Browse By

But for the Esquiline, Bishop Fellay? For the Esquiline?

“For Wales? Why Richard, it profit a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world. . . but for Wales!”

“Hey guys! Guess who just called! The Devil! And he said we could have this whole great big house on the Esquiline he’s not using. And he promised he TOTally won’t try to destroy us… Isn’t that great news?!”

You meet people in Rome who are dazzled by all the Romeness of everything. They have a kind of glazed and giddy expression, like they just can’t believe they are there… really really there…!! They wear their best cassocks, freshly pressed, shoes shined, faces scrubbed… You know… you just know that they’ve got visions dancing in their wee heads of themselves having important meetings with important prelates, talking about their important plans to importantly save the world, while sitting and sipping tea in frescoed Baroque splendor.

So, after 40 years of resistance, now the carrot has been dangled that has never been dangled before and suddenly we’re being scolded about anonymous blogging priests and the deeply, deeply offensive poster campaign in Rome… Tut tut… that’s not the way we do things.

Rumours… rumours… rumours… it’s the stock in trade of the Vatican reporter, of course, but the rumours have it that the deal is done.

In case anyone’s wondering, no.

No, I will not go meekly into the re-education camp that is currently being planned. I don’t care how good the music is.


48 thoughts on “But for the Esquiline, Bishop Fellay? For the Esquiline?”

  1. Marie says:

    Here Bishop Fellay speaks for himself, showing just how unfounded, erroneous, slanderous, and gravely judgmental (given the seriousness of the Bishop’s role in this Church crisis and the importance of his reputation and credibility, which you recklessly damage) your mischaracterizations of Bishop Fellay in this blog post are:

    At the same time, Bishop Fellay is not blind:

    “It does not mean that we go forward, we must go with great prudence and also secure our future to be able to prevent any possibility of trap. Therefore we are not running in this situation.”

    Concluding, Bp. Fellay says he does not know if or when a recognition of the Society will happen:

    “So whether or not we are going to get an upcoming recognition, I do not know, I do not think so, but the pope can make a surprise. It seems impossible, as he already did it several times. Then we must continue to pray much, to ask our Protectress, the Blessed Virgin Mary to continue to lead us.”

  2. Andrew Dunn says:

    Marie, Hilary and everyone else here are not intentionally bashing or disrespecting Bishop Fellay or the SSPX in general. Bottom line is we have a guy on the Throne of St. Peter who clearly HATES the Mass and DESPISES those who say it and revere it. I think it’s past time now for all of us to seriously question whether Bergoglio even believes in the Real Presence, let alone the Sacraments. Those facts combined with all of the evidence, proving that he can’t be trusted to keep his word, not to mention his intentional and personal success in destroying the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, etc. etc. is the cause for our alarm. We want the True Mass to be preserved and many of us see the day coming soon when our diocesan priests will be forbidden to say the Mass, and in all likelihood, the FSSP and the ICTK as well. That leaves the SSPX as the remnant and we have every right to believe that Bergoglio is setting a trap. The devil – and those he possesses – have a lot of power. Don’t underestimate that power.

  3. Marie says:

    And as far as this is concerned in your reply: “The response from the SSPX US was quite interesting. First, the heavy-handed sarcasm, the dramatically aggrieved tone, was telling all by itself. And ending it by blasting Il Foglio” — I have no idea what you are talking about. It’s clear you are emotionally invested in the position you have taken in publicly condemning Bishop Fellay for non-existent mercenary motives.

    As I read SSPX’s response, I don’t see either sarcasm or drama, simply facts which completely debunk your unfortunate condemnations of a fine prelate and show how extraordinarily ill-informed and ill-advised they are.

  4. Marie says:

    Miss White, I have known the SSPX for over 40 years. I knew Archbishop Lefebvre personally. I don’t consider them fawning and unquestioning by any stretch.

    Furthermore, I am so confident in the perspicacity of Bishop Fellay and the leadership of SSPX that I feel absolutely certain they will discern and only do the Will of God in this situation, and that they well know how to be “wise as serpents and harmless as doves…..”

    Please give them some credit.

    Have you ever gone on an Ignatian Retreat? The Rules for Discernment are extraordinarily efficacious. I live by them and even as a sinner, God makes His Will abundantly clear to me even in the most demanding of circumstances.

