SSPX, General Chapter, Williamson.

Fellay

And so it came to pass – and to be leaked – that the exclusion of bishop Williamson from the General Chapter of the SSPX was approved by an overwhelming majority  of the capitularies now gathering in Écône.

Some say this does not mean much, because Williamson is certainly not as dangerous to Fellay’s leadership than the other two I do not say rebel, but at least critical bishops.

Allow me to say why I disagree:

1. Without attributing to certainly very honest men less than honest qualities, it must be evident that if Tissier de Mallerais and Alfonso de Galarreta had intended to openly challenge bishop Fellay’s leadership, they would not have started by asking their supporters to go against Williamson. Not for reasons of duplicity, but simply for reasons of ordinary prudence and political common sense. If, on the other hand, the two bishops do want to mount a challenge but cannot have their men rallying in Williamson’s defence, then they are clearly not nearly strong enough to challenge Fellay’s leadership.

2. It seems to me that, with some exceptions, most f the SSPX members have seen – if I may say so; I think I may – through the Vatican’s game of dividing them trying to cause separations within them and the creation of “splinter” groups; a game already played, most notably in 1988 through the FSSP; a move which seems to me to have been certainly approved –  if not altogether engineered – by a Cardinal… Ratzinger.

3. By all disagreements, the cold shower from the Vatican has certainly showed bishop Fellay is not willing to be strong-armed by the Vatican (cow)boys, and no vague threats of (what exactly? Declaration of 2000 years of Catholicism as “schismatic”, perhaps?) “retaliation” will move him to do any concession. Bishop Fellay is, in fact, amply outsmarting the Vatican, being able to present himself as a safe custodian of Catholic orthodoxy – as, make no mistake, I am sure he is; though I have been known to be very wrong in the past, most notably concerning Popes… –  whilst the Holy Father shoots himself in the foot by appointing a mediocre, irascible, apparently even interview-addicted pal of his to the main chair in this controversy (three interviews already in just a few days, if memory serves; and not coming well at all out of any of them).

Mueller

Obviously, during the weekend I might prove to be spectacularly wrong, and I will make a suitable act of contrition if it were to be so; but I do not think bishop Fellay is one of those types preferring the womanly option and saying “if there is dissent against me I prefer to go, so that everyone can see how badly hurt I am”. I think we can safely say the Lord carved the man out of different wood than that.

Therefore, this morning’s announc  leak persuaded me all is – considering the circumstances – rather well within the SSPX. There will be no splits, nor ferocious lamentations; there will be some expression of dissent, largely expected but not threatening the SSPX’ stability;  and there will be a show of unity having with special addressee the Vatican. Hic sumus, et hic manebimus optime. 

In the end, Fellay must well know his position is much more solid than Archbishop Mueller’s. If he only wants, Fellay will be at his place – Deo volente, of course – for the next six years at the very, very least; Archbishop Mueller can’t even know whether (as the Italian saying goes) he will eat his panettone as the head of the CDF. It may be cynical to say so, but it is the reality on the ground, and it doesn’t really make sense to ignore it.

Mundabor

About these ads

Posted on July 13, 2012, in Catholicism, FSSPX and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 6 Comments.

  1. Although I believe it true and that ample, reliable and almost incontrovertible evidence exists to support what I am about to write I am equally sure that not only would it be imprudent of me to disclose the supporting facts but that it would be a signal breach of trust for me to do so and for those reasons I will, at this time, claim only ‘well informed opinion’ for my words.

    For some time when Bernard Fellay was a Seminariste at Econe he sat at the feet of the then Father Richardson and was an avid follower of his lectures and conferences. All was well until Bishop Fellay stitched up his own appointment as Superior – Archbishop Lefebvre did not want any of the Bishops to be the Superior General of the Fraternity but Bishop Fellay is an ambitious fellow and wanted to rule the Fraternity. He is a number cruncher and administrator of great skill and he believes in his capacity for knowing what is best for others.

    Bishop Williamson – the Fraternity’s senior Bishop – is an obstacle to Bishop Fellay’s plans, to his particular vision of what he wants to do and he is also and without doubt + Fellay’s intellectual superior.

    + Fellay is no intellectual. + Fellay is no Pastor. He enviously resents + Williamson superior intellectual qualities.

    + Fellay is a whiz with the numbers and in building his own empire, all with the help of Herr Krahl, his busom buddy and fellow Director on a myriad of Boards of Administration for Companies that + Fellay, alone, controls and governs.

    Of course, the money for those Companies is not + Fellay’s. It is the Fraternity’s and in origin came from the laity. That money and property is under the immediate control of + Fellay. It is materially his to do with as he lists but it is, at the same time, morally not his.

    None would be surprised if the other Bishops are wary of + Fellay. None would be shocked at the very reasonable questions that are being asked. + Fellay and his pro-Israel, zionist, Jewish lawyer – Mr Krahl – are a good team: an Accountant and a Lawyer, a marriage of great mutual convenience if not one at all made in Heaven.

    In this country + Fellay and his lawyer, co-Director buddy would be subject to intense scrutiny by various statutory authorities, the most innocuous of which would be the Charities’ Commission.

    + Fellay is no theologian. + Fellay is no Pastor. + Fellay is no intellectual. + Fellay is a juggler of numbers, a peddlar of unrealistic and naive dreams, an artist of smoke and mirrors and he is not a man who can be trusted with the heritage of Archbishop Lefebvre and the patrimony and security of the FSSPX.

    • Interesting reading, John, if a rather bitter one; but the logic escapes me why you unload such a salvo of accusations on the bishop when you say it would be a breach of trust to divulge the evidence.

      In many countries, you could be sued for libel for accusing the bishop of mismanagement, and then you would have to divulge the supposed evidence supporting these facts – I do not think a lawyer being Jewish would go very far – or be convicted. Would not this be, then, a breach of trust?

      More in general, I cannot at this point avoid to point out that I do not think this blog should be used for the spreading of wild, utterly unproved allegations, and I ask you to kindly keep such tirades out of my blog.

      I have nothing against wild recriminations due to what someone has demonstrably said; but what you are systematically doing on my blog is of an entirely different kind, and frankly I think it should stop.

      Mundabor

  2. I have no wish to use your blog for any purpose other than the good of Holy Church and the dissemination of the truth, however hard or unpalatable that may be to any or all. I would heartily welcome Bishop Fellay’s Writ of Libel. it will never come because he would wish at all costs to avoid an examination of his doings before an English Judge. Same goes for his friend and business partner, Dr Max Krah. Respecting your expressed wishes, I shall hereinafter read your blog but probably not comment upon it for fear of offending your delicate sensibilities. Pax et bonum

  3. John you have got to be kidding. Bishop Williamson has boxed himself into a situation of his own making and has succeeded in making himself redundant. Your claim that he has intellectual superiority over Bishop Fellay is laughable. His addiction to outlandish conspiracy theories and his lack of prudence prove the contrary. Thankfully the Capitularies are a sensible bunch and voted to maintain him in his own Orthanc where with any luck he will manage to stay out of trouble!

    • I personally like the spirit of the man and would not call his place “Orthanc”, but it seems clear to me he drives it too far; by the way, I woudl doubt he has those diplomatic qualities necessary for a man in charge of an entire order with the inevitable internal differences and contrasts.

      I have just reblogged one of his interventions, because I think the man is still brilliant. But it seems to me, in part, a waste of talent.

      M

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,962 other followers

%d bloggers like this: