Author Topic: lease Help Bishop Fellay Find His Hermeneutic of Continuity (Read 545 times)

Lover of Truth · « **on:** January 07, 2014, 07:43:34 AM »

I don't follow Fellay so this is old news to some I guess. But he seems to say opposite things only eight months apart:

http://www.christorchaos.com/PleaseHelpBishopFellayFindHisHermeneuticOfContinuityPartOne.htm

It was but a scant seven months ago that Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, was attempting to make his own "reconciliation," however tentative, with the "hermeneutic of continuity" to rationalize his efforts to make a rapprochement with the conciliar revolutionaries. This is part of one those canned "interviews" that appeared on the Society's DICI website on June 7, 2012"

"Personally, I would have wished to wait for some more time to see things clearer," he said, "but once again it really appears that the Holy Father wants it to happen now."

Bishop Fellay spoke appreciatively of what he characterized as the pope's efforts to correct "progressive" deviations from Catholic teaching and tradition since Vatican II. "Very, very delicately -- he tries not to break things -- but tries also to put in some important corrections," the bishop said.

Although he stopped short of endorsing Pope Benedict's interpretation of Vatican II as essentially in continuity with the church's tradition -- a position which many in the society have vocally disputed -- Bishop Fellay spoke about the idea in strikingly sympathetic terms.

"I would hope so," he said, when asked if Vatican II itself belongs to Catholic tradition.

"The pope says that ... the council must be put within the great tradition of the church, must be understood in accordance with it. These are statements we fully agree with, totally, absolutely," the bishop said. "The problem might be in the application, that is: is what happens really in coherence or in harmony with tradition?"

Insisting that "we don't want to be aggressive, we don't want to be provocative," Bishop Fellay said the Society of St. Pius X has served as a "sign of contradiction" during a period of increasing progressive influence in the church. He also allowed for the possibility that the group would continue to play such a role even after reconciliation with Rome.

"People welcome us now, people will, and others won't," he said. "If we see some discrepancies within the society, definitely there are also (divisions) in the Catholic Church."

"But we are not alone" in working to "defend the faith," the bishop said. "It's the pope himself who does it; that's his job. And if we are called to help the Holy Father in that, so be it." (Traditionalist leader says group could divide over unity with Rome.)

Ah, that's when Bishop Fellay had those proverbial "high hopes" for entering into "full communion" in the counterfeit church of concilairism so that the Society of Saint Pius X could take its place alongside Focolare, the "Catholic" Charismatic Movement, Cursillo, the Sant'Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic Community, the Chemin Neuf Community, the International Community of Faith and Light, Regnum Christi, Communion and Liberation, the Emmanuel Community, the Seguimi Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, and. among many, many others, the Neocatechumenal Way while claiming to be working from "within" for the restoration of the Catholic Church. There never can be a restoration, however, based upon an admixture of truth and error. Never.

Well, that was then.

This is what Bishop Fellay said about the "hermeneutic of continuity" on Friday, December 28, 2012, the Feast of the Holy Innocents, during a conference in Toronto, Canada, as he tried to explain in a very meandering way his seven year-effort to "normalize" relations with the Occupy Vatican Movement:

And so, so from the start this text we could not accept. And that's what I told Rome: we can't accept. I told it even two times. The first time, I tried to remain broad because my aim was to demolish the frame which they were trying to impose to us. This frame is called the Hermeneutic of the Continuity. That means that we have to interpret, or to understand, they pretend that the Council is in the line of Tradition, and that's the only way, we have to the Council in the light, not only the light, but to say that the Council is traditional. And we say no, that's not true, we say, that we should that we should understand that we should understand anything that comes from Rome in the light of Tradition, it's the only Catholic way, but precisely this Council, with this Council, we can't do that because the texts are opposed to Tradition, they're contrary; what they say in the Council has been condemned before. Especially Religious Liberty, but also Ecuмenism for example, very clearly the contrary.

And so, we say: no it doesn't work. Doesn't work. But, I didn't want to go into the details, I just wanted to, so to say, to *ppprrr* to explode the frame. Because they said if I go into the details, they will change the details but they will try to remain, to remind, to keep the frame. So I say no, it doesn't work. They were not happy with it, and they called me and they asked me if I could not be more precise. I said OK, I will do it that, I will do that. So I sent a second answer. It was not that I would correct the first, no. It was exactly the same answer, but more precise, according to their text. (Transcript of Bishop Fellay's Meandering Musings, December 28, 2012.)

One's head spins.

