P
ProVobis
Guest
Then how about FSPJXXIII?
- Status
S
sw85
Guest
You know, I never thought about it before but you’re right. The X is vaguely sinister.
T
TempleServant
Guest
X means 10. Just because it was subsequently used to the mean unknown, porn, x marks the spot, etc., is not pertinent.
Shows you how important it is to use a special language set aside for sacred matters and not the vulgar one.
Shows you how important it is to use a special language set aside for sacred matters and not the vulgar one.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Having a sacred language does nothing to prevent folks who aren’t a part of the Church from twisting certain letters around. People would still apply their thoughts to the characters and words.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Professor X? Extremely powerful telepath.
The X-Men? Speaks for themselves.
Megaman X? Fantastic video game series.
Final Fantasy X? An underrated installment of the series.
St. Francis Xavier X-Men? A Canadian University!
Nothing vague about it in my books
T
TempleServant
Guest
I’ve read this twice and I still don’t know what you mean.
The common language mutates all the time. A ‘dead’ one doesn’t. This is good for sacred rituals. You don’t want people wincing or tittering in the pews as some phrase develops vulgar connotations.
S
sw85
Guest
Did we just become best friends?!Professor X? Extremely powerful telepath.
The X-Men? Speaks for themselves.
Megaman X? Fantastic video game series.
Final Fantasy X? An underrated installment of the series.
St. Francis Xavier X-Men? A Canadian University!
Nothing vague about it in my books
YUP!!
M
Melchior_1
Guest
The vulgar tongue that people are exposed to will still be applied on the sacred language.
Say Latin was used all times every time by everyone. A group is formed that has the motto Paupertas Offero Obsequium (Poverty, Bringing Forward, Service) or something like that. In the holy language, that would spell POO.
Say there was a Pope Erasmus, and there was ten of them. The tenth was was a Saint. and a group is founded in his honour. Societate Erasmus X, also known as SEX.
Yes, clearly in the holy language that’s fine. However the language that people use outside of the Church every day will shake their head. Like it or not, the language we use every day will still impact us.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Good times!
In my city there’s several Catholic households that have popped up for fellowship, growing in the faith together, and keeping your expenses down while you’re single (once one of the people get married, they move out and someone takes their place). A trend started where the people in the house would pick a patron and name the household after them.
Much to my chagrin, another household had a better name than mine did. They called themselves the X-Men after St. Francis Xavier.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Not only do I agree but that’s the way it is.
FSSPX is Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X
ICRSS is Institutum Christi Regis Summi Sacerdotis
FSSP is Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Petri
(But that won’t stop them from using SSPX, ICK, etc.)
P
ProVobis
Guest
Sex is also Latin for “six.” Heaven forbid we use it in any of the readings at Mass.
J
JReducation
Guest
I hate to say “I told you so,” but I did say this many times on this forum. The Society is not coming back in one piece. I had no idea who would be on what side, other than Bishop Williamson. Though I believe that Pope Benedict would like to make him chaplain at Auschwitz. There is monastery there, for those who don’t know. They pray for the victims of the Holocaust.
Several thoughts and points jumped out at me as I read the entire page. Before going to the letter, let me say that the responses were like a Bell Curve. On the hump, are the majority of us who want this to happen and are happy to see the Bishop working hard to make it happen. At the A end of the curve are the few that still believe that this will happen without casualties. Which makes me wonder if they have been paying attention at all. On the F end of the curve are the other few who are speaking as if they owned the Society and had a right to dictate to a superior general what he should or should not do.
If the Society is regularized as a prelature, the first thing that is going to disappear is outside influence. Prelatures answer to the Holy Father, as do religious orders of pontifical right. Unless Pope Benedict changes the rules to accommodate the SSPX, the current regulation that governs Opus Dei, the only prelature in the Church, explicitly prohibits the participation of laity and religious in the decision making of the prelature. It also limits the ordinary power to the prelate. In this case the other bishops would not be ordinaries. They would have to give up some control.
The prelate governs in the name of the pope. There can be a superior general who is not the prelate, if they establish an infrastructure like that of Opus Dei, where the Society of the Holy Cross is part of the prelature, then the prelature itself consists of clergy, religious and laity. But only the clergy have a voice and vote.
It also struck me as interesting that some people seemed to feel that if the SSPX comes back, they have to come back. In my mind, this raises the question, “Where have you been?” The laity was never penalized.
