Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome  (Read 2649 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8212
  • Reputation: +7173/-7
  • Gender: Male
Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
« on: May 08, 2012, 11:37:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • People here know I'm against a deal between the SSPX and Rome, but I think it's important that we list some key reasons as to why they should not sign. In no particular order, here are my reasons. Others are free to add their list their own reasons.

    1- The other three Bishops (+Williamson, +Tissier, and +Galarreta) appear to be opposed to a deal. This could mean that, if Bishop Fellay goes ahead and signs a deal with Rome, there could be a major split in the SSPX.

    2- The Society would be under the watch and control of Rome. Like the Fraternity of Saint Peter, practically every move they make will be monitored by Rome. This means that their ability to speak out against Vatican II, the Novus Ordo, and any other actions modernist Rome is doing will be very limited, if not completely diminished.

    3- Rome has not converted yet. They still do not favor Traditional Catholicism and still adhere to many errors and heresies. The SSPX should wait for Rome to convert first. This was the mindset of Archbishop LeFebvre. The Society never broke from Tradition, it was Rome that did so.

    4- Someone even more modern than Benedict could be elected in the future and could attempt to abolish Tradition. Then the Society, if they wanted to do the right thing, would be forced to break away again, making the point of reconciling with them a waste of time and effort to begin with.

    5- Archbishop LeFebvre would not have supported a deal, as his own quote seems to indicate:

    Quote
    TWO YEARS AFTER THE CONSECRATIONS:
    WE MUST NOT WAVER, WE MAY NOT COMPROMISE

    Archbishop Lefebvre's address to his priests given in Econe, Switzerland on September 6, 1990

    ...A FALSE CHARITY

    And we must not waver for one moment either in not being with those who are in the process of betraying us. Some people are always admiring the grass in the neighbor's field. Instead of looking to their friends, to the Church's defenders, to those fighting on the battlefield, they look to our enemies on the other side. "After all, we must be charitable, we must be kind, we must not be divisive, after all, they are celebrating the Tridentine Mass, they are not as bad as everyone says" —but THEY ARE BETRAYING US —betraying us! They are shaking hands with the Church's destroyers. They are shaking hands with people holding modernist and liberal ideas condemned by the Church. So they are doing the devil's work.

    Thus those who were with us and were working with us for the rights of Our Lord, for the salvation of souls, are now saying, "So long as they grant us the old Mass, we can shake hands with Rome, no problem." But we are seeing how it works out. They are in an impossible situation. Impossible. One cannot both shake hands with modernists and keep following Tradition. Not possible. Not possible. Now, stay in touch with them to bring them back, to convert them to Tradition, yes, if you like, that's the right kind of ecuмenism! But give the impression that after all one almost regrets any break, that one likes talking to them? No way! These are people who call us corpse-like Traditionalists, they are saying that we are as rigid as corpses, ours is not a living Tradition, we are glum-faced, ours is a glum Tradition! Unbelievable! Unimaginable! What kind of relations can you have with people like that?

    This is what causes us a problem with certain layfolk, who are very nice, very good people, all for the Society, who accepted the Consecrations, but who have a kind of deep-down regret that they are no longer with the people they used to be with, people who did not accept the Consecrations and who are now against us. "It's a pity we are divided", they say, "why not meet up with them? Let's go and have a drink together, reach out a hand to them" —that's a betrayal! Those saying this give the impression that at the drop of a hat they would cross over and join those who left us. They must make up their minds.

    WE CANNOT COMPROMISE

    That is what killed Christendom, in all of Europe, not just the Church in France, but the Church in Germany, in Switzerland —that is what enabled the Revolution to get established. It was the Liberals, it was those who reached out a hand to people who did not share their Catholic principles. We must make up our minds if we too want to collaborate in the destruction of the Church and in the ruin of the Social Kingship of Christ the King, or are we resolved to continue working for the Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ? All those who wish to join us, and work with us, Deo Gratias, we welcome them, wherever they come from, that's not a problem, but let them come with us, let them not say they are going a different way in order to keep company with the liberals that left us and in order to work with them. Not possible.


    6- It wouldn't be God's Will at this point (most important reason).

