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

Author Topic: Bp de Galarreta Sermon  (Read 6588 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MaterDominici

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 5438
  • Reputation: +4152/-96
  • Gender: Female
Bp de Galarreta Sermon
« on: June 07, 2016, 01:41:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The link already doesn't work (I copied this from Google cache), but here it is:
    http://sspx.org/en/mgr-de-galarretas-sermon-ordinations-2016

    Given by Mgr. Alfonso de Galarreta
    Winona, MN - June 3, 2016

     

    Today is a day full of joy – of a noble, profound, Christian joy – bringing us together around the altar and the sacrifice of Our Lord, in order to confer the sacred orders of Priesthood and Deaconate, on this feast day of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, our priestly ideal.

    “Sacerdos alter Christus” – the priest is another Christ who, by means of the sacrament of the Eucharist, continues the presence and action of Our Lord, Eternal High Priest. As a sacrament, the Eucharist perpetuates the incarnation, the presence of Our Lord among us. As a sacrifice, it perpetuates the redemption, the cross of Our Lord.

    The Sacred Heart of Jesus is the object of the preaching and apostolate of the priest. But it is also, at the same time, the form and model of the priestly spirituality and activity. St. Paul wants us to know the inexhaustible treasures of wisdom, science, holiness and charity that lay in the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

    Our Lord Himself reveals to us these treasures of His priestly Heart when He says: “I am the way, the truth, the life.” Not one way, or one truth, or one life – but the way, the truth, the life.

    St. Augustine says that Our Lord is the way as Man, and the truth and life as God. For that reason, Our Lord is, at the same time, the fatherland and our way to the fatherland.

    Our Lord is Way because nobody can go to the Father unless it is through Him. He is Way because He is the High Priest who reconciles men with God. He is the only Mediator. He is Way through His Priesthood, His Kingship and His Church, the only Bride and Mystical Body of Christ, and there is no other way to attain God.

    Our Lord is also Truth, Wisdom incarnate, Light without darkness, without error or lies: “For this I have come into the world, to give testimony of the truth… and all those who are of the Truth hear My voice.” Our Lord died on the cross to give testimony of this truth. He is the source of all truth.

    He is also Life – resurrection and Life: “I have come so that my sheep may have life, and life in abundance.”  Our Lord is the supernatural life of souls by His grace, His virtues and holiness, His sacrifice, which is the source of all graces and holiness.

    The proof that the priests is the apostle of the Heart of Jesus is given by the correspondence that exists between what Our Lord tells us and the powers received by the priest with the sacramental character and grace.

    The priest has a triple power: “postestas regendi, potestas docendi, potestas sanctificandi.” The power to rule, to direct souls in the Way that is Our Lord Jesus Christ. The power to teach the truth, only the truth, integral, supernatural truth. The