Now to the Bishop’s letter. I liked his realism. He comes across as a real person who is looking into the barrel of a loaded gun and he’s rightfully scared. It takes a lot of humility to show that side of the self. In that honesty, he also admits the reality of the situation when he says
**
For the common good of the Society, we would prefer by far the current solution of an intermediary status quo, but clearly, Rome is not going to tolerate it any longer. **
He makes it obvious, without too many words that Rome has given them an ultimatum, “Come in or get out. There is no more irregular status.” Again, the man is being very realistic and saying that if they want to be Catholic, they have to come in. Peter has spoken.
He said something that we have discussed here many times. The necessity of obedience, except in case of sin. Even though situations are not ideal, we do not have the right to disobey. He won my vote of confidence with that statement.
**
If the pope expresses a legitimate will concerning us which is good and which does not order anything contrary to the commandments of God, have we the right to neglect or to dismiss this will? **
This statement shows a lot of spiritual and emotional growth. When he was a younger man, he disobeyed the pope and accepted an illegal ordination to the episcopal order. Now, he’s talking about obeying, even when it’s tough to do so. This is not the same person. This is a man who has grown in many ways, to the point that he is willing to challenge is colleagues and to obey.
I loved this line.
**
You see the dangers, the plots, the difficulties, but you no longer see the assistance of grace and of the Holy Ghost.**
CAF should make this into a banner on the TC Forum. This statement is so similar to many made by St. Francis, St. Clare and St. Anthony to the friars and nuns every time they pointed their finger at some failing in the Church.
He makes another very important statement that speaks about the future of the SSPX.
**
Our venerated founder gave the bishops of the Society a precise function and duties. He made it clear that the unifying principle of our society is the Superior General. But for some time now, you have tried, each in his own way, to impose on him your point of view, even in the form of threats, even publically.**
He calls a spade a spade. He’s telling them that until further notice, he’s the boss and he will do as he sees best. He saw best to keep them out of the loop. He also calls them to task for trying to bully him and to manipulate him, something that no superior general tolerates well. It speaks to the future too. If he remains the superior general, he will not put up with whining, backbiting, or people telling him what to do.
There is an important note that must be made here. While it is true that he is the superior general, his priests and bishops are not bound to obey him to the same moral degree as is the case for religious. The SSPX is not an order or a congregation. It is a secular society of apostolic life. They don’t make vows of obedience. They make a promise of obedience. If they are disobedient to the superior general, it’s a venial sin of disobedience. If a religious is disobedient to a superior general he commits two sins. He disobeys (venial) and he breaches the vow that he made to obey always (mortal). In fairness to the others, it’s important to know that they are not guilty of violating a vow of obedience. If what he says is happening, they’re guilty of insubordination, but not grave sin.
Let’s pray that this chapter will conclude soon. As the bishop said in the letter, one problem replaces another. Just because this chapter is concluded, we’re not going on a honeymoon, yet.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Several thoughts and points jumped out at me as I read the entire page. Before going to the letter, let me say that the responses were like a Bell Curve. On the hump, are the majority of us who want this to happen and are happy to see the Bishop working hard to make it happen. At the A end of the curve are the few that still believe that this will happen without casualties. Which makes me wonder if they have been paying attention at all. On the F end of the curve are the other few who are speaking as if they owned the Society and had a right to dictate to a superior general what he should or should not do.
If the Society is regularized as a prelature, the first thing that is going to disappear is outside influence. Prelatures answer to the Holy Father, as do religious orders of pontifical right. Unless Pope Benedict changes the rules to accommodate the SSPX, the current regulation that governs Opus Dei, the only prelature in the Church, explicitly prohibits the participation of laity and religious in the decision making of the prelature. It also limits the ordinary power to the prelate. In this case the other bishops would not be ordinaries. They would have to give up some control.
The prelate governs in the name of the pope. There can be a superior general who is not the prelate, if they establish an infrastructure like that of Opus Dei, where the Society of the Holy Cross is part of the prelature, then the prelature itself consists of clergy, religious and laity. But only the clergy have a voice and vote.
It also struck me as interesting that some people seemed to feel that if the SSPX comes back, they have to come back. In my mind, this raises the question, “Where have you been?” The laity was never penalized.