One's eyes roll at the sheer madness of making an effort to claim an openness to the "hermeneutic of continuity" when an agreement appeared between the Society of Saint Pius X and the Occupy Vatican Movement appeared likely in May of last year before claiming eight months later to have been firmly opposed to it all along.

This is nothing other than revisionist history.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #1 on:** January 07, 2014, 07:49:46 AM »

http://www.christorchaos.com/PleaseHelpBishopFellayFindHisHermeneuticOfContinuityPartOne.htm

Fellay's "first assistant," Father Niklaus Pfluger, himself spoke highly of the "hermeneutic of reform" in May of 2012:

That was actually our argument, and then this Pope comes and says: Stop! The council is being interpreted falsely. That was his famous sermon, an important talk, in December, 22 December, 2005, where he said we need a new interpretation of the council. Up until now, people have been abusing the council, in the name of the council, but that isn't what the council wanted. We need a new interpretation and using the greek term, a new hermeneutic, a new understanding... it's not bad, 40 years after the council, to understand the council correctly, and the correct understanding of the council is the hermeneutic of reform.

So it isn't a contradiction after all, no discontinuity between the council and tradition. It is a continuity, and this continuity is made visible through a healthy reform. That is important for the reason that from now on this is the idea that defines his pontificate. Everything that he does, and thereby the permission for, or the liberation of the ancient mass, plays a very decisive role, everything he does, everything he attempts, is to show that there isn't a break. The council, our main argument for this resistance, for holding firmly to Tradition, for rejecting the ideas of the council, the important ideas of the council -- the Pope wants to say that this argument is no argument at all. It is just... it is just a matter of harmonious development of tradition, this Second Vatican Council. (http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42305.)

It appears as though close exposure to those infected with the spiritually fatal disease of the "new theology" comes to think and to speak in form of Hegelianism where truth contains within itself the seeds of its own internal contradiction.

More seriously, however, the disease from which the Society of Saint Pius X suffers is a simple one: utilitarianism.

That is, the leadership of the Society of Saint Pius X, starting with its courageous founder, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, has expected the faithful attached to their chapels to believe whatever is they are told without regard for how credulity is strained in the process, without regard for consistency, without regard for objective truth, without regard for right principles. The "end result" is the only thing that has mattered. The faithful just have to believe what they are told and suspend all rationality while doing so.

To wit, Catholics attached to the Society of Saint Pius X have been told that a pope can teach error if he is not "teaching from the Chair." He cannot.

Catholics attached to the Society of Saint Pius X have been told that the Catholic Church can promulgate liturgical rites that are "evil" or defective, if not invalid, in some way. She cannot.

Catholics attached to the Society of Saint Pius X have been taught to believe whatever the leadership tells them. And the current leadership has encouraged "loyalists" to spy on "rebels," who are considered "enemies" and must shunned, if not denounced as treacherous, ungrateful souls, in order for this or that current "grand scheme" to succeed.

The end result is the only thing that matters, not intellectual consistency and not truth.

For a Catholic, however, the dispassionate adherence to truth without regard for human respect and without regard for a very misplaced and all too frequently highly manipulated, emotionally-laden sense of personal loyalty to various persons who not have the charism of personal infallibility must outweigh all other considerations.

What matters is the truth, not who one likes or what one wishes to be the case, not what desires to be true even though level-headed, sensible human beings, deemed "enemies" by the "leaders," present cogent arguments to explode the mythical contentions by which autocrats seek to aggrandize themselves and arrogate power to themselves while using various emotional devices and mind-control games to control the faithful, fearful of losing the sacraments by being expelled for thinking and an acting as Catholics and not a blind loyalists to this or that person or to this or that community.

The truth about the Society of Saint Pius X, no matter its historic defense of the Social Reign of Christ the King and its firm, clear an absolutely correct teaching on morality that rejects such anti-Catholic notions advanced by the conciliarists as "natural family planning" and "brain death," is that its entire ecclesiology (teaching on the nature of the Church and her Divine Constitution) is false.

In essence, the Society of Saint Pius X's institutional belief that the popes can err if not teaching infallibly or that they can promulgate defective, if not offensive, liturgical rites places them in essential agreement with Joseph Ratzinger's long-held belief that the Catholic Church is "sinful" and thus can err:

One of the progressivist attacks against the sanctity of the Spouse of Christ is to affirm that sin is present in the essence of the Church. That the Church is a sinner and in constant need of reform are affronts made by the heresiarch Martin Luther.

These affronts were heard again at Vatican II and are repeated by significant representatives of the Church.

As Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Card. Joseph Ratzinger made clear that he considers that the note of sin exists in the essence of the Church. He said these words in a speech to the Pontifical Faculty of Theology, Lima, Peru, in July 1986.

The idea of the Body of Christ developed in the Catholic Church with the meaning that the Church presents herself as ‘the Christ who continues to live on earth.’ She is described as the Incarnation of the Son that will continue until the end of time.

This raised the opposition of the Protestants, who saw this as an insupportable identification of the Church with Christ, an identification in which the Church, so to speak, would adore herself and consider herself to be infallible.

Some Catholic thinkers, without reaching this point, also began to conclude that this formula would attribute a definitive character to every ministerial word and action of the Church, which would make any critique of her seem an attack on Christ himself, thus forgetting her human element.

For this reason, it was affirmed that it is necessary for the difference between Christ and the Church to become clearly manifest, that is to say, that the Church is not identical to Christ but is different from Him.

She is the Church of sinners, which incessantly needs to purify and renew herself. Thus, the idea of ‘reform’ – which could not develop easily in the notion of the Body of Christ – became a decisive element of the concept of People of God.

(J. Ratzinger, “La eclesiología del Vaticano,” Iglesia-Mundo, Madrid, October 1986, p. 19) (As found at: Progressivist Docuмent of the Week.)

Obviously, the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X do not believe in Ratzinger's false view of the Church. However, their own Gallicanism, condemned by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794, and mocked by Bishop Emile Bougaud in the Nineteenth Century, mimics it by contending that the Catholic Church can be stained by error, ambiguity, falsehood and sacrilege. The Society of Saint Pius X's "governing magisterium" as opposed to the "authentic magisterium" (the "Rome of all time") is a work of fiction. It is as much a work of fiction as conciliarism itself.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #2 on:** January 07, 2014, 07:51:49 AM »

http://www.christorchaos.com/PleaseHelpBishopFellayFindHisHermeneuticOfContinuityPartOne.htm

Quite despite what the leaders of the Society of Saint Pius X have contended, although errors have existed to a greater or lesser extent in the minds of Catholics during various times in the history of Holy Mother Church, she Church cannot be stained by any taint of error, as pope after pope has taught us:

As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of truth. You correctly understand, venerable brothers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philosophical system which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support that truth. (Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari Nos, May 25, 1834.)

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel it does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly." The same holy Martyr with good reason marveled exceedingly that anyone could believe that "this unity in the Church which arises from a divine foundation, and which is knit together by heavenly sacraments, could be rent and torn asunder by the force of contrary wills." For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

Please note that Pope Gregory XVI wrote that the truth can be found in the Catholic Church without "even a slight tarnish of error."

Please note that Pope Leo XIII stressed that the Catholic Church "makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the command which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity."

Please note that that Pope Pius XI explained that the Catholic Church brings forth her teaching "with ease and security to the knowledge of men."

Anyone who says that this has been done by the counterfeit church of conciliarism, which has made its "reconciliation" with the false principles of Modernity that leave no room for the confessionally Catholic civil state and the Social Reign of Christ the King, is not thinking too clearly (and that is as about as charitably as I can put the matter) or is being, perhaps more accurately, intellectually dishonest. If the conciliar church has brought forth its teaching "with ease and security to the knowledge of men," why is there such disagreement even between the "progressive" conciliarists and "conservative" conciliarists concerning the proper "interpretation" of the "Second" Vatican Council and its aftermath? Or does this depend upon what one means by "ease and security"?

No, the Catholic Church has never endorsed error in any of her officials docuмents and we have never seen anything like the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges that have characterized the the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes" in the past fifty-four years now.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #3 on:** January 07, 2014, 07:58:09 AM »

http://www.christorchaos.com/PleaseHelpBishopFellayFindHisHermeneuticOfContinuityPartOne.htm

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., explained in but one sentence the simple fact those steeped in error cannot have any part in the Catholic Church, meaning that Federico Lombardi's desire to put aside "differences" is of the devil, not of God:

There is a fatal instinct in error, which leads it to hate the Truth; and the true Church, by its unchangeableness, is a perpetual reproach to them that refuse to be her children. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, commentary on the life of Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen.)

The true Church, the Catholic Church, cannot countenance falsehood and error.

Perhaps, Bishop Fellay ought to watch For Greater Glory, especially the scene that depicts the bravery of Jose Luis Sanchez Del Rio after he had been tortured and before his martyrdom in defense of the Social Reign of Christ the King, which his "pope" rejects both in theory and in practice.

