Walt apologizes to non-Catholic (and even anti-Catholic) readers for posting so many items about Pope Francis, the dire state the Roman Catholic Church, and the traditional Catholic opposition to Vatican II and the mainstream Church. But, dear readers, the Church is in crisis -- more so now than ever before -- and if the Church falls, the Western world will fall, and the rest of the world with it.
That is what Our Lady of Fatima meant when She warned that if Heaven's requests are not obeyed, the consequences will be the enslavement of millions and the annihilation of nations. So please bear with me. This is important.
My post yesterday about the rather Damascene conversion of Bishop Fellay, leader of the Society of St. Pius X, echoed strong comments both for and against the bishop, from within the SSPX and from people who consider themselves good Catholics, in communion with Rome and obedient to the Magisterium of the Church and the "teachings" of Vatican II.
One such is Jeff Mirus, of Trinity Communications, publishers of Catholic World News. In an e-mail to Agent 3, he wrote "the Traditionalists (by which I mean those who reject the authority of the Church in favor of their own private reading of tradition) seem more and more sure to spin away now from any pretense of Catholicity, as Bishop Fellay has already done.... Bishop Fellay has...rejected the Church of Christ. It is impossible to reject an ecumenical Council and condemn the Church’s liturgy without rejecting the Church...."
Like Pope Francis, Jeff Mirus is in error. Traditional Catholics stand for the traditional Catholic Faith as defined by numerous truly ecumenical councils, papal bulls and encyclicals, and the infallible and unchangeable dogma of the Church. "Private reading" as nothing to do with it!
Mr Mirus is in error also when he calls Vatican II an "ecumenical" council. It was not and did not hold itself out to be, which is one of the reasons why the teachings of the Council were never defined anywhere its documents as dogma.
UPDATE, 23/10/13 - Before you go on to the talk by Father Gregory Hesse (below), take a look at "On Pope Francis’ Consecration of the World: A Reply to Jeff Mirus" by Christopher Ferrara, which appeared October 18th in Fatima Perspectives.
Agent 3 has referred Mr Mirus to a talk given some years ago, during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II, by Father Gregory Hesse. Fr Hesse held doctorates in both Thomistic theology and Canon Law. From 1986-88 he served at the Vatican as Secretary to Alfons Cardinal Stickler, one of the periti on the Liturgy Commission of the Council, and one of those who spoke out -- too late -- against the Council and the New Mass.
Father Hesse spoke extensively on the true and false understanding of Papal infallibility and the modern errors in the understanding of sacred tradition, religious liberty and ecumenism brought about by the errors or obscurity and lack of definition in the documents of Vatican II.
His talk "Vatican 2 gave us a New Religion" contrasts what the Council documents (and the first encyclical of John Paul II) teach with established Church teaching derived from previous councils and Papal encyclicals. I'm sorry this "video" is really an "audio". It runs for almost 50 minutes and is well worth listening to in its entirety.
Showing posts with label Fellay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fellay. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
SSPX leader finally gets off the fence, gives up on reconciling with Rome
Just over a month ago, Walt had an eyeball-to-eyeball chat with John Vennari, the editor of Catholic Family News, one of a handful of newspapers and magazines that are still Catholic in more than name only. John mentioned that he would be at the Angelus Press Conference in Kansas City this past weekend, and was looking forward to hearing talks by Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X. I don't know if John expected to hear the strong views expressed by the bishop.
You see, Bishop Fellay has for some months now been accused by "radical traditional" Catholics of being "soft on Vatican II and soft on Rome", in a push to reach an agreement with the Vatican that would see the SSPX brought back into communion with Rome and end the break which occurred in 1988.
It has been suggested by some that Bishop Fellay's motives for desiring the "regularization" of the SSPX were more personal than spiritual, since he would presumably be the head of any new "personal prelature" that might be set up by the Vatican. One group, led by Bishop Richard Williamson, has left to form the "Society of St. Pius X of the Strict Observance". Their stated reason for breaking away is that they absolutely refuse to accept Vatican II and any sort of accommodation with the mainstream Church.
Many in the audience at Kansas City were shocked to hear Bishop Fellay -- after months of dithering -- clearly denounce Vatican II. He described the Novus Ordo (New) Mass imposed by the Council as "evil", and said he is grateful that the SSPX never reached the mooted accommodation with the Holy See.
John Vennari has written a lengthy summary of Bishop Fallay's talks, well worth reading in full: "Bishop Fellay on Pope Francis: 'We have in front of us a genuine Modernist!'" Here are the highlights.
The clear statement that so many traditionalists have waited for for so long was this: "It is has never been our intention to pretend either that the Council would be considered as good, or the New Mass would be 'legitimate'. Bishop Fellay explained that although the Novus Ordo Mass may be valid, "The New Mass is bad, it is evil."
The SSPX leader said that talks with the Vatican collapsed last June because the Vatican insisted on acceptance of the teachings of Vatican II. He flatly rejected the teaching of Pope Benedict XVI that the statements of Vatican II should be read in the light of consistent Catholic teaching. "The Council is not in continuity with tradition," he said. You couldn't ask for a much clearer pronouncement than "It is not."