    Given Bishop Fellay’s monumental obligations in this matter — historically significant in a dramatic degree — he will surely seek the Will of God, and I don’t doubt for a moment that God will make it clear to him.

    Your denigration of his reputation and integrity is harmful to the cause of the SSPX and his leadership as their shepherd at this critical time. You should make reparation for it.

  5. Hilary White says:

    The response from the SSPX US was quite interesting. First, the heavy-handed sarcasm, the dramatically aggrieved tone, was telling all by itself. And ending it by blasting Il Foglio – well known in Italy as a “traditionalist” (small T) Catholic paper who have gone into innumerable fights in this country swinging mightily on the side of the Angels and Catholic teaching – and offering a warm “caress” to Andrea Tornielli – equally well known as Pope Francis’ chief water-carrier in the Italian secular press – was all the signal we needed, I think.

    Thank you, Marie, especially for helping us understand what we are facing in the SSPX – a laity as fawning and unquestioning to its leadership as the neo-Catholic papolaters are towards Francis.

    Your prayers and good will are evident, and I do encourage you to continue to share with us your feelings.

  6. Marie says:

    M. Ray: Yes there IS denial by SSPX that Rome is involved in any way in SSPX’s interest in purchasing the subject property. See link below; it also debunks the rest of the rumors. I think what Miss White writes here impugning Bishop Fellay’s character in such a manner is disgraceful

    And yet, she does not withdraw the very clear — and baseless — condemnation she offers of Bishop Fellay as being seduced by mercenary intentions, even going so far as to offer an excerpt from “A Man for All Seasons” as though there is a moral equivalence between the two.

    This is character assassination of an outstanding prelate of the Church, whose reputation and credibility is essential in decisions and leadership which he must offer to over 1,000,000 souls, for which damage Miss White will have to give an account to God for not offering reparation for the damage she has done.

    Furthermore, Bishop Fellay has had in his possession a doctrinal agreement from Rome for almost a year and has yet to sign it (see second link). He is solid as a rock, and will never do what he does not believe is the express Will of God.

    It’s disgraceful how lay persons without an ounce of his personal sanctity dare to second guess him as though they are wiser and more perceptive than he is. They make him out to be a fool, a prelate of such outstanding qualities, virtue and sanctity of life.

    “The agreement entailing the establishment of a personal prelature similar to that granted to Opus Dei in the eighties, however, will not happen in a matter of days or weeks. The Holy See has been waiting for almost a year for Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior of the Society of St. Pius X, to sign the new doctrinal statement. A necessary step before finalizing any legal form. It is known that negotiations ran aground in 2012 precisely on the doctrinal statement. Today’s text is shorter compared to that of 2012. As explained by Bishop Pozzo in some interviews, while the first document sought to settle every dispute, and to clarify every point, the new declaration merely calls Lefebvre’s society only on what is necessary to be Catholic, leaving everything else to future talks after its full communion. “

  7. GracieLou says:

    Thanks for the link Hilary. I didn’t realize he’d said that in his overt hippy days…totally changes the meaning.

    This pertains to your next post — I’m adding you to my Rosary intentions. I plan to pray the Rosary in Latin every day for Lent, which is a serious challenge because I’ve heard very little Latin, don’t know how it’s supposed to sound and have the memory skills of Dory the fish (temporal lobe seizure thingy). Jesus Pedroza posted a nice version on the Youtube:

  8. Hilary White says:

    Gracie Lou,

    Ummm… yeah. About that “smaller purer Church” Pope Quitty was talking about that time… I think we’ve been rather misled about what that means and whether that’s a desirable thing.

    Do not wish it, Miss Dashwood…

  9. Hilary White says:


    Yes. Given what we know about Bergoglio and his crew, his MO and theirs, I think the SSPX is being brought in in order to legitimize and carry water for the New Church. They’ve been all but silent for 4 years, after decades of vocal opposition to the new religion. Now the’ve gone from all-but-silence to outright scolding those who are left carrying the bag.

  10. Heminarian says:

    The snow-white SSPX was not wooed by good Pope Benedict, but throws herself at bad boy Francis?