    Feel free to provide your own thoughts.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.


    Offline LordPhan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1171
    • Reputation: +826/-1
    • Gender: Male


    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7173/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #2 on: May 08, 2012, 11:41:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Oh, and I forgot another reason:

    7- The Consecrations of more Bishops would likely be in jeopardy.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13825
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #3 on: May 09, 2012, 08:38:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • #8 The modernists cannot be trusted.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +22/-13
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #4 on: May 09, 2012, 08:47:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Does anyone here believe that Benedict XVI truly believes in the Gospels with supernatural Faith?


    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5768
    • Reputation: +4622/-480
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #5 on: May 09, 2012, 09:12:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • One problem that has already developed with merely holding "discussions" is that the SSPX seems to have shifted in its view of the new rites of ordination and consecration.

    Even Society priests have questioned the validity of the new rites, and their questions are not frivolous.  There are real concerns.  Yet, Bishop Fellay seems to have put the Society in a position in which the new rites really cannot be questioned without answering any of the objections.  Never does the Church merely use her authority to declare a doctrinal (or sacramental) truth.  She uses her authority to put the question to rest but her authority is always based upon reason.

    The questions concerning the validity of the new rites of orders have never been answered without simply commanding submission to what amounts to an arbitrary decision in Rome.

    With some sort of agreement with Rome, how long can the faithful, who have positive--and reasonable doubts--about the validity of the orders of Conciliar priests (and bishops) be able to continue at Society chapels?

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5768
    • Reputation: +4622/-480
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #6 on: May 09, 2012, 09:15:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Does anyone here believe that Benedict XVI truly believes in the Gospels with supernatural Faith?


    He has already shown that he doesn't believe the Gospels with purely natural faith.  He believes they have to be viewed through (the condemned) historical-critical lense.

    Offline Francisco

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1150
    • Reputation: +843/-18
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #7 on: May 09, 2012, 09:30:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Does anyone here believe that Benedict XVI truly believes in the Gospels with supernatural Faith?


    Only BpFellay, Frs Schmidberger,Pfluger, Wailliez,Rostand,Vernoy, Couture ...if they are members of this forum


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +22/-13
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #8 on: May 09, 2012, 09:50:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Francisco
    Quote from: Telesphorus
    Does anyone here believe that Benedict XVI truly believes in the Gospels with supernatural Faith?


    Only BpFellay, Frs Schmidberger,Pfluger, Wailliez,Rostand,Vernoy, Couture ...if they are members of this forum


    They can't possibly really believe that.  So one has to ask, what do they really believe?

    Offline VinnyF

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 162
    • Reputation: +0/-1
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #9 on: May 09, 2012, 12:59:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    People here know I'm against a deal between the SSPX and Rome, but I think it's important that we list some key reasons as to why they should not sign. In no particular order, here are my reasons. Others are free to add their list their own reasons.

    1- The other three Bishops (+Williamson, +Tissier, and +Galarreta) appear to be opposed to a deal. This could mean that, if Bishop Fellay goes ahead and signs a deal with Rome, there could be a major split in the SSPX.

    Of course, this is only hearsay. Even Bishop Williamson stops short of saying it should be stopped at all costs.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    2- The Society would be under the watch and control of Rome. Like the Fraternity of Saint Peter, practically every move they make will be monitored by Rome. This means that their ability to speak out against Vatican II, the Novus Ordo, and any other actions modernist Rome is doing will be very limited, if not completely diminished.

    So what if they monitored everything?  What can they do to courageous priests and bishops? Suspend them again?

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    3- Rome has not converted yet. They still do not favor Traditional Catholicism and still adhere to many errors and heresies. The SSPX should wait for Rome to convert first. This was the mindset of Archbishop LeFebvre. The Society never broke from Tradition, it was Rome that did so.

    Conversion of Rome was not a pre-requisite for ABL to sign the Protocol in 1988.  He was courageous enough to think that he could form the soldiers for this battle.  I think it is almost pathetic to expect the modernists in Rome to convert before we storm their castles. Almost cowardly.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    4- Someone even more modern than Benedict could be elected in the future and could attempt to abolish Tradition. Then the Society, if they wanted to do the right thing, would be forced to break away again, making the point of reconciling with them a waste of time and effort to begin with.