Young Jose Luis Sanchez Del Rio was told by his Godfather, the Mayor of Sahuayo, that all he had to do was to save his life was to say "Death to Christ the King, Long Live the Federal Government." Jose exclaimed in a loud and clear voice after he expressing his love for his mother, "Viva Cristo Rey!"

Bishop Fellay did say last year that it was possible for "Vatican II to be understood in light of Tradition, something he does not say now is the case and would have us believe he never said.

Please help Bishop Fellay find his own internal hermeneutic of continuity.

While you are at it, please forward Gregorius's The Chair is Still Empty.

No one can be forced to "see" the truth of our situation (or of any situation involving conflict with others) for what it is, that the conciliar revolutionaries are not Catholic and that they belong to a counterfeit church bereft of Holy Orders and of the graces that flow therefrom. That any of our true bishops and priests, among so many others, who have seen things clearly in the past forty years, right in the midst of a most diabolically clever use of the media to convey images of Catholicism and Catholicity, is the working of the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and that flowed into their hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces. We must remember that it is very easy to go "back," to refuse to "kick against the goad," to "conform" to what the "mainstream" believes is "respectable" and "prudent."

The "mainstream" is not to be followed.

God permitted one hundred percent of the human race to be deceived in the Garden of Eden.

God permitted all but eight members of the human race to be deceived and deluded prior to the Great Flood.

Almost all of the Chosen People who had been led out of their bondage to the slavery of the Egyptian Pharaoh by Moses built and worshiped a molten calf whilst Moses was receiving the Ten Commandments from God on Mount Sinai.

All but a handful of people stood by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as He suffered and died for us on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday.

All but one bishop, Saint John Fisher of Rochester, England, defected from the Faith at the time of the Protestant Revolt in England when King Henry VIII took this thoroughly Catholic country out of the Church.

All but thirty bishops defected from the Faith at the time Queen Elizabeth I took England out of the Church once again in the 1660s following the brief restoration that took place under the reign of her half-sister, Queen Mary, from 1553 to 1558.

The "mainstream" is not be followed. We need apostolic courage in these times of apostasy and betrayal. God's greater honor and glory must be defended against the against of men who have proved themselves to be precursors of the Antichrist.

How do we think that we are going to recognize, no less resist and reject, the Antichrist when he comes we are so complacent and smug in the face of the groundwork that is being laid by his conciliar minions for his coming? Will the emotionalism of sentimentality and the delusion of positivism not prevail then in the minds and hearts of most men?

It's been over six years ago now since I began to publicly write about the plausibility of the sedevacantist thesis. I can report that those six years have been difficult ones, humanly speaking, as friendships have been strained or broken and as many former contributors stopped donating to us. Obviously, friendship is a free gift and people are free also to end non-tax-deductible donations whenever they want to do so. It is not for the "money" or for any kind of "honor" or "prestige" that one comes to recognize that the conciliar "popes" have indeed been figures of Antichrist. To embrace sedevacantism is to lose one's credibility on all subjects, including that of the defense of the Social Reign of Christ the King, in the eyes of traditionally-minded "gatekeepers" in the "resist but recognize movement," some of whom would rather turn to lifelong Protestants or to Catholic apostates turned Protestants or Mormons for "commentary" on the events of the day.

No, embracing the truth of our ecclesiastical situation does not make one any bit better than those who do not. Indeed, some of the worst witnesses in behalf of sedevacantism are sedevacantists, both clergy and laity. The bad example given by those who do see the truth of our ecclesiastical situation does not make invalidate the truth that they seek to defend despite all of the opposition that is engendered thereby.

No one has anything to gain, humanly speaking by recognizing that the conciliar "popes" are apostates and their liturgical rites are sacramentally barren and offensive to God and their doctrines have been condemned repeatedly by the authority of the Catholic Church. Yes, it is good to suffer for one's sins. It is necessary to do so in order to save one's soul. One does not embrace the truth in order to suffer, though, as that suffering will find him in due course.

Sedevacantists compose only a handful of mostly warring tribes. They are not the problem facing Holy Mother Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal. Just take a look at the evidence presented above if you believe that I am mistaken.

All the more reason, of course, to flee from everything to do with conciliarism and its false shepherds. If we can't see that the public esteeming of the symbols and places of "worship" of false religions is offensive to God and can in no way lead to any kind of authentic restoration of the "Catholic" Church, then it is perhaps necessary to recall these words of Saint Teresa of Avila in her Foundations:

"Know this: it is by very little breaches of regularity that the devil succeeds in introducing the greatest abuses. May you never end up saying: 'This is nothing, this is an exaggeration.'" (Saint Teresa of Avila, Foundations, Chapter Twenty-nine)