Now to the Bishop’s letter. I liked his realism. He comes across as a real person who is looking into the barrel of a loaded gun and he’s rightfully scared. It takes a lot of humility to show that side of the self. In that honesty, he also admits the reality of the situation when he says
**
For the common good of the Society, we would prefer by far the current solution of an intermediary status quo, but clearly, Rome is not going to tolerate it any longer. **
He makes it obvious, without too many words that Rome has given them an ultimatum, “Come in or get out. There is no more irregular status.” Again, the man is being very realistic and saying that if they want to be Catholic, they have to come in. Peter has spoken.
He said something that we have discussed here many times. The necessity of obedience, except in case of sin. Even though situations are not ideal, we do not have the right to disobey. He won my vote of confidence with that statement.
**
If the pope expresses a legitimate will concerning us which is good and which does not order anything contrary to the commandments of God, have we the right to neglect or to dismiss this will? **
This statement shows a lot of spiritual and emotional growth. When he was a younger man, he disobeyed the pope and accepted an illegal ordination to the episcopal order. Now, he’s talking about obeying, even when it’s tough to do so. This is not the same person. This is a man who has grown in many ways, to the point that he is willing to challenge is colleagues and to obey.
I loved this line.
**
You see the dangers, the plots, the difficulties, but you no longer see the assistance of grace and of the Holy Ghost.**
CAF should make this into a banner on the TC Forum. This statement is so similar to many made by St. Francis, St. Clare and St. Anthony to the friars and nuns every time they pointed their finger at some failing in the Church.
He makes another very important statement that speaks about the future of the SSPX.
**
Our venerated founder gave the bishops of the Society a precise function and duties. He made it clear that the unifying principle of our society is the Superior General. But for some time now, you have tried, each in his own way, to impose on him your point of view, even in the form of threats, even publically.**
He calls a spade a spade. He’s telling them that until further notice, he’s the boss and he will do as he sees best. He saw best to keep them out of the loop. He also calls them to task for trying to bully him and to manipulate him, something that no superior general tolerates well. It speaks to the future too. If he remains the superior general, he will not put up with whining, backbiting, or people telling him what to do.
There is an important note that must be made here. While it is true that he is the superior general, his priests and bishops are not bound to obey him to the same moral degree as is the case for religious. The SSPX is not an order or a congregation. It is a secular society of apostolic life. They don’t make vows of obedience. They make a promise of obedience. If they are disobedient to the superior general, it’s a venial sin of disobedience. If a religious is disobedient to a superior general he commits two sins. He disobeys (venial) and he breaches the vow that he made to obey always (mortal). In fairness to the others, it’s important to know that they are not guilty of violating a vow of obedience. If what he says is happening, they’re guilty of insubordination, but not grave sin.
Let’s pray that this chapter will conclude soon. As the bishop said in the letter, one problem replaces another. Just because this chapter is concluded, we’re not going on a honeymoon, yet.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
M
Melchior_1
Guest
My respect for His Grace Fellay has grown a lot reading this. Out of the four of them, it looks like three Bishops want to continue fighting, while Bishop Fellay wants to head home. That can’t be easy, and it certainly can’t be easy when he probably is being bombarded with comments.
Some of the language used by the other faction within the Society is alarming, but His Grace seems to be much more moderate in comparison. Frankly, I think a lot of the concerns people have about the Society would be resolved (or at least calmed) if more people had his attitude.
If His Grace Fellay can lead those like him back into the fold, I can only imagine great things happening for the Church.
Some of the language used by the other faction within the Society is alarming, but His Grace seems to be much more moderate in comparison. Frankly, I think a lot of the concerns people have about the Society would be resolved (or at least calmed) if more people had his attitude.
If His Grace Fellay can lead those like him back into the fold, I can only imagine great things happening for the Church.
M
Megan7
Guest
Dear Brother JR,Several thoughts and points jumped out at me as I read the entire page. Before going to the letter, let me say that the responses were like a Bell Curve. On the hump, are the majority of us who want this to happen and are happy to see the Bishop working hard to make it happen. At the A end of the curve are the few that still believe that this will happen without casualties. Which makes me wonder if they have been paying attention at all. On the F end of the curve are the other few who are speaking as if they owned the Society and had a right to dictate to a superior general what he should or should not do.
If the Society is regularized as a prelature, the first thing that is going to disappear is outside influence. Prelatures answer to the Holy Father, as do religious orders of pontifical right. Unless Pope Benedict changes the rules to accommodate the SSPX, the current regulation that governs Opus Dei, the only prelature in the Church, explicitly prohibits the participation of laity and religious in the decision making of the prelature. It also limits the ordinary power to the prelate. In this case the other bishops would not be ordinaries. They would have to give up some control.
