Replies

You see, you paint yourself into a corner with your overblown rhetoric.

No I don't.

There are divisions in most areas of the Church.

No there aren't. You are just imbibing in conspiracy theory. All the bishops in communion with the Holy See are fully on board and completely devoted to the Catholic Faith.

There certainly are in mine. SSPX is no different.

So you agree with Bishop Williamson then.

By continually spinning this "everyone is on the same page", "Fellay-good cop, Williamson-bad cop" stuff, you further erode your credibility.

No I don't. To say that Williamson and Fellay are on opposite sides is what is not credible.

We all have multiple sources of information in this internet age.

Some better than others.

Many of us have lives outside FR and see and observe things ourselves.

Possibly.

You're not our unique source of information on SSPX.

It's not the information. It's the speculation that's the problem.

Williamson's position within the society and his attittude towards Rome and reconciliation are not classified information.

It seems classified when you go onto neo-Catholic sites that refuse to actually post quotes in context and instead prefer to tell you what someone says and not show you. To paraphrase Bishop Sheen. There are plenty of devoted Catholic people that disagree with what they think are Williamson's postion and only a few that actually disagree with his real positions.

His letter regarding yesterday's meeting can be read and understood clearly without the need for spin.

Then why are the neo Catholics trying to spin it?

Silly.

Yes.

No I don't. To say that Williamson and Fellay are on opposite sides is what is not credible.

Oh isn't it? How's this for a change? It is apparently from Bp. Williamson or one of his cronies.

Will the Society's Superior General
Known within the SSPX as the "Compromising Swiss"
Sell out to Newrome on His August 29 "Obeisance"?

Immediately after the election of Benedict-Ratzinger, TRADITIO was the first to predict that the SSPX's Superior General, Bernard Fellay, would be summoned to Newrome. TRADITIO's contacts at Newrome and in the Society confirmed our predictions to us several weeks ago, but we were not at liberty to report on the matter publicly at that time. Subsequently, however, the matter has become public, so we can report that Fellay will be running off to Newrome to kiss the big toe of Benedict. Why, you ask? Good question.

Supposedly, the Society has laid down two non-negotiable conditions (for better or worse) for resuming "negotiations" with the New Order. The first condition is what the political-activist rioters of the 1960s always asked for first: amnesty. Fellay wants the "excommunications" of the four SSPX bishops lifted. Why is this even a consideration, since for 17 years the Society has published its position that the excommunications are invalid?! Rather than standing forth as a dry martyr for the Roman Catholic Faith, as Archbishop Lefebvre did, does Fellay hanker after "human respect" more than divine respect?

The second condition is a so-called "universal indult" for Pope John XXIII's Modernized Missal of 1962 (with which even Archbishop Lefebvre was not fully comfortable and from which he instructed deviations). When you think about it, a "universal indult" is a pretty naïve demand. First of all, the Ecclesia Dei so-called "indult" of 1988 has been a monstrous failure, almost a dead letter. Our reports from around the United States indicate that most of these "Indult Masses" are actually hybrids of the Novus Ordo service with the Modernized Missal of 1962. Cookies consecrated at the Novus Ordo are forced on the indultarians at the "Indult Mass," for example. If they object, the bishop just cancels the "indult."

With supposedly full papal support for 17 years, most of the dioceses in the United States, for example, don't have even a single "Indult Mass." Those that do usually have one for the entire diocese. The Newchurch diocesan bishops don't want the "indult," "universal" or otherwise. As Ecclesia Dei proves, the pope can sign any document he pleases, but the bishops will simply ignore it. And no post-Vatican II pope will push the issue. Ratzinger has already backed down at least twice on the issue when bishops objected. And his own German bishops objected the most!

And even if a "universal indult" were granted, can you imagine what would happen if a presbyter said to his Newchurch bishop, "I'm going to do an 'Indult Mass' at my parish. The pope says I can." That presbyter would be gone the next day, and a Eucharistic ministress would be installed! A "universal indult" is an entirely unworkable concept. It would set up an untenable and impractical bipolar authority structure in every diocese. The diocesan bishops and cardinals (they have the votes, remember) will never stand for it. They haven't stood for even the shadow of an "indult" for the last 17 years.

Moreover, what is the "Indult Mass" anyway but a devious method to ensnare semi-traditional Catholics into Newchurch? They will be forced to abandon the authority of Catholic and Apostolic Tradition and its perpetual canonization by the dogmatic decrees of the Council of Trent and Pope St. Pius V. They will be forced to swear to a non-Catholic, made-up "authority" of the post-conciliar popes to fabricate whatever New "Mass," New Sacraments, New Theology, and New Morality they please.

In other words, a "universal indult," just like the Ecclesia Dei "indult," is a sell-out to the Counterfeit New Order Church. Just ask Bishop Rifan of Campos what a crock the "indult" is, who was forced to concelebrate the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo service in front of thousands of Brazilians to betray his consecration oath to God and publicly demonstrate his submission to serve the new god of the New Order.

If these are the Society's "non-negotiable" conditions, why does Fellay seem so ready to run off to Newrome to "negotiate" with Benedict-Ratzinger? What is there to "negotiate" about?

If Fellay had a gram of the fortitude of the Society's Founder, he would simply inform Newpope that the Society's conditions (for better or worse) are non-negotiable; that as soon as Benedict signs Benedictus XVI, seals with the pescatorio, and delivers with the bullae to the Society his unconditional acceptance of the non-negotiable terms, there will be no SSPX "pilgrimages" to Newrome.

But it may well be that for Fellay and the other members of his more liberal wing of the Society, the "fix" is in. His public statements and his sycophancy in communications for the Society immediately after the papal election outdid even former U.S. President Bill Clinton's explanation that "it depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." Fellay has clearly not learned from history, but again displays a naïveté that will probably end up ripping the Society from its Lefebvran foundations, just as the "indult" relegated the Fraternity of St. Peter and the other "indult" societies to the outer darkness, where the indultarians weep and gnash their teeth.