However, the bishop said, while the "hermeneutic of continuity" preached by Benedict was unrealistic, he acknowledged that the former pope was at least somewhat sympathetic to the concerns of traditionalists. But Pope Francis, he said, the gap between the SSPX and the Holy See is widening. "When we see what is happening now," Bishop Fellay said, "we thank God -— we thank God! -— we have been preserved from any kind of agreement" with the Vatican.
Bishop Fellay noted that we cannot simply obey the present popes without question, because then we would endanger our Faith and so destroy ourselves. He warned also that we may be entering into the time of Antichrist, although we cannot know when, or how far off in the future this may be. Be sure to read: "The 'liquid' message of Pope Francis; will he be the last supreme pontiff?"
You see, Bishop Fellay has for some months now been accused by "radical traditional" Catholics of being "soft on Vatican II and soft on Rome", in a push to reach an agreement with the Vatican that would see the SSPX brought back into communion with Rome and end the break which occurred in 1988.
It has been suggested by some that Bishop Fellay's motives for desiring the "regularization" of the SSPX were more personal than spiritual, since he would presumably be the head of any new "personal prelature" that might be set up by the Vatican. One group, led by Bishop Richard Williamson, has left to form the "Society of St. Pius X of the Strict Observance". Their stated reason for breaking away is that they absolutely refuse to accept Vatican II and any sort of accommodation with the mainstream Church.
Many in the audience at Kansas City were shocked to hear Bishop Fellay -- after months of dithering -- clearly denounce Vatican II. He described the Novus Ordo (New) Mass imposed by the Council as "evil", and said he is grateful that the SSPX never reached the mooted accommodation with the Holy See.
John Vennari has written a lengthy summary of Bishop Fallay's talks, well worth reading in full: "Bishop Fellay on Pope Francis: 'We have in front of us a genuine Modernist!'" Here are the highlights.
The clear statement that so many traditionalists have waited for for so long was this: "It is has never been our intention to pretend either that the Council would be considered as good, or the New Mass would be 'legitimate'. Bishop Fellay explained that although the Novus Ordo Mass may be valid, "The New Mass is bad, it is evil."
The SSPX leader said that talks with the Vatican collapsed last June because the Vatican insisted on acceptance of the teachings of Vatican II. He flatly rejected the teaching of Pope Benedict XVI that the statements of Vatican II should be read in the light of consistent Catholic teaching. "The Council is not in continuity with tradition," he said. You couldn't ask for a much clearer pronouncement than "It is not."
However, the bishop said, while the "hermeneutic of continuity" preached by Benedict was unrealistic, he acknowledged that the former pope was at least somewhat sympathetic to the concerns of traditionalists. But Pope Francis, he said, the gap between the SSPX and the Holy See is widening. "When we see what is happening now," Bishop Fellay said, "we thank God -— we thank God! -— we have been preserved from any kind of agreement" with the Vatican.
Bishop Fellay noted that we cannot simply obey the present popes without question, because then we would endanger our Faith and so destroy ourselves. He warned also that we may be entering into the time of Antichrist, although we cannot know when, or how far off in the future this may be. Be sure to read: "The 'liquid' message of Pope Francis; will he be the last supreme pontiff?"
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Turns out Walt is a Recusant!
Walt is a sometime student of Church history but still has a lot to learn. For instance, what should one call Catholics who refuse to attend the Protestantized "New Mass" which is one of the poisoned fruits of Vatican II? Some traditionalists go even farther and have abandoned the Society of St. Pius X because it uses the "transitional" Roman Missal of 1962.
But what do you call these "Ultra-traditionalists"? Pope Francis recently called them "extremists". Cardinal Bertone inveighed against "Fatimists". But there is an older term, dating back to the days of Henry VIII. Those who refused to attend the "masses" of Henry's schismatic "Church of England" came to be known as Recusants.
The faithful Catholics (and others) who refused to conform to the beliefs and practices of the new English "church" were made criminals by the Recusancy Acts. They suffered fines, confiscation of their property, imprisonment, and even capital punishment -- the death of martyrs like St. Thomas More, who happens to be Walt's patron saint.
Taking their cue from the St. Thomas and the other English martyrs, a group of clergy and laity have separated from the Society of St. Pius X, because they disagree with the desire of it's Superior-General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, to reach some sort of compromise with Rome.
The breakaway group has started a new publication aptly titled The Recusant. The raison d'être of the newsletter/website is to fight "a guerrilla war for the soul of Tradition." This is declared in a signed Letter of Entreaty dated 21 May 2013, which attacks Bishop Fellay and the SSPX for "wilfully pursuing a new direction and a new agenda, remaking the Society in their own image with reckless disregard for the souls which Divine Providence has placed in their care."
The letter charges the SSPX with "having deviated from its essential mission of fidelity to Catholic Tradition and opposition to Modernism due to the betrayal of its liberal leadership." The Recusants argue that the faithful must secede from the corrupted society, which they describe as a "sinking ship, which is beyond repair."
Walt finds the lack of unity in the forces of Tradition within the Church deeply disturbing. Still, one must cling to that which is known to be right -- to the eternal truths taught to us by Our Lord Himself and handed down to us through His Church. If that means refusing to conform to the novelties and outright heresies which was are told are necessary to adapt to the modern world, then yes, let us be "nonconformists". Let us be Recusants!
But what do you call these "Ultra-traditionalists"? Pope Francis recently called them "extremists". Cardinal Bertone inveighed against "Fatimists". But there is an older term, dating back to the days of Henry VIII. Those who refused to attend the "masses" of Henry's schismatic "Church of England" came to be known as Recusants.
Taking their cue from the St. Thomas and the other English martyrs, a group of clergy and laity have separated from the Society of St. Pius X, because they disagree with the desire of it's Superior-General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, to reach some sort of compromise with Rome.
The breakaway group has started a new publication aptly titled The Recusant. The raison d'être of the newsletter/website is to fight "a guerrilla war for the soul of Tradition." This is declared in a signed Letter of Entreaty dated 21 May 2013, which attacks Bishop Fellay and the SSPX for "wilfully pursuing a new direction and a new agenda, remaking the Society in their own image with reckless disregard for the souls which Divine Providence has placed in their care."
The letter charges the SSPX with "having deviated from its essential mission of fidelity to Catholic Tradition and opposition to Modernism due to the betrayal of its liberal leadership." The Recusants argue that the faithful must secede from the corrupted society, which they describe as a "sinking ship, which is beyond repair."
Walt finds the lack of unity in the forces of Tradition within the Church deeply disturbing. Still, one must cling to that which is known to be right -- to the eternal truths taught to us by Our Lord Himself and handed down to us through His Church. If that means refusing to conform to the novelties and outright heresies which was are told are necessary to adapt to the modern world, then yes, let us be "nonconformists". Let us be Recusants!
Saturday, June 1, 2013
Ron Paul, Romeo Dallaire... and Bishop Bernard Fellay too!
On May 22nd, in "Thunder on the right! Politics and religion meet in Niagara Falls", Walt congratulated the Fatima Center on having lined up Ron Paul and Canadian Senator Romeo Dallaire for its "Path to Peace" conference, coming to Niagara Falls (the pretty side) on September 9th through 13th.
Now the "Fatimists" have announced that Most Rev. Bernard Fellay will be attending and speaking as well. Bishop Fellay is the Superior-General of the Society of St. Pius X, the religious society founded by the late Archbishop Lefebvre in opposition to the Protestant/Jewish "reforms" of Vatican II, particularly the suppression of the Mass of All Time.
Missing from the Fatima Center's press release is any reference to the split in the SSPX over Bishop Fellay's attempts to bring the society back into communion with the mainstream Church. The three other bishops consescrated by Abp. Lefebvre have condemned Fellay's overtures to the Vatican as a sell-out, and one -- Bishop Richard Williamson -- has quit the society entirely.
Walt is hoping to attend at least part of the Path to Peace conference, to hear Ron Paul. Now if they could get Bishop Fellay and Bishop Williamson to debate the nature of Catholic Tradition, I'd be there for the whole week!
Now the "Fatimists" have announced that Most Rev. Bernard Fellay will be attending and speaking as well. Bishop Fellay is the Superior-General of the Society of St. Pius X, the religious society founded by the late Archbishop Lefebvre in opposition to the Protestant/Jewish "reforms" of Vatican II, particularly the suppression of the Mass of All Time.
Missing from the Fatima Center's press release is any reference to the split in the SSPX over Bishop Fellay's attempts to bring the society back into communion with the mainstream Church. The three other bishops consescrated by Abp. Lefebvre have condemned Fellay's overtures to the Vatican as a sell-out, and one -- Bishop Richard Williamson -- has quit the society entirely.
Walt is hoping to attend at least part of the Path to Peace conference, to hear Ron Paul. Now if they could get Bishop Fellay and Bishop Williamson to debate the nature of Catholic Tradition, I'd be there for the whole week!
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Abp. Müller labels Traditional Catholics "heretical"; elsewhere, pot calls kettle "black"
Incredible! La Stampa's Vatican Insider reports this week that Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, the newly installed Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (thus chief theological flak-catcher for the Vatican) said that traditionalist Catholics advance a "heretical interpretation" of Vatican II if they claim that the Council made radical changes in Church teaching.
Well, it takes one to know one, you might say. Traditional Catholics have for decades called attention to such heresies as syncretism and relativism which are at least implicit in Vatican II's false "ecumenism", the replacement of the Mass of All Ages with the Protestant (or worse) "new mass" and other poisoned fruits of the Second Vatican Council.
Archbishop Müller said that an "accurate reading" of Vatican II statements must assume that the Council’s statements are in keeping with the established teachings of the Church. Well, why must it? Is it, then, a question of interpretation? If so, what would make Abp. Müller's interpretation superior to that of Archbishop Lefebvre (founder of the Society of St. Pius X) or, for that matter, Pope Paul VI who said that with Vatican II "the smoke of Satan has entered the Church".
Pope Paul should have known the truth of it, for he himself held open the doors.
Further reading: "The terrible dilemma of Bishop Fellay". Follow the link at the end of the article to learn more about the limitations of papal authority -- or the authority of a council -- to change Sacred Tradition.
Well, it takes one to know one, you might say. Traditional Catholics have for decades called attention to such heresies as syncretism and relativism which are at least implicit in Vatican II's false "ecumenism", the replacement of the Mass of All Ages with the Protestant (or worse) "new mass" and other poisoned fruits of the Second Vatican Council.
Archbishop Müller said that an "accurate reading" of Vatican II statements must assume that the Council’s statements are in keeping with the established teachings of the Church. Well, why must it? Is it, then, a question of interpretation? If so, what would make Abp. Müller's interpretation superior to that of Archbishop Lefebvre (founder of the Society of St. Pius X) or, for that matter, Pope Paul VI who said that with Vatican II "the smoke of Satan has entered the Church".
Pope Paul should have known the truth of it, for he himself held open the doors.
Further reading: "The terrible dilemma of Bishop Fellay". Follow the link at the end of the article to learn more about the limitations of papal authority -- or the authority of a council -- to change Sacred Tradition.
Monday, November 26, 2012
The terrible dilemma of Bishop Fellay
Bishop Bernard Fellay, leader pro tem of the Society of St. Pius X, finds himself on the horns of an intellectual and theological dilemma. On November 1st, Bishop Fellay celebrated Holy Mass -- the Traditional Mass of All Time -- at the SSPX seminary in Ecône, Switzerland.
During his sermon, after recalling the spiritual meaning of the Feast of All Saints, he explained the status of the Society's relations with Rome. Unfortunately for him and for the SSPX, Bishop Fellay's discourse expressed more clearly than ever before why his position and that of his wing of the Society is untenable.
Let's examine the logic:
Premise 1. The magisterium is the authentic judge of Apostolic Tradition. It is the magisterium which tells people what belongs to Tradition and what doesn't.
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise. He accepts that "magisterium" means the pope. But that is not good Catholic teaching. "Magisterium" is a neuter noun. It is an objective thing, not a person. Objectively, Tradition is Tradition. Even the pope cannot change Tradition, as it comes from Christ's Apostles. In 1870 the first Vatican Council proclaimed that even the pope does not have the power to change Sacred Tradition. That is dogma!
Premise 2. The Pope claims that the teachings of the Vatican II Council are "Tradition". Benedict XVI goes on and on about the "hermeneutic of continuity" -- whatever that is -- and asserts over and over again that Vatican II is not a break with the past, but part of Catholic "Tradition".
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise too. Therefore, he and his followers in the SSPX -- there are dissenters, notably Bishop Richard Williamson -- must accept the teachings of the Vatican II Council concerning ecumenism, collegiality, religious liberty, and many other modernistic "doctrines" which are objectively not Catholic.
It follows too that Bishop Fellay and those who stand with him must accept the validity of the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo worship service -- notice I didn't say "Mass" -- of 1969, as well as the status of those admitted to the priesthood under the New Ordinal.
But... in his sermon, the bishop claims that he can not follow these two conclusions. The problem is that -- logically -- if he accepts the two premises, he must accept their two conclusions. Thus, Bishop Fellay exposes himself as either unable to follow the logic or a hypocrite.
In his sermon, he confesses that he tried to have it both ways, to somehow reconcile the Vatican's position with his previous opposition to it. He penned certain changes denying the conclusions to the Pope's proposed "Doctrinal Preamble". But Benedict himself struck out Bishop Fellay's amendments and returned to him the original document, demanding that the bishop and the SSPX accept it unchanged.
According to the Traditio website, from which the foregoing is adapted, Bishop Fellay could redeem his hypocrisy by rejecting the two conclusions and accepting a different premise, i.e. the premise of the Catholic Fathers and Doctors of the Church that even a pope can be a personal heretic.
St. Paul denounced St. Peter for heresy (Galatians 2:11 et seq.), from which very important example we learn that the faithful must not follow a pope into heresy. But Bishop Fellay rejects that Catholic premise in favor of allowing the Modernists -- led by a thoroughly Modernist pope disguised as a "conservative" -- to occupy and possess the Holy See and the Chair of St. Peter.
Thus (says Traditio), Bishop Fellay has become the Great Hypocrite, and his followers in the Society of St. Pius X follows him into this hypocrisy. What will be the consequences for them of their hypocritical acceptance of heretical principles? St. Matthew 24:51 tells us: "The Lord ... shall separate him, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Click here to learn more about the limitations of papal authority to change Sacred Tradition, from the writings of Roman Catholic popes, councils, saints, and theologians. The second part of this rather lengthy piece is a list -- an astonishingly long list -- of popes who arguably fell into material (personal) heresy.
Finally, the article speaks of two anti-popes. Particularly à propos is the account of St. Bernard's rejection of the validity of a pope (Anacletus II) who was elected by the majority of cardinals, occupied the See of Rome, and was recognized by the whole world!