    You've got to be kidding. This is no excuse. St. Francis could have said the same thing to the Pope when he was asked to reform the church.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    5- Archbishop LeFebvre would not have supported a deal, as his own quote seems to indicate:

    You completely misinterpret ABLs statement. His challenge to never compromise on the faith is the advice that applies here.  Nowhere does he say to avoid a canonical agreement with the Pope that does not include a compromise of faith.  Assuming that it does at this point is relying on insight that you do not possess.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    6- It wouldn't be God's Will at this point (most important reason).

    I guess I'm speechless to know that He has confided this to you.

    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +121/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #10 on: May 09, 2012, 01:13:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: VinnyF
    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    People here know I'm against a deal between the SSPX and Rome, but I think it's important that we list some key reasons as to why they should not sign. In no particular order, here are my reasons. Others are free to add their list their own reasons.

    1- The other three Bishops (+Williamson, +Tissier, and +Galarreta) appear to be opposed to a deal. This could mean that, if Bishop Fellay goes ahead and signs a deal with Rome, there could be a major split in the SSPX.

    Of course, this is only hearsay. Even Bishop Williamson stops short of saying it should be stopped at all costs.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    2- The Society would be under the watch and control of Rome. Like the Fraternity of Saint Peter, practically every move they make will be monitored by Rome. This means that their ability to speak out against Vatican II, the Novus Ordo, and any other actions modernist Rome is doing will be very limited, if not completely diminished.

    So what if they monitored everything?  What can they do to courageous priests and bishops? Suspend them again?

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    3- Rome has not converted yet. They still do not favor Traditional Catholicism and still adhere to many errors and heresies. The SSPX should wait for Rome to convert first. This was the mindset of Archbishop LeFebvre. The Society never broke from Tradition, it was Rome that did so.

    Conversion of Rome was not a pre-requisite for ABL to sign the Protocol in 1988.  He was courageous enough to think that he could form the soldiers for this battle.  I think it is almost pathetic to expect the modernists in Rome to convert before we storm their castles. Almost cowardly.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    4- Someone even more modern than Benedict could be elected in the future and could attempt to abolish Tradition. Then the Society, if they wanted to do the right thing, would be forced to break away again, making the point of reconciling with them a waste of time and effort to begin with.

    You've got to be kidding. This is no excuse. St. Francis could have said the same thing to the Pope when he was asked to reform the church.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    5- Archbishop LeFebvre would not have supported a deal, as his own quote seems to indicate:

    You completely misinterpret ABLs statement. His challenge to never compromise on the faith is the advice that applies here.  Nowhere does he say to avoid a canonical agreement with the Pope that does not include a compromise of faith.  Assuming that it does at this point is relying on insight that you do not possess.

    Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
    6- It wouldn't be God's Will at this point (most important reason).

    I guess I'm speechless to know that He has confided this to you.



    Quote
    Re: General Discussion » Open Invitation - Post about SSPX, Bp Fellay, SSPX priests


    I read the joint letter of Mgr. Alfonso de Galarreta,  Mgr. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais,  Mgr. Richard Williamson :
    Lettre au Conseil Général de la Fraternité St Pie X,  le 7 avril 2012

    Yes it is real.  It is a stiff letter.  It predicts a profound division of the fraternity when Bp Fellay continues his fatal course.  The 3 bishops are in battle mode now.  They have to because Bp Fellay will pull off the Betrayal.

    Stand by to repel boarders !


    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +121/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #11 on: May 09, 2012, 01:16:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Of course, this is only hearsay


    Amazing. If we had more like you, Vinny F. Such a letter as outlined below exists.


    Quote
    Re: General Discussion » Open Invitation - Post about SSPX, Bp Fellay, SSPX priests


    I read the joint letter of Mgr. Alfonso de Galarreta,  Mgr. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais,  Mgr. Richard Williamson :
    Lettre au Conseil Général de la Fraternité St Pie X,  le 7 avril 2012

    Yes it is real.  It is a stiff letter.  It predicts a profound division of the fraternity when Bp Fellay continues his fatal course.  The 3 bishops are in battle mode now.  They have to because Bp Fellay will pull off the Betrayal.

