with Rome. Are they going to let go, abandon the fight? It is too soon to tell, they are adamant they are not. Here is a brief summary of the events which took place and which are making us fear for them: I asked Bishop de Galarreta to go and meet immediately with Bishop Rangel to try and stop that process so doubtful, hidden, and conducted behind our backs. Bishop de Galarreta ended up having two meetings with the Counsel of the Priestly Union; they are as one, the have an answer to everything, that don’t even discuss it anymore, they justify themselves. Bishop Rangel said: “It is your opinion, we have another. It is a question of prudence, we have another way of seeing things.” They insist that the want to pursue the same fight, that they are remaining friends with us. Amongst the arguments given to justify going their separate ways, one can find a bit of everything, arguments which we had never heard from these otherwise remarkable priests. “One must receive with a good spirit what comes from Rome, that is to say with a will to see the good in it”. “One must not refuse to be sedevacantist on paper only; one must not only obey in right but in deeds…” “To refuse the Roman offer would be schismatic”. All the arguments based on facts, on declarations and actions of Rome on the Fraternity of St Peter for instance, were answered with “we are different from the Fraternity of St Peter”… What Rome is offering, as far as we know: a personal prelature, one more Bishop. The exclusivity of the traditional rite (1962), but the obligation to ask the permission of the local Bishop when Mass is celebrated extra muros or when they wish to open a new place of worship. February 2002 A prevarication such as Assisi begs this public confession… which we have not heard from Campos.
with Rome. Are they going to let go, abandon the fight? It is too soon to tell, they are adamant they are not. Here is a brief summary of the events which took place and which are making us fear for them: I asked Bishop de Galarreta to go and meet immediately with Bishop Rangel to try and stop that process so doubtful, hidden, and conducted behind our backs. Bishop de Galarreta ended up having two meetings with the Counsel of the Priestly Union; they are as one, the have an answer to everything, that don’t even discuss it anymore, they justify themselves. Bishop Rangel said: “It is your opinion, we have another. It is a question of prudence, we have another way of seeing things.” They insist that the want to pursue the same fight, that they are remaining friends with us. Amongst the arguments given to justify going their separate ways, one can find a bit of everything, arguments which we had never heard from these otherwise remarkable priests. “One must receive with a good spirit what comes from Rome, that is to say with a will to see the good in it”. “One must not refuse to be sedevacantist on paper only; one must not only obey in right but in deeds…” “To refuse the Roman offer would be schismatic”. All the arguments based on facts, on declarations and actions of Rome on the Fraternity of St Peter for instance, were answered with “we are different from the Fraternity of St Peter”… What Rome is offering, as far as we know: a personal prelature, one more Bishop. The exclusivity of the traditional rite (1962), but the obligation to ask the permission of the local Bishop when Mass is celebrated extra muros or when they wish to open a new place of worship. February 2002 A prevarication such as Assisi begs this public confession… which we have not heard from Campos.
February-15th-2014.docx