During his sermon, after recalling the spiritual meaning of the Feast of All Saints, he explained the status of the Society's relations with Rome. Unfortunately for him and for the SSPX, Bishop Fellay's discourse expressed more clearly than ever before why his position and that of his wing of the Society is untenable.
Let's examine the logic:
Premise 1. The magisterium is the authentic judge of Apostolic Tradition. It is the magisterium which tells people what belongs to Tradition and what doesn't.
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise. He accepts that "magisterium" means the pope. But that is not good Catholic teaching. "Magisterium" is a neuter noun. It is an objective thing, not a person. Objectively, Tradition is Tradition. Even the pope cannot change Tradition, as it comes from Christ's Apostles. In 1870 the first Vatican Council proclaimed that even the pope does not have the power to change Sacred Tradition. That is dogma!
Premise 2. The Pope claims that the teachings of the Vatican II Council are "Tradition". Benedict XVI goes on and on about the "hermeneutic of continuity" -- whatever that is -- and asserts over and over again that Vatican II is not a break with the past, but part of Catholic "Tradition".
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise too. Therefore, he and his followers in the SSPX -- there are dissenters, notably Bishop Richard Williamson -- must accept the teachings of the Vatican II Council concerning ecumenism, collegiality, religious liberty, and many other modernistic "doctrines" which are objectively not Catholic.
It follows too that Bishop Fellay and those who stand with him must accept the validity of the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo worship service -- notice I didn't say "Mass" -- of 1969, as well as the status of those admitted to the priesthood under the New Ordinal.
But... in his sermon, the bishop claims that he can not follow these two conclusions. The problem is that -- logically -- if he accepts the two premises, he must accept their two conclusions. Thus, Bishop Fellay exposes himself as either unable to follow the logic or a hypocrite.
In his sermon, he confesses that he tried to have it both ways, to somehow reconcile the Vatican's position with his previous opposition to it. He penned certain changes denying the conclusions to the Pope's proposed "Doctrinal Preamble". But Benedict himself struck out Bishop Fellay's amendments and returned to him the original document, demanding that the bishop and the SSPX accept it unchanged.
According to the Traditio website, from which the foregoing is adapted, Bishop Fellay could redeem his hypocrisy by rejecting the two conclusions and accepting a different premise, i.e. the premise of the Catholic Fathers and Doctors of the Church that even a pope can be a personal heretic.
St. Paul denounced St. Peter for heresy (Galatians 2:11 et seq.), from which very important example we learn that the faithful must not follow a pope into heresy. But Bishop Fellay rejects that Catholic premise in favor of allowing the Modernists -- led by a thoroughly Modernist pope disguised as a "conservative" -- to occupy and possess the Holy See and the Chair of St. Peter.
Thus (says Traditio), Bishop Fellay has become the Great Hypocrite, and his followers in the Society of St. Pius X follows him into this hypocrisy. What will be the consequences for them of their hypocritical acceptance of heretical principles? St. Matthew 24:51 tells us: "The Lord ... shall separate him, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Click here to learn more about the limitations of papal authority to change Sacred Tradition, from the writings of Roman Catholic popes, councils, saints, and theologians. The second part of this rather lengthy piece is a list -- an astonishingly long list -- of popes who arguably fell into material (personal) heresy.
Finally, the article speaks of two anti-popes. Particularly à propos is the account of St. Bernard's rejection of the validity of a pope (Anacletus II) who was elected by the majority of cardinals, occupied the See of Rome, and was recognized by the whole world!
Thursday, October 25, 2012
SSPX gives Bishop Williamson the boot
Rorate Caeli reports that the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has expelled Bishop Richard Williamson for what it calls "refusing to show respect and obedience to his lawful superior". That would be the Society's Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, who Bishop Williamson has criticized repeatedly for betraying the True Faith and the work of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in Bishop Fellay's quest to bring the society back into communion with Rome.
Bishop Williamson was declared "excluded" from the Society on October 4th, 2012. However, he was given a final deadline of October 14th, by which date he had to "bend the knee" -- declare his submission to Bishop Fellay and the Society's council. Bishop Williamson evidently thought he could not do so in good conscience, and announced the publication of an “open letter” asking the Superior General to resign.
He also travelled to Brazil recently, where he administered the sacrament of Confirmation without approval from the SSPX leadership.
Unfortunately for the Superior General, Bishop Williamson is not the only one who believes that Bishop Fellay has gone too far -- much too far -- towards conformity with the modernist teachings and practices of Pope Benedict XVI and the Second Vatican Council. He will not be silenced by his "exclusion", and others will listen... and follow.
Bishop Williamson was declared "excluded" from the Society on October 4th, 2012. However, he was given a final deadline of October 14th, by which date he had to "bend the knee" -- declare his submission to Bishop Fellay and the Society's council. Bishop Williamson evidently thought he could not do so in good conscience, and announced the publication of an “open letter” asking the Superior General to resign.
He also travelled to Brazil recently, where he administered the sacrament of Confirmation without approval from the SSPX leadership.