  11. James says:

    There is an implicit recognition of the non-binding status of the documents of Vatican II in this proposed rapprochement and the only concrete reason I can determine to be supportive of the proposed reconciliation.
    That said, I remain suspicious in the extreme as to intent of the Domus Sanctae Marthae. This outreach to the Society has to have an extenuating rationale. It would appear to insulate the Bergoglian pontificate when it extends its other hand to “who-knows-what” in the not distant future. “That crew” will be given pride of place, the Society and those who share its commitment to authentic Roman Catholicism will be corralled – and muzzled in effect – since the same “merciful broadmindedness” which gave them their new found status will underlie the introduction of all manner of protestant “ecclesiology.”
    Another fear I have is that this will badly splinter the Society. I know little of it, of its interior cohesion, but the Domus would not be disappointed to see the unity of the Society further fractured. I don’t see the Kasperian hankie in use were such a consequence come to reality.
    As for the undermining of the Vatican II project. Given Cardinal Koch’s recent trashing of Trent, it appears that all ecclesiastical authority is useless to the current powers that be – rationalized personal rage being the instrument of choice for chastisement these days.
    Hagan lio!

  12. Eejay says:

    @Miss White, so let it be written, so let it be done

  13. GracieLou says:

    P.S. You could see why he’d need major global support (EU/UN/Clinton/Soros) to drop that kind of bomb. You could also see the whole Akita thing played out there. Which might surprise BOGO. Like most Narcs he thinks everybody thinks just like him and that we’re all just faking it, waiting for a NuChurch O’ Peace Lurve & Stan.

  14. GracieLou says:

    Since we’re all throwing out wild theories how about this one: Bogo makes a trad ghetto with the SSPX, which he calls The Catholic Church. Then he loots all the rest to build his new Pantheon, aka global church, aka religion to end all religions, aka the false church of darkness. He’s never really been interested in being the head of the Catholic Church, that much is obvious.

    Maybe it will be what the CCC called the Passion of the Church on Earth the “”mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception…by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.”

    The good news is that of course it will fail. And then we’ll have that smaller, purer Church like Benedict said. Which will rise higher than ever, like ACE and Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres of Quito and a whole bunch of other saints said.

  15. JoeA says:

    Our Lady of Good Success, better translated Our Lady of the Great Event, tells that when all seems lost and paralyzed then will be “the arrival of my hour, when, in a marvelous way, I will dethrone the proud and accursed Satan, trampling him under my feet and fettering him in the infernal abyss.”.
    So we may be witnessing the next chapter in the martyrdom of the faithful so that the hour of restoration can begin.

  16. Pearl says:

    Hilary’s right. This is a massive con job, and unlike certain wide eyed naifs here, I am convinced that Bp Fellay has intended to deliver the SSPX to the NO Church for some time, since about 2006. And those who consider him to be a principled man, let me say, they have not seen the things that I saw in my parish. He operates under the same rules that JPII did when dealing with Abp Lefebvre. By whatever means necessary to force his will.

  17. MaryK says:

    Marie, thank you for your defense of Bishop Fellay. Of course he is not infallible or sinless. And ultimately, if the SSPX collapses, the Church will continue, as Eejay said. This has also been told to me by multiple SSPX priests in my long association with them. Most of us don’t get to write history but only watch it.

  18. Gerard Brady says:

    I think the attached link is more helpful in assessing the Societies position. Personally I have no doubt that Bishop Fellay is doing the right thing. He stated some years ago that any regularisation would be the beginning of a larger fight not the culmination of the present one. Bishop Schneider’s assessment is my own. Could the whole thing be a disaster? Certainly. However given the caliber of the Societies priests – they stand head and shoulders over any other clerics I have met with the exception of some Carthusians – I think the pontiff is likely to regret his generosity. I wholeheartedly believe any regularisation will be good for the Church.

  19. louiseyvette says:

    You could well be right, and I’m inclined to agree, but Mundabor took a different view which may be worth considering.

  20. M. Ray says:

    Here is one if the sermons of Fr. Patrick Girouard that I think got him into trouble with the leadership of the SSPX, which led to his eventual expulsion. This was recorded in Vancouver, B.C., 2012:

  21. M. Ray says:

    Neither Ecclesia Dei nor the SSPX have denied that Guido Pozzo (head of Ecclesia Dei) have been instrumental in helping the SSPX to purchase the property in Rome for the use of an SSPX Personal Prelature. Fr. Z doesn’t know what’s going on. Remember, this story of the SSPX property purchase in Rome was first released by a former priest of the SSPX, Fr. Patrick Girouard (who still has, I assume, contacts in the SSPX) abuot two weeks ago. It was not picked up by any other news source until recently. Fr. Girouard was booted out of the SSPX because he was against a deal with Rome, and he’s not the only one who was booted out. There have been quite a few others. There are still many good priests in the SSPX who, I think, will bail if there’s a deal with unrepentant Modernist Rome and Francis.

