?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't know that the source for this is trustworthy as they are on the side of wanting talks. Did +Fellay confirm the 'talks' will continue or simply that he will respond if Rome asks.
    As for another rosary crusade, that will only get up PF's nose especially since the acts of penance will be for PF's conversion. I wonder if this is a deliberate tactic of +Fellay to remove the threat of a unilateral recognition.

    If only there were one prelate in the Church you said Yes, Yes, No, No.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, trustworthy. There's always CMRI.

      Delete
    2. And actually, it was first reported to our knowledge by La Croix, who probably dislikes the SSPX even more than you do.

      Delete
  10. In the sspx, the priests and bishops all took the anti-Modernist oath. It is a mortal sin to break it. That is why people have to have more faith in the leadership of the SG, his assistants and the district superiors running it. Those priests, bishops and even cardinals who say the Tridentine Mass from time to time still have to say the Paul VI's NOM. Once the Vatican or the local diocesan bishop pressures a good-willed priest, bishop or even a cardinal, he cannot say no or the result would be to forbid him to say the Tridentine Mass. He has to comply and submit. If the sspx is regularised, Catholics who had feared would be more at ease to step into an sspx chapel for the Mass and Sacraments. Conservative priests, bishops, archbishops and cardinals would then be more bold to step onto the plate to defend the Catholic Faith against wolves instead of cowering. That's why the sspx has to be extremely careful. If enemies of the Faith infiltrate the Church to try to destroy her, why can't the knights of the Faith join forces to defend her, through the instrument of God, the sspx? This order was founded in 1970, when the Church was already in the hands of Modernists, led by Paul VI. Abp L also dialogued ad nauseam with the Vatican until he realised it was a ploy. The situation after the 1988 consecrations was such that not many clergy other than the sedevacantist ones said the Tridentine Mass. However, things have changed and more and more priests, bishops and even cardinals have now been exposed to the Tridentine Mass, especially after the SP of B XVI, even though he still restrains the sspx in SP. No one knows for certain if the new ordination rite for priests or new consecration rite for bishops is invalid, due to the fact that there is a laying on of an ordaining or consecrating bishop's hands on the head of the candidate. Why? Bishops consecrated before the new rite of 1968 laid their hands on to-be-consecrated candidates. Though using the new rite with dodgy wordings and grave omissions, laying of hands has been done. So if the newly consecrated bishops lay hands on future bishops, it would still be transmitted. Is there then no doubt? Of course there is! The new rites of holy orders have dodgy wordings and grave omissions. That's why the sspx will continue to ordain and consecrate through her 3 remaining bishops to transmit the traditional form of ordination and consecration. This has been made clear by Bp T d M most recently. Yes, there is a doubt in the new rite of ordination, consecration, so it is best to continue using proven formulae instead of new ones, which were concocted to deviate from the Faith and her Tradition.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why do the SSPX no longer conditionally ordain Novus Ordo priests who come into their order? This was a huge sticking point for me and ultimately the reason I left the SSPX.

    Seattle Kim

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Someone feel free to correct me but I read the SSPX holds the novus ordo Sacramento to be perfectly Valid.

      Delete
  12. Seattle Kim, ever heard of this idiom, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink? The late Fr. N. Gruner was ordained in the 1970s, never conditionally ordained because he was sure his ordination was valid. Could anyone assert as certain that he died a layman especially when he had told many the graces received when saying the Tridentine Mass? How about Bp Schneider, Cardinal Burke? So both of them are just laymen imagining themselves consecrated to offer holy Sacrifice of the Mass? The sspx is not the Church authority. It can point out doubts but it cannot make definitive decisions on matters of Faith and morals. The Vatican with its congregations all under the direction of the Pope or he himself can clarify, declare, define and reject. If the sspx were to do that, it would be in schism. Sometimes, the gentle nudge to the new-rite ordained priest to seek conditional ordination has to come from the laity, like seeking conditional confirmation. If indeed ordained, the conditional ordination does not make it sacrilegious. As mentioned, the sspx cannot force. Sigh...

    ReplyDelete
  13. From my understanding, the SSPX originally did require conditional ordination. When, exactly, that requirement was dropped I do not know.

    LeFebvre believed the new rite of ordination was doubtful but that the new bishop consecration rite was definitely invalid. So it is possible, in the eyes of LeFebvre, that Gruner was a priest as he would have been ordained by a valid bishop. But according to LeFebvre's beliefs, all the novus Ordo priests ordained by "bishops" consecrated in the new rite should be considered invalid, nonetheless, SSPX now accepts them unconditionally.