Unfortunately for the Superior General, Bishop Williamson is not the only one who believes that Bishop Fellay has gone too far -- much too far -- towards conformity with the modernist teachings and practices of Pope Benedict XVI and the Second Vatican Council. He will not be silenced by his "exclusion", and others will listen... and follow.
Monday, October 8, 2012
Negotiations between Rome and the SSPX: Abp. Muller slams the door
The new Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith -- the old Holy Office -- Archbishop Gerhard Muller, should have been a politician. Last week he demonstrated a remarkable gift for saying different things in different languages to different audience.
Katholisches: Magazin für Kirche und Kultur reports on two interviews given by the prelate on the topic of his main challenge, the "negotiations" between the Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican over the readmission of the former to the mainstream modernist Catholic Church.
Speaking in German to Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Muller took a very hard line, saying (not quite in so many words) that the negotiations are at an end. But talking with the (US) National Catholic Register in English, he was all hopeful and prayerful that a "spirit of unity" would prevail... provided of course that the SSPX bends its collective knee to the will of the Holy Father to break with the Traditional Faith once and for all.
Here's what Abp. Muller said in German. (Please don't be nitpicky about the translation. Neither Walt nor Ed. reads/writes German, so we've had to rely on others.)
"Bruderschaft ist für uns kein Verhandlungspartner, weil es über den Glauben keine Verhandlungen gibt." This Society [the SSPX] is for us not a negotiation-partner because there is no negotiation over the Faith.
"Es gibt keine Ermäßigungen was den katholischen Glauben angeht, gerade wie er auch vom Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzil gültig formuliert worden ist." No reduction that can be tolerated to the Catholic Faith, exactly as it has been formulated by the Second Vatican Council. [Rather a revealing statement, that last part, since the Council itself never specifically said that its pronouncements were to have the authority of defined dogma.]
"Es gibt jetzt keine neuen Gespräche mehr." There is no more negotiation. [That's what the man said. If the translation is incorrect, please could someone supply the correct interpretation.]
Muller's position sounds pretty clear to me. He has stated once again the Vatican's hard-line policy that the Society of St. Pius X must do two things:
(1) accept the documents of Vatican II as doctrine, with no further debate over their errors and heresies;
(2) accept as valid the Novus Ordo mass, which the Pope now calls the "Ordinary Rite", to distinguish it from the centuries-old Tridentine Mass which we are now told is "Extraordinary".
The truth that Bishop Bernard Fellay, the leader of the SSPX, refuses to recognize is that these two conditions have never been, in the Pope's mind, negotiable. We can see this now through the revelations of the Vatileaks documents, for the release of which the Pope's butler, Paolo Gabriele, was this week found guilty.
In trying to reach an accommodation of any sort with Rome, Fellay and his followers -- perhaps a minority within the SSPX -- have been wasting their time. It's not going to happen! As the Society's founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, might have said: no matter how long your spoon, you cannot sup with the Devil!
Katholisches: Magazin für Kirche und Kultur reports on two interviews given by the prelate on the topic of his main challenge, the "negotiations" between the Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican over the readmission of the former to the mainstream modernist Catholic Church.
Speaking in German to Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Muller took a very hard line, saying (not quite in so many words) that the negotiations are at an end. But talking with the (US) National Catholic Register in English, he was all hopeful and prayerful that a "spirit of unity" would prevail... provided of course that the SSPX bends its collective knee to the will of the Holy Father to break with the Traditional Faith once and for all.
Here's what Abp. Muller said in German. (Please don't be nitpicky about the translation. Neither Walt nor Ed. reads/writes German, so we've had to rely on others.)
"Bruderschaft ist für uns kein Verhandlungspartner, weil es über den Glauben keine Verhandlungen gibt." This Society [the SSPX] is for us not a negotiation-partner because there is no negotiation over the Faith.
"Es gibt keine Ermäßigungen was den katholischen Glauben angeht, gerade wie er auch vom Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzil gültig formuliert worden ist." No reduction that can be tolerated to the Catholic Faith, exactly as it has been formulated by the Second Vatican Council. [Rather a revealing statement, that last part, since the Council itself never specifically said that its pronouncements were to have the authority of defined dogma.]
"Es gibt jetzt keine neuen Gespräche mehr." There is no more negotiation. [That's what the man said. If the translation is incorrect, please could someone supply the correct interpretation.]
Muller's position sounds pretty clear to me. He has stated once again the Vatican's hard-line policy that the Society of St. Pius X must do two things:
(1) accept the documents of Vatican II as doctrine, with no further debate over their errors and heresies;
(2) accept as valid the Novus Ordo mass, which the Pope now calls the "Ordinary Rite", to distinguish it from the centuries-old Tridentine Mass which we are now told is "Extraordinary".
The truth that Bishop Bernard Fellay, the leader of the SSPX, refuses to recognize is that these two conditions have never been, in the Pope's mind, negotiable. We can see this now through the revelations of the Vatileaks documents, for the release of which the Pope's butler, Paolo Gabriele, was this week found guilty.
In trying to reach an accommodation of any sort with Rome, Fellay and his followers -- perhaps a minority within the SSPX -- have been wasting their time. It's not going to happen! As the Society's founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, might have said: no matter how long your spoon, you cannot sup with the Devil!