The prelate governs in the name of the pope. There can be a superior general who is not the prelate, if they establish an infrastructure like that of Opus Dei, where the Society of the Holy Cross is part of the prelature, then the prelature itself consists of clergy, religious and laity. But only the clergy have a voice and vote.
It also struck me as interesting that some people seemed to feel that if the SSPX comes back, they have to come back. In my mind, this raises the question, “Where have you been?” The laity was never penalized.
Now to the Bishop’s letter. I liked his realism. He comes across as a real person who is looking into the barrel of a loaded gun and he’s rightfully scared. It takes a lot of humility to show that side of the self. In that honesty, he also admits the reality of the situation when he says
**
For the common good of the Society, we would prefer by far the current solution of an intermediary status quo, but clearly, Rome is not going to tolerate it any longer. **
He makes it obvious, without too many words that Rome has given them an ultimatum, “Come in or get out. There is no more irregular status.” Again, the man is being very realistic and saying that if they want to be Catholic, they have to come in. Peter has spoken.
He said something that we have discussed here many times. The necessity of obedience, except in case of sin. Even though situations are not ideal, we do not have the right to disobey. He won my vote of confidence with that statement.
**
If the pope expresses a legitimate will concerning us which is good and which does not order anything contrary to the commandments of God, have we the right to neglect or to dismiss this will? **
This statement shows a lot of spiritual and emotional growth. When he was a younger man, he disobeyed the pope and accepted an illegal ordination to the episcopal order. Now, he’s talking about obeying, even when it’s tough to do so. This is not the same person. This is a man who has grown in many ways, to the point that he is willing to challenge is colleagues and to obey.
I loved this line.
**
You see the dangers, the plots, the difficulties, but you no longer see the assistance of grace and of the Holy Ghost.**
CAF should make this into a banner on the TC Forum. This statement is so similar to many made by St. Francis, St. Clare and St. Anthony to the friars and nuns every time they pointed their finger at some failing in the Church.
He makes another very important statement that speaks about the future of the SSPX.
**
Our venerated founder gave the bishops of the Society a precise function and duties. He made it clear that the unifying principle of our society is the Superior General. But for some time now, you have tried, each in his own way, to impose on him your point of view, even in the form of threats, even publically.**
He calls a spade a spade. He’s telling them that until further notice, he’s the boss and he will do as he sees best. He saw best to keep them out of the loop. He also calls them to task for trying to bully him and to manipulate him, something that no superior general tolerates well. It speaks to the future too. If he remains the superior general, he will not put up with whining, backbiting, or people telling him what to do.
There is an important note that must be made here. While it is true that he is the superior general, his priests and bishops are not bound to obey him to the same moral degree as is the case for religious. The SSPX is not an order or a congregation. It is a secular society of apostolic life. They don’t make vows of obedience. They make a promise of obedience. If they are disobedient to the superior general, it’s a venial sin of disobedience. If a religious is disobedient to a superior general he commits two sins. He disobeys (venial) and he breaches the vow that he made to obey always (mortal). In fairness to the others, it’s important to know that they are not guilty of violating a vow of obedience. If what he says is happening, they’re guilty of insubordination, but not grave sin.
Let’s pray that this chapter will conclude soon. As the bishop said in the letter, one problem replaces another. Just because this chapter is concluded, we’re not going on a honeymoon, yet.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Thank you!
God Bless you for everything you do!
I always understand things better once I read your posts!
PAX,
Megan
M
Mike30
Guest
An excellent post Brother. I am no fan of the SSPX, although I can certainly understand why, in the context of the times, Archbishop Lefbreve did as he did. He truly felt that there was a rupture in the Church, a serious break with tradition and he had to act to save continuity. Maybe pride got the best of him. Who knows? While I don’t agree with what he did, I can understand why he felt the need to do it, and not to hate him or the Society because he did. If I had to hate and scorn all those, both Clergy and laity, who disobey the Holy Father and those who flaunt the rules, Doctrine and Dogmas of the Church, I would soon be hating way to many to count.I hate to say “I told you so,” but I did say this many times on this forum. The Society is not coming back in one piece. I had no idea who would be on what side, other than Bishop Williamson. Though I believe that Pope Benedict would like to make him chaplain at Auschwitz. There is monastery there, for those who don’t know. They pray for the victims of the Holocaust.
