|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 5, 2016 23:06:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 25, 2016 18:24:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 21, 2016 12:12:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prayerful on Jan 4, 2017 17:50:10 GMT
Given how Pope Francis has proceeded and now with the dubia crisis (brought on by the Pope trying to ignore it), Bishop Fellay need not do anything for now except sit tight. A unilateral recognition is certainly very unlikely now.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 5, 2017 1:28:58 GMT
Something odd seems to be happening. There are a lot of claims on the Net, including from SSPX sources, that they are close to reaching a deal with Rome on the basis of a personal prelature for the SSPX. I am surprised that this is coming up, given the recent rows over the dubia and the Order of Malta, which (like Prayerful) I would have expected to stall things. Indeed, I have seen indult trads citing the present state of the SSPX as an advantage because it allows leverage for those who threaten to defect to it. One possible reason I have seen cited is that the advancing age of some of the SSPX bishops means that if they don't take a deal now they will be faced with the prospect of consecrating new bishops, which would kill off any possible deal. Maybe the bitterenders have already departed with Richard Williamson. We can only pray, and await developments. One
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 18, 2017 18:44:55 GMT
Damian Thompson suggests there is a real possibility that Pope Francis may reach a deal with the SSPX, if they are not scared off by the recent treatment of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and the Knights of Malta: www.catholicherald.co.uk/issues/february-10th-2017/pope-franciss-traditionalists/One problem that comes to mind is that Thompson implies a personal prelature can operate within a diocese without reference to its bishop, or even over his opposition. This is one reason why there was such opposition to Opus Dei (the best known PP) being given this status, and in practice OD only operate in a diocese with the consent of tHe Bishop. Given all Pope Francis's talk about synodality and collegiality in the sense of devolving authority to local bishops, it would seem odd to let the SSPX operate like that. On the other hand, in practice Pope Francis has been an aggressive centraliser... We'll see.
|
|
|
Post by prayerful on Mar 24, 2017 22:58:45 GMT
A Rorate Caeli[/i] comment authored by 'New Roman' claimed it is imminent and a closed down convent in the Tuscolano neighbourhood is to be HQ in Rome. Really hard to know. Chatter has reached a high volume, but again we'll see with the Fatima Anniversary on 13th of May and ten years of Summorum Ponticum on 7th of July given as two likely dates. The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate were vulnerable. If they had been erected under the Ecclesia Dei Commission, like the Benedictines of Silverstream and other TLM focussed orders, the small US faction which effectively destroyed them, would not have mattered. They were not, and so were vulnerable. I'm sure Bishop Fellay is aware of the risks.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 4, 2017 19:51:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 9, 2017 20:15:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prayerful on Apr 13, 2017 22:35:26 GMT
+Fellay and earlier +Schmidberger were poor in their handling, but eventually the priests concerned were removed from public ministry, one (Fr Abraham I think) even subject to a Vatican approved canonical trial. The biggest problem is the complainants and family did not take their complaints to the civil authorities. All those suspended priests needed to do to evade any penalty was depart for some sort of Resistance or Independent existence. The Post Falls scandal did result in the criminal conviction of the molester Kevin Sloniker, but that disturbed former seminarian should never have been allowed any responsibility for boys or any vulnerable person, or anyone with a pulse. Anyhow, Bp Williamson has major questions to answer. Giving a place in his home to Fr Abraham could have been seen as charitable, but then Fr Abraham was encouraged to offer Mass against his own reservations - he was aware he had not mastered his perverse urges towards young males. Click here for some coverage of the Fr Abraham and +Williamson case. Greg Taylor (a Pfeifferite or anti-Williamson Resistance activist) provides a fairly accurate account. The second part of the programme covers Post Falls and +Williamson's Holocaust preoccupation, which got him expelled from the SSPX. edit: I wonder if the SSPX will be regularised in a month. All this fairly well known stuff was probably fed to the journalist Fegan by the same Conciliar panickers who got BXVI to ask +Fellay to subscribe to a Profession of Faith, which had not been agreed to, even expected, scuppering the earlier Regularisation. Pope Francis has a record of complete indifference to the opinions of others who completely disagree with him (in this case with a long record of friendliness to the SSPX), so it shouldn't have too bad of an effect. Given how Pope Francis reversed Fr Inzoli's dismissal from the priesthood, which is just one example of how BXVI's effort at cleaning the 'filth' has been reversed, I'm fairly sure that 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.'
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 23, 2017 20:38:00 GMT
There is a controversy because the SSPX were prevented from saying Mass on Knock Shrine property. A couple of points -(1) The SSPX didn't even try to obtain permission first, which is required for any group. (2) Indult EF Masses are said at regular intervals (not sure how often, but I attended a pilgrimage EF Mass there earlier this month). (3) Some recent practices at the Shrine (such as the light show with Our Lady depicted holding up the Sam Maguire Cup) were tasteless to say the least, but they're separate issues from the handling of the SSPX. Two wrongs don't make a right. (I'm not saying that the SSPX must be excluded, but that the shrine authorities are entitled to exclude them.) www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2017/09/20/sspx-prevented-from-celebrating-mass-at-knock-shrine/wdtprs.com/blog/2017/09/sspx-forbidden-to-pray-at-shrine-of-our-lady-of-knock/
|
|
lynne
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by lynne on Sept 23, 2017 21:18:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 23, 2017 21:27:19 GMT
The Shrine authorities said they did not ask permission, and so far as I am aware the SSPX have not denied it (unless you are suggesting that they asked and were denied, which would make their subsequent behaviour even more problematic). There seems to be a direct disagreement about whether they were allowed to say the Rosary and do the Stations.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Sept 26, 2017 8:39:36 GMT
There's a lot of exaggerating in some of the reports and Father Z should have checked out the story first. I know the SSPX have been running pilgrimages to Knock for some time, but they never had public Mass at the Shrine. From time to time, SSPX priests have been allowed say Mass privately in the shrine. That is the advice received from the professor of Canon Law at Maynooth. As far as I was aware, the SSPX pilgrimage used to take place at a Mass rock near Knock. This year the SSPX group arrived unannounced with the intention of having Mass in tents in the car park. The shrine heard this on the grapevine and acted as reported, but I can't see what else they could have done.
The shrine position on the EF Mass is as follows. There is only one pilgrimage with the EF permitted in Knock and that is the annual pilgrimage on the first Saturday in September. This is to be open to all groups wishing to attend, including the SSPX followers. The chaplain to the pilgrimage, Fr John Loftus, writes to the priests in charge of the regular EF Masses (no including SSPX though)inviting attendance at the pilgrimage.
In addition,Mass takes place in Knock on every second Sunday at 5.30 pm. There is agreement in principle to have this more regularly but there are few priests available to celebrate at present. Other groups will be facilitated with Mass there on request subject to availability. Perhaps not all we would wish but very much a situation we can work with.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Sept 26, 2017 15:41:13 GMT
I'm not even a traditionalist, certainly I have nothing to do with the SSPX. I've never been to Knock. But if there really have been ecumenical services happening in the Shrine, it does look rather bad that traditionalists are not OK but non-Catholics are.
|
|