Monday, July 16, 2012
Traditionalist SSPX defy leader, reject terms of "reunion" with Rome
Walt started the week by reading the brief and totally unilluminating press release emanating from the General Chapter of the Society of St. Pius X which met at the SSPX HQ at Écone this past week.
In its entirety it says:
The General Chapter of the Society of Saint Pius X ended this Saturday, July 14, 2012, in Econe (Switzerland). Gathered near Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s tomb, the capitularies have given thanks to God for the profound unity that prevailed among them during all these workdays.
The General Chapter will soon make a common statement to Rome, which will then be made public. The General Superior, Bishop Fellay, thanks deeply all the priests and faithfuls for their fervent prayers.
What really happened
Word travels fast in these days of the Internet, and Walt's agents heard just after Mass yesterday that the group opposed to the General Superior, Most Rev. Bernard Fellay, has forced him to back down from his proposed sellout to the Vatican's Ecclesia Dei, the commission charged with getting the traditionalists to bend the knee to the errors of Vatican II.
Bishop Fellay has been ordered, my sources say, to send a communiqué to Benedict XVI
rejecting the Pope's demand for "full acceptance" of the modernist Council as the price of entrance into "full communion" with the mainstream not-so-Catholic Church.
Just before the General Chapter convened, Bishop Fellay had already started changing his tune. He is said to have stated publicly that he would not accept any deal with Rome "at this time", given the content of the Holy Father's latest "evaluations."
Could it be that the SSPX's Moses has seen that he's leading his people in the wrong direction -- further into the desert of the "new Faith" as proclaimed by Vatican II? Did the penny drop when the pope appointed the Marxist Gerhardt Muller as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the hopeless modernist Joseph DiNoia as Vice-Prefect of Ecclesia Dei?
Or was the last straw the publication of the three SSPX bishops' letter criticizing Fellay's sellout programme, which was followed by some 30 of his own priests speaking out against him? Or how about the proposed canonization of Pope Paul VI, the pope who let "the smoke of Satan" into the Church?
Those were Paul VI's exact words: "The smoke of Satan has entered the Church." What Bishop Fellay is hearing from his fellow bishops, priests and faithful is that we prefer to remain outside... in the non-smoking section.
Recommended reading: "Archbishop Di Noia Admits:The Goal is to Convert SSPX to Conciliar Thinking", by John Vennari, in Catholic Family News.
In its entirety it says:
The General Chapter of the Society of Saint Pius X ended this Saturday, July 14, 2012, in Econe (Switzerland). Gathered near Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s tomb, the capitularies have given thanks to God for the profound unity that prevailed among them during all these workdays.
The General Chapter will soon make a common statement to Rome, which will then be made public. The General Superior, Bishop Fellay, thanks deeply all the priests and faithfuls for their fervent prayers.
What really happened
Word travels fast in these days of the Internet, and Walt's agents heard just after Mass yesterday that the group opposed to the General Superior, Most Rev. Bernard Fellay, has forced him to back down from his proposed sellout to the Vatican's Ecclesia Dei, the commission charged with getting the traditionalists to bend the knee to the errors of Vatican II.
Bishop Fellay has been ordered, my sources say, to send a communiqué to Benedict XVI
rejecting the Pope's demand for "full acceptance" of the modernist Council as the price of entrance into "full communion" with the mainstream not-so-Catholic Church.
Just before the General Chapter convened, Bishop Fellay had already started changing his tune. He is said to have stated publicly that he would not accept any deal with Rome "at this time", given the content of the Holy Father's latest "evaluations."
Could it be that the SSPX's Moses has seen that he's leading his people in the wrong direction -- further into the desert of the "new Faith" as proclaimed by Vatican II? Did the penny drop when the pope appointed the Marxist Gerhardt Muller as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the hopeless modernist Joseph DiNoia as Vice-Prefect of Ecclesia Dei?
Or was the last straw the publication of the three SSPX bishops' letter criticizing Fellay's sellout programme, which was followed by some 30 of his own priests speaking out against him? Or how about the proposed canonization of Pope Paul VI, the pope who let "the smoke of Satan" into the Church?
Those were Paul VI's exact words: "The smoke of Satan has entered the Church." What Bishop Fellay is hearing from his fellow bishops, priests and faithful is that we prefer to remain outside... in the non-smoking section.
Recommended reading: "Archbishop Di Noia Admits:The Goal is to Convert SSPX to Conciliar Thinking", by John Vennari, in Catholic Family News.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
SSPX reply to Rome -- start of a sell-out?
The number of people who know what's really going on at the highest levels of the Roman Catholic Church is very small. One such is Andrea Tornielli, a "Vaticanista" whose conclusions and predictions are accurate almost as often as Walt's. (Lifetime pct .983)
In yesterday's Vatican Insider, Signor Tornielli opines that the "positive response" of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to the "doctrinal preamble" presented to them by the Holy See last September could form the basis for reconciliation between the traditionalist group and the mainstream Church.