  22. Mike says:

    A few obvious points have been missed in this discussion.
    1st why do you fail to point out the destruction and sell out of the FSSP or ICK under these same circumstances?
    2nd Is the Society the real “Church” with the 4 marks that will look to be destroyed once under the false church?
    3rd under what moral authority do you impugn the selling out of the Society as equivalent as committing perjury?
    4th Weren’t you attending the Benedictines in Norsia who made a deal with Rome and if so why not impugn them with such a sellout?
    5th Campos, FSSP, and others have all been forced to compromise (Protocol 1411, doing the New Mass, changing professors) so where was the chorus from others to stop a deal under Benedict or JPII? They were both heretical in their own right, but not to the same degree.

  23. EJ says:

    Heard today, that the purchase did not go through, it was blocked somehow, and that BF prefers Switzerland anyhow. Marie, give us a break, no one is interested in BF is so holy and can do no wrong, and anyhow you have revealed your own scruples. The scruples of some people are no reason to hand the work of Archbishop Lefebvre over to the destroyer, some thing he would never have done himself.

  24. Hilary White says:

    @ Eejay,

    Yes. I once asked a priest in confession what was the bare minimum required to fulfill Christ’s promise, and he said something similar. Along the lines of “If there is one little old bead-squeezing lady left who keeps the Faith, it is fulfilled.” The idea, I think, was for me to be that lady.

  25. Hilary White says:

    @ Andrew Dunn…

    I figure something like this yes. My own thought is that he simply puts all the Traditionalist orgs under the prelature with Fellay or one of the other SSPX bishops as the head of the entire Trad Thing in the Church, essentially dissolving Ecclesia Dei into this new Big Trad Thing, all headquartered in this nice big place on the Esquiline. Then one day Francis calls him to a private meeting – show up in one hour… no, don’t tell anyone and no, you can’t bring anyone else – in which Bishop X is informed that from that moment Bishop X is no longer the head of the Big Trad Thing. “Allow me to introduce you to my good buddy here, who is the new superior of the Big Trad Thing who will implement all my good pastoral plans for y’all.”

    Presto! We’ve got ourselves a Traddie re-education camp.

    And that will be that.

    This is how Bergoglio deals with EVERYone. It’s been his MO his entire ecclesiastical career.

  26. Hilary White says:

    “Miss White” if you please.

  27. Marie says:

    And in fact, Father Z provides a reference that shows SSPX sought the property INDEPENDENT of any dealing with Rome or Francis:

    “However, La Stampa says

    “The complex is composed of a Neo-gothic church constructed in the first part of the 20th century, built by the Brothers if Charity (called the “Grey Brothers”) and of a building used in the past as an elementary and middle school, now the property of a religious order. It is said that Francis and the Commission “Ecclesia Dei” had brought about the acquisition. In reality that isn’t what happened: “Ecclesia Dei” was in no way involved, nor was the Vicariate of Rome. The property of the institute is in fact separated from that of the Church of the Immaculate: the later, where Mass is regularly celebrated, is a rectorate of the Vicariate and has attached only an apartment for the lodging of the rector. For a while the Lefevbrites have wanted to acquire a place in Rome. The order that possesses it would have to obtain permission for its sale from the Congregation for Religious. In case the acquisition went through, as far as the eventual use of the church is concerned, they would have to deal with the Diocese of Rome, which is the proprietor.”

    You should recant the calumny that an agreement is being considered because Fellay was offered the Equisline and was seduced by such mercenary considerations.

  28. Steve D. says:

    Relax peoples, what could possibly go wrong?

  29. Stephen Golay says:

    Blackmail, anyone?

    Especially if the result is confusion, dangled souls, and a long-hard wilderness struggle tossed to the ravishing wolves while the sled slides across a bitter frozen Tiber.

  30. Sam Ahn says:

    Hilary if you really believe Bp. Fellay is doing it for that building then aren’t they already lost? Rather, let’s listen to the advice of Bp. Schneider:

    “I have told Msgr. Fellay: “Monsignor, we need your presence to join together with all of the good forces in the Church to achieve this union.”