Br. JR, FFV
I have been reading on other sites that Bishop Fellay is a sellout, a traitor and worse, so I too have to agree there wil be those in the Society who refuse to follow him should he lead the Society back to the Church. I have also read that the possibility exists that even if the Society returns it could theoretically be possible that Bishops would not have to accept them in their Diocese, and the Society would effectively be destroyed, although I really don’t understand that angle. Maybe you could explain it.
A truly bittersweet situation. Very, very sad.
J
JReducation
Guest
Well Mike, I’m sure you’ve heard about Monday morning quarterbacks and backseat drivers, etc. Unfortunately, there are too many people on the internet who have never sat through a course of Canon Law in their lives, have never belonged to a religious order or to a society of apostolic life, but they’re all experts. Go figure!
The truth is that no matter which way the Bishop goes, someone is going to be unhappy. I live in a town where there is a chapel with two SSPX priests. How those two have not killed each other is beyond me. One hates Rome. I think he’s middle name is Nero. He’s packing his matches and fiddle. The other is best friends with our brothers and can’t wait for this to be over, because I promised him that as soon as his suspension is lifted I will give him faculties to celebrate the EF for us in thanksgiving. They’re on two different pages. I’m sure that they’re no different from the rest of the SSPX. or any other group.
The difference between the SSPX and let’s say a religious order is that the superior general of the SSPX does not have the same kind of clout that the superior general of a religious order has. The superior general of a religious order has the right to command silence. He has the right to command that you put distance between you and whatever you’re thinking that is not good for the community. If you do not comply, he has the right to suspend your faculties. If that does not work, he has the right to file for your dismissal.
Because the SSPX has no canonical place, it has no canonical rights either. The superior general depends on the good faith of his men. If they choose to be insubordinate, there is very little that he can do. I would hate to be in his shoes, because it must be a horrible feeling. These are his friends and partners. When you have to make a tough choice that puts you on the other side, it hurts. My heart goes out to this man, even though we disagree on everything from ecumenism to the number of continents on this planet. But he’s not a person who gets under my skin. He is very genuine and I believe that he can give and take in a debate without making it personal. Many in the SSPX have made this very personal, especially the laity. The laity should really back off at this point. This is really a canonical matter between an institute and the Vatican.
People are guessing about what can potentially happen to them if they become regularized. The truth is that only the Lord, Pope Benedict and Cardinal Levada know. Here’s the deal. If it’s true that they are being offered a prelature, the only prelature in existence is Opus Dei. It’s the first in the history of the Church. Which is ironic. The idea of a prelature was a creation by Bl. John Paul II, for whom the SSPX has no love and now, his creation is going to save them.
The way that Opus Dei operates is that they have a bishop who is the prelate. He governs in place of the pope. He can build semianries, recruit vocations, assign men, purchase property, sell property, and offer the services of the prelature to Catholics around the world, without physical boundaries. He can also ordain. There is one thing that he cannot do. He cannot grant faculties.
When Opus Dei wants to setup in a diocese, it asks the bishop’s permission to enter and with that, the Society of the Holy Cross, which is their society of priests, get faculties in the diocese that they’re entering. The good thing is that once the bishop has given them canonical status in his diocese, no one can take it away for any reason, except the pope.
J
JReducation
Guest
Canon Law is deliberately vague on the infrastructure of prelatures. Bl. John Paul wanted to leave a lot of wiggle room. It says that the prelature must have statutes and govern itself by them. It says nothing about entering dioceses except this.
**
Can. 297 The statutes likewise are to define the relations of the personal prelature with the local ordinaries in whose particular churches the prelature itself exercises or desires to exercise its pastoral or missionary works, with the previous consent of the diocesan bishop.**
I’m not sure where people are getting this idea that the prelature of the SSPX is going to be destroyed by the bishops, when in fact, the prelature is governed by statutes given to it by the pope.
Think of the prelature as a religious order and the pope as the founder. He writes the rules. How they go about getting the consent of the bishop to enter his diocese is to be determined by the statutes. No one will know until the pope hands Bishop Felay the statutes. Even Bishop Felay won’t know. The erection of a prelature is personal to the pope. He makes up the rules and he changes them at will. They have no voice or vote, unlike a religious order where we have a chapter and we vote on our statutes. Even we have to submit them to the pope for approval.
The difference is that religious know the statutes in advance and the prelature does not. Religious write the statutes and submit them for approval and the prelature gets them from the pope. The law says
**
Can. 295 §1. The statutes established by the Apostolic See govern a personal prelature, and a prelate presides offer it as the proper ordinary; he has the right to erect a national or international seminary and even to incardinate students and promote them to orders under title of service to the prelature.**
It does not say that the pope cannot sit down with them to write these statutes. We don’t know if he will or not. It’s going to be the statutes that will dictate how they will relate to the bishops. The statutes are binding on them and the bishops.
You can tell those folks out there to stop speculating and stop trying to read tea leaves. The Pope, Cardinal Levada, Bishop Felay and the Roman Curia have enough on their plate without being second guessed every step of the way.
St. Augustine tells his monks to mind their own business. Best advice I have ever read.
Fraternally,
Br.JR, FFV
**
Can. 297 The statutes likewise are to define the relations of the personal prelature with the local ordinaries in whose particular churches the prelature itself exercises or desires to exercise its pastoral or missionary works, with the previous consent of the diocesan bishop.**
I’m not sure where people are getting this idea that the prelature of the SSPX is going to be destroyed by the bishops, when in fact, the prelature is governed by statutes given to it by the pope.
Think of the prelature as a religious order and the pope as the founder. He writes the rules. How they go about getting the consent of the bishop to enter his diocese is to be determined by the statutes. No one will know until the pope hands Bishop Felay the statutes. Even Bishop Felay won’t know. The erection of a prelature is personal to the pope. He makes up the rules and he changes them at will. They have no voice or vote, unlike a religious order where we have a chapter and we vote on our statutes. Even we have to submit them to the pope for approval.
The difference is that religious know the statutes in advance and the prelature does not. Religious write the statutes and submit them for approval and the prelature gets them from the pope. The law says
**
Can. 295 §1. The statutes established by the Apostolic See govern a personal prelature, and a prelate presides offer it as the proper ordinary; he has the right to erect a national or international seminary and even to incardinate students and promote them to orders under title of service to the prelature.**
It does not say that the pope cannot sit down with them to write these statutes. We don’t know if he will or not. It’s going to be the statutes that will dictate how they will relate to the bishops. The statutes are binding on them and the bishops.
You can tell those folks out there to stop speculating and stop trying to read tea leaves. The Pope, Cardinal Levada, Bishop Felay and the Roman Curia have enough on their plate without being second guessed every step of the way.
St. Augustine tells his monks to mind their own business. Best advice I have ever read.
Fraternally,
Br.JR, FFV
J
JReducation
Guest
This is a very interesting letter by one of the SSPX priests. Reading between the lines, one can tell that the camps are forming, which is unfortunate.
Here is the letter.
sspx.org/theological_commission/fr_simoulin_no_longer_in_1975_5-11-2012.htm
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
Here is the letter.
sspx.org/theological_commission/fr_simoulin_no_longer_in_1975_5-11-2012.htm
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
M
Mike30
Guest
I agree Brother, and thanks for the responses. They cleared up a lot for me.
1
1AugustSon7
Guest
Wow! You know how to make the word naive appear correctly on a forum? Sorcerer!
All kidding aside, this was clearly written with full knowledge that it would be made public, as should be rather obvious. (This is hardly the kind of letter sent between friends. It’s patent posturing on the face of it; that is, it’s political.)
Bp. Fellay has actual control of the Society. The other bishops can but garnish popular support amongst the ranks of the laity. A revolt would be extremely time consuming and expensive and virtually require a start from scratch as well as no historical link to the Catholic Church. Not a good situation.
It’s clear Bp. Fellay is planning on reconciling whether they (or anyone, for that matter) like it or not. For the other bishops, it’s a matter of their own principles or potentially seizing an opportunity to become the next quasi-Abp. Lefebvres: e.g., decrying a compromise of Tradition but (in this case) specifically the Society’s tradition.
Personally, I think taking issue with a lack of i) “a supernatural spirit” (as opposed to a preternatural or human one?) as well as ii) a lack of “realism” is a bit comical, if not an outright oxymoron these days. You cannot possibly get any more ambiguous than that.
What we gather from this is that Bp. Fellay is going ahead regardless of what objections the other bishops have. Of course, since he effectively controls the Society, it’s not like he needs their support anyways.
In my personal opinion, Bp. Fellay is a bad politician. A decent strategist, for sure… but no statesman.
There’s no question now that he intends to reconcile and (short of a catastrophe) it’s almost assuredly going to happen, given the rather definitive tone of this letter.
- Status