The response, which Tornielli says has only a few minor alterations to the most recent version of the document, will be reviewed by the Ecclesia Dei commission, which is responsible for relations between the Vatican and traditional Catholics, as well as by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. If they find no fault in it, the document will be forwarded to Pope Benedict XVI for a final decision which would presumably result in the lifting of the purported suspensions of the Society's bishops.
But here's the problem. Of the four SSPX bishops, only one -- Bishop Bernard Fellay -- appears fully committed to the reconciliation. The other three -- Tissier de Mallerais, Galarreta, and Williamson -- are opposed to what they see as a sell-out. So are at least 25% of their faithful followers, according to the Italian daily La Stampa.
Both the Vatican and the SSPX are on record as saying Bishop Fellay’s response does not resolve all remaining disagreements between the two sides. Father Federico Lombardi, the director of the Vatican press office, warned reported that "we cannot conclude that a positive outcome has been reached quite yet."
The SSPX issued a statement saying that the latest development in a 3-year series of negotiations must be seen as "a stage and not a conclusion". However, Tornielli and others sympathetic to the SSPX are optimistic about the prospects for resolving the split between the Society and the Holy See.
Signor Tornielli sees it as likely that the Society will be awarded the status of "personal prelature" a new juridical role added to the Canon Law in 1983 and so far adopted only by Opus Dei. Bishop Fellay doubtless sees himself as the first prelate, answerable only to the Holy See.
Will the other three, especially Bishop Williamson, kiss Fellay's ring? Don't be surprised if some or all of them separate from the separated! (Lifetime .pct still .983.)
See also "The Lefebvrians' answer to the Vatican". "Vatican, SSPX reported ready to reconcile", from Catholic World News, has a useful summary of the history and background to the conflict.
In yesterday's Vatican Insider, Signor Tornielli opines that the "positive response" of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) to the "doctrinal preamble" presented to them by the Holy See last September could form the basis for reconciliation between the traditionalist group and the mainstream Church.
The response, which Tornielli says has only a few minor alterations to the most recent version of the document, will be reviewed by the Ecclesia Dei commission, which is responsible for relations between the Vatican and traditional Catholics, as well as by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. If they find no fault in it, the document will be forwarded to Pope Benedict XVI for a final decision which would presumably result in the lifting of the purported suspensions of the Society's bishops.
But here's the problem. Of the four SSPX bishops, only one -- Bishop Bernard Fellay -- appears fully committed to the reconciliation. The other three -- Tissier de Mallerais, Galarreta, and Williamson -- are opposed to what they see as a sell-out. So are at least 25% of their faithful followers, according to the Italian daily La Stampa.
Both the Vatican and the SSPX are on record as saying Bishop Fellay’s response does not resolve all remaining disagreements between the two sides. Father Federico Lombardi, the director of the Vatican press office, warned reported that "we cannot conclude that a positive outcome has been reached quite yet."
The SSPX issued a statement saying that the latest development in a 3-year series of negotiations must be seen as "a stage and not a conclusion". However, Tornielli and others sympathetic to the SSPX are optimistic about the prospects for resolving the split between the Society and the Holy See.
Signor Tornielli sees it as likely that the Society will be awarded the status of "personal prelature" a new juridical role added to the Canon Law in 1983 and so far adopted only by Opus Dei. Bishop Fellay doubtless sees himself as the first prelate, answerable only to the Holy See.
Will the other three, especially Bishop Williamson, kiss Fellay's ring? Don't be surprised if some or all of them separate from the separated! (Lifetime .pct still .983.)
See also "The Lefebvrians' answer to the Vatican". "Vatican, SSPX reported ready to reconcile", from Catholic World News, has a useful summary of the history and background to the conflict.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
No compromise, Faith comes first! -- SSPX
Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, has indicated that the SSPX will not agree to a Vatican requirement that they accept the authority of Vatican II teachings, in order to be reconciled to Rome.
Monsignor Fellay is in Rome for meetings to discuss the results of discussions between Vatican and SSPX theologians. Before going, he assured supporters, “If their aim is still to force us to accept the second Vatican Council, the discussions have been clear enough in showing that we have no intention of doing any such thing.”
"There are those who say that up until now, [the Vatican] have always tried to shove the Council down our throats.... All I am saying is: We are moving on. We have our principles, above all faith.... Without faith, God can never love you, so our decision is made. Faith comes first, no matter what; it even comes before recognition by the Church. We need to be strong."
Click here to read "Lefebvrians say they will never accept Council", from the Vatican Insider.
Monsignor Fellay is in Rome for meetings to discuss the results of discussions between Vatican and SSPX theologians. Before going, he assured supporters, “If their aim is still to force us to accept the second Vatican Council, the discussions have been clear enough in showing that we have no intention of doing any such thing.”
"There are those who say that up until now, [the Vatican] have always tried to shove the Council down our throats.... All I am saying is: We are moving on. We have our principles, above all faith.... Without faith, God can never love you, so our decision is made. Faith comes first, no matter what; it even comes before recognition by the Church. We need to be strong."
Click here to read "Lefebvrians say they will never accept Council", from the Vatican Insider.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)