    Stand by to repel boarders !

    Offline VinnyF

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 162
    • Reputation: +0/-1
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #12 on: May 09, 2012, 01:42:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: John Grace
    Quote
    Of course, this is only hearsay


    Amazing. If we had more like you, Vinny F. Such a letter as outlined below exists.


    Quote
    Re: General Discussion » Open Invitation - Post about SSPX, Bp Fellay, SSPX priests


    I read the joint letter of Mgr. Alfonso de Galarreta,  Mgr. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais,  Mgr. Richard Williamson :
    Lettre au Conseil Général de la Fraternité St Pie X,  le 7 avril 2012

    Yes it is real.  It is a stiff letter.  It predicts a profound division of the fraternity when Bp Fellay continues his fatal course.  The 3 bishops are in battle mode now.  They have to because Bp Fellay will pull off the Betrayal.

    Stand by to repel boarders !


    John,

    It doesn't help that you keep referring to a letter that I can't find.  Please have mercy on us technically challenged folks and give us a link to the letter.

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7173/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #13 on: May 09, 2012, 03:10:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: VinnyF
    Of course, this is only hearsay. Even Bishop Williamson stops short of saying it should be stopped at all costs.


    It's not "hearsay". They do indeed appear to be opposed to a deal. Your statement shows you haven't been following the issue.

    Quote
    So what if they monitored everything?  What can they do to courageous priests and bishops? Suspend them again?


    Why do you think FSSP priests can never say anything bad about Vatican II or the NO? They'll get in trouble with their bishop or with Rome themselves. You saw what happened to Father Bisig.

    Quote
    Conversion of Rome was not a pre-requisite for ABL to sign the Protocol in 1988.  He was courageous enough to think that he could form the soldiers for this battle.  I think it is almost pathetic to expect the modernists in Rome to convert before we storm their castles. Almost cowardly.


    ABL stated many times that Rome must convert first, and he did not sign the protocol. And what do you mean by "storm their castles"? Are you suggesting that the Society would somehow be big enough infiltrate Rome? With all those thousands of liberals and Masons in there? You need to get your facts straight.

    Quote
    You've got to be kidding. This is no excuse. St. Francis could have said the same thing to the Pope when he was asked to reform the church.


    Had there been any modernist Popes during the days of St. Francis?

    Quote
    You completely misinterpret ABLs statement. His challenge to never compromise on the faith is the advice that applies here.  Nowhere does he say to avoid a canonical agreement with the Pope that does not include a compromise of faith.  Assuming that it does at this point is relying on insight that you do not possess.


    You're naive. Read it again. He went much further than warning not to compromise the Faith.

    Quote
    I guess I'm speechless to know that He has confided this to you.


    I never said He did. But it is common sense that God woudn't Will any "reconciliation" between modernist Rome and a group that never left the Church to begin with.
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7173/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Reasons why the Society should not sign with Rome
    « Reply #14 on: May 09, 2012, 03:14:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: VinnyF
    Quote from: John Grace
    Quote
    Of course, this is only hearsay


    Amazing. If we had more like you, Vinny F. Such a letter as outlined below exists.


    Quote
    Re: General Discussion » Open Invitation - Post about SSPX, Bp Fellay, SSPX priests


    I read the joint letter of Mgr. Alfonso de Galarreta,  Mgr. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais,  Mgr. Richard Williamson :
    Lettre au Conseil Général de la Fraternité St Pie X,  le 7 avril 2012

    Yes it is real.  It is a stiff letter.  It predicts a profound division of the fraternity when Bp Fellay continues his fatal course.  The 3 bishops are in battle mode now.  They have to because Bp Fellay will pull off the Betrayal.

    Stand by to repel boarders !


    John,

    It doesn't help that you keep referring to a letter that I can't find.  Please have mercy on us technically challenged folks and give us a link to the letter.


    Here's the thread the link was posted on:

    http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Letter-of-Three-SSPX-Bishops-to-Bishop-Fellay
    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.