    As I said earlier, this was a sticking point for me in my quest. I finally decided that I would only seek out priests that I was fairly certain were validly ordained. Of course, some question the validity of the ordinations and consecrations by the handful of brave bishops who rejected the 2nd Vatican council. So well, there it is. A confusing mess for all. God reads hearts. I have many conservative Novus Ordo friends who sincerely seek the Lord but haven't made the same path that I have. I leave it at that.

    Tis a confusing time for all who want to be faithful Catholics.

    Seattle kim

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This has nothing at all to do with the above post, but the Society has answered the issue:

      http://sspx.org/en/validity-new-rite-episcopal-consecrations-2

      Delete
    2. And I've got to say that you are rapidly disinviting yourself from the comments section.

      "2) Archbishop Lefebvre, visibly raised up by God to sustain the little flock of the faithful, never called in question the validity of the new rite of episcopal ordinations as published by Rome."

      Delete
  14. That's just "Pelagianism"! Kidding.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Tis the season to be holy...������������������������ and do stay jolly! The Church is the mystical body of Christ. As He the Head had slept in the boat so soundly, the Church is now asleep, especially those in authority like His Vicar Bergoglio the visible head. Who among the cardinals, archbishops, bishops and priests will be pivotal in waking the Pope up from his slumber?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Fellay is asking people to pray the rosary because he is buying time to decide to come bring the SSPX into the Church like he should!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tancred you are an IDIOT!

      And how I know this??

      Fellay wants to return to the Church even though we have a liberal Pope at the moment but it is obvious he feels the pressure of those in the SSPX priests and SSPX members who DON'T WANT TO be part of Rome.

      AND BE A MAN AND PUBLISH MY COMMENT DON'T JUST DELETE THEM LIKE YOU DO WHEN YOU SIMPLY DON'T LIKE A COMMENT.

      That is unfortunately how many Traditionalists like the Remnant and Rorate Caeli react to when some point out that they are NOT always right.

      Delete
    2. It's always been a goal of the Society to normalize its situation with respect to the Church, and you still haven't answered the question, how do you know that Bishop Fellay is using a prayer campaign disingenuously?

      Maybe the reason that Remnant and Rorate don't bother to answer your posts is because you're rude and not able to discuss these issues intelligently?

      Delete
    3. I already answered you and you DIDN'T like the answer even though that's how it is.

      And what I say is very intelligent and realistic because it is important to recognize that there is politics in everything, this is nothing new to the Church also because Fellay might be a bishop but he is also a man HE IS NOT A SAINT as many fanatics like you believe him to be.

      Neither was Lefebvre.

      And in regards to the Remnant and Rorate LET ME TELL YOU they block comments from everyone they don't agree with very much like you.

      Or are you too obtuse not to realize that I am not the only anonymous whose comments Rorate and the Remnant block or delete comments from??

      There is many of us, some of us know each other and we comment regularly under anonymous and other names but when we dare to say things narrow minded people like you don't want hear you delete our comments or block us.

      Tancred it is you needs to stop like an ignoramus and also the one who needs to stop being so naive.

      Delete
    4. Until next time!

      Delete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I say this as someone who doesn't belong to neither SSPX or CMRI.
    This issue has been in the news since 2008-2009.As a result I have thought about it more so than before 2009.It appears the SSPX has a strong chance of reconciling with Rome.
    The SSPX parishoners who don't agree could join the CMRI.
    I say this because both orders follow the same rubrics and missals for Holy Mass,Holy Week,Sacraments,and holy order's.
    And in all fairness the CMRI and SSPX,at the moment,have clergy I would trust giving me or my family last rites.(excluding the novus ordo clergy who haven't been re-ordained.Sorry not being rude that's just my belief)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Parishoners who don't agree can become Episcopalian or Wisconsin Synod Lutherans for all I care.

      As shown in the resistance, most of its adherents simply continue going to chapels as they did before. Most people will go along and the Society will continue on as it has in the past, regardless of how its work is considered by whichever faction finally wins out in Rome and makes a decision about its right to criticize the Vatican II documents.

      Delete

  19. Hi there
    It is well explained about a Specific topic.I am also a Translators , and of course i had done many more projects.
    I hope your article will teach me to do something else different.
    Thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...