Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter Kwasniewski's avatar

As a wise friend wrote after reading this:

"Bishops who agree with the basic critique of the Vatican (as Sarah does!) should get together and say, Holy Father, we call upon you to prevent this rupture by taking these steps to circumvent the felt necessity to ordain bishops without a mandate -- and then outline a way forward that allows sympathetic prelates to ordain for the SSPX (Sarah, Müller, et al can offer their services) and regularizes the Society; at least insert the language of +Schneider on the Abu Dhabi statement; soften or repeal TC; and establish a study group to correct AL.

Or something similar.

The way of stating things Sarah goes with just widens the gap. But presenting the matter as something the authority has the responsibility to fix changes the narrative, not least because if the Pope doesn't take the suggestion, once overtly made, he looks like he's admitting that the charges are correct -- that he really does want to lead the church into Anglicanism (a good line there in Müller's statement, much better than hiding behind synodality).

It's really Rome's move."

Mimi's avatar

“This unity is first that of the Catholic faith; it is also that of charity; and finally, it is that of obedience.”

Question for Cardinal Sarah: WHO is causing this “disunity “……Rome who is beatifying a known child predator or the SSPX who has always defended the a true Faith and held fast to the teachings of Christ?

WHO is causing this disunity, Cardinal, Rome who rewards heterodox prelates to positions of authority or the SSPX who adhere to the teachings of Christ?

As a priest has pointed out in his podcast WHO IS STANDING WITH THE ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH?

One more question Cardinal: when a child’s father tells him to commit sin, is that child obligated to obey? Even I know that answer!

103 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?