  31. Richard Malcolm says:

    I exclusively attend (well, the occasional Melkite or Ukrainian DL aside) the Traditional Mass and sacraments at diocesan or Ecclesia Dei parishes, but with a real sympathy and appreciation for the Society. As such, my sense is this: If you’re an SSPX layperson or priest, and you do not trust Bishop Fellay and his district superiors and fellow bishops to accept a canonical arrangement, you really ought not trust them in anything else, either. And if that is the case, you should head for the nearest Resistance or Sede chapel, post-haste.

    Francis and his colleagues cannot be trusted. We know this. But there’s no guarantee that even if you get a supertrad pope, that he won’t be followed by a bad one. There are no guarantees in this world. If something unjust is being done to you, you resist. And if the Society doesn’t have the strength to do that when the time comes, they’re likely a lost cause already.

  32. Gladstone says:

    -And White is right.

  33. Isabel says:

    I suppose it’s possible that Bishop Fellay believes that once they get regularized and get their own pad, all will be well and they’ll be the one thing standing when Frankie blows up the Church. Fellay feels they’re safe in the meantime and that Francis won’t try to destroy them. But what he doesn’t understand is that it doesn’t matter. Francis doesn’t give a darn about what liturgy they celebrate or what they believe, but simply regards them as the same as the Anglicans, the Lutherans, or, heck, the Muslims, all of whom he believes belong to his one-world religion with him in charge. Fellay’s bringing the SSPX into the Church of Francis only legitimizes Francis. This is a terrible thing.

  34. wewjude says:

    Looking more and more like Bishop Williamson was right all along.

  35. Marie says:

    Furthermore, have you not considered that as a priest and pastor and confessor, Bishop Fellay has had to deal with not a few moral and spiritual crises of soul resulting from individuals and/or married couples who suddenly find themselves in upheaval over the question of subjective recourse to extraordinary jurisdiction.

    Don’t you think these priests are deeply concerned with the spiritual dilemmas that arise in many souls (and I know more than a few) who suddenly wonder one day if their marriages and absolutions for grave sins (some of them reserved sins) were ever valid?

    Such dilemmas of conscience cannot be dismissed by priests who truly love souls and want to put an end to this possibility once and for all.

    You can’t fathom such mysteries of the soul and the priesthood and the desire of priests to resolve these concerns in the sight of God.

    Nor should you dare to judge them and make public mockery of their efforts to seek the path they believe God is leading them along.

    The Ignatian Rules for Discernment are well known to Bishop Fellay, and we can be assured he is mortified, humble and spiritual enough to follow them in order to ascertain the Will of God in such an historical and momentous decision.

    Give Bishop Fellay credit for doing what holy priests do in order to be certain of the Will of God, which he surely esteems and seeks before all else.

  36. Andrew Dunn says:

    Wendy in VA, here’s how I see this all working out… The SSPX becomes “official” thanks to the “mercy” of a certain blaspheming heretic. This blaspheming heretic dissolves the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, the Institute of Christ the King and any other TLM orders, making the SSPX the “official” TLM wing of the Church. The Fraternity and the Institute of course cave in obedience. Then, out of nowhere, the blaspheming heretic rescinds Summorum Pontificum under whatever excuse (i.e. it’s not “inclusive” enough), yanking the TLM from non-order, diocesan priests and the new TLM wing of the Church. The diocesan priests, in obedience to their cowardly bishops, cave in obedience. The SSPX bishops and priests are told they must immediately start saying the Novus Ordo and all assets – including the SSPX seminaries – belong now to francischurch. The SSPX leaders say “hey man, that was not part of the deal.” The blaspheming heretic says “I MAKE THE RULES AND CHANGE THEM AS I SEE FIT!!!” He then declares those in the SSPX who do not submit to be officially in schism. This is how it is all going to work out. Please pray that the SSPX don’t fall into this trap.

  37. M. Ray says:

    Hilary, have you heard that the deal is done, regarding the SSPX and Rome? Can you tell us more?

    My hope has been that the SSPX will not reconcile with unrepentant modernist Rome. But I think that they will reconcile, unfortunately.

    Glad to see that you are not going to go along with the re-education camp that is being planned. Wait…..what re-education plan is that? I haven’t heard of it before.

    It’s interesting is that the mainstream Catholic media is not admitting that Guido Pozzo, head of Ecclesia Dei, helped with the purchase of the property in Rome by the SSPX. Probably because it would lend to the idea that a deal is pretty much done.

  38. Lynda says:

    Is there any bishop that will speak boldly and with righteous anger against the diabolic war being waged by Francis and the majority of prelates against Almighty God, His Holy Church, His Holy Laws, and the salvation of soyls???!!! Lord, have mercy.

  39. Evangeline says:

    Upon further reflection, my tone may be overly critical of the SSPX.
    But my word, how much of this can we take. And it is a disappointment to find no one voicing a serious opposition.
    Please God, help us.

  40. St. Benedict's Thistle says:

    Fr. Z wrote, a ways back, that Francis might be the one to bring the SSPX back in. I knew something was up then.

  41. Marie says:

    I think it’s absolutely reprehensible for you to impugn as being mercenary the intentions of a prelate like Bishop Fellay, a priest of an undeniable virtue and advanced sanctity which certainly far exceeds yours; and in whose care is the spiritual welfare of over a million souls, over 600 priests and a few hundred religious, for whose well-being he will answer to God, FROM WHOM Bishop Fellay ALONE receives the grace of state to know His express will regarding such an ENORMOUS responsibilty. To suggest he is incapable of discerning that Will with all his good will and priestly discernment and instead debases himself by being enticed by a carrot is outrageously malign.

    You are completely reckless in your public accusations and slander and should confess them. Shame on you.

  42. Mike says:

    The prelature will outlast Frank.

  43. Red Feather says:

    I believe this (regularization) to be the Holy Spirit’s life raft. Now don’t go having a spittle flecked nutty y’all. Can things get much more bleak?

  44. Evangeline says:

    FWIW I looked at your blog Petrus, and I agree with your assessment.
    Mystery, mystery, everything “mystery” all of a sudden in our church and world.
    You can’t know why Benedict retired, it is a “mystery”.
    You can’t know why Bergolio was elected, it is a “mystery”.
    You can’t fathom the things the pope says or does, it is a “mystery”.
    You can’t comprehend why there is not ONE, NOT ONE, cleric who wears the martyr’s red, who is willing to call this man a heretic and denounce him to the face, this too, is a “mystery”.
    It’s all just too deep for us. We are the huddled masses, the perpetually ignorant, we can’t possibly comprehend the spiritual depth of all that these men do and say to each other while they sip that tea under those frescoes!
    Except we do know. We do know that the SSPX has been vastly, undeniably, and most painfully, silent, about the fact that our sitting pope is a destroyer and an apostate, and he is almost single-handedly tearing our church and faith in two. There is a moment that is an opportunity, and after that moment, the opportunity has passed and is no more. It cannot be reimagined or reinvented. I do not care low lovely the Mass, how faithful the Liturgy, how timeless the music. If you leave the sheep to suffer while you are busy selecting the real estate, I personally have no use for you. Others will feel differently, surely.
    It appears, that 2017 will be the year when to all appearances we are left entirely alone, with nothing but the Rosary and the crucifix. But it’s ok, brothers and sisters, even if that is the case, we’ll make it. God will not abandon us. He promised.

  45. Eejay says:

    I mentioned this in another blog comment somewhere else. When I became Catholic I never attended an RCIA session. I think these days you have to, I’m not sure. Anyway, years later I did attend such a course. It was pretty good. By this time I was quite streetwise regarding the threat of modernism and just sat back and listened confident I could filter out any nonsense. But I have to say it was a very good course. The priest said something that struck me quite hard, I never forgot it. He told us that even if the Church was reduced to just one orthodox Catholic priest in the whole world, then the Church would be alive and continuing. So, even if the SSPX succumbed to the worst, so be it. There are others who will continue the faith.

  46. GOR says:

    Be afraid, SSPX. Be very afraid!

  47. Petrus Romanus says:

    Hillary, I agree with you. Consider reading my blog

  48. Wendy in VA says:

    I don’t know enough about what’s purported to be in the personal prelature agreement to know if any of this is possible, but could it be that Bishop Fellay is looking at this as a rescue mission? If part of the agreement is that all the other trad orders could be gathered in, so to speak, under the SSPX, maybe the thinking is that there’s strength in numbers? If the SSPX retains control of their own assets, they could leave again if need be, but this time with all the trads and an already operational infrastructure of chapels, seminaries, and schools. I don’t see any other way this makes a bit of sense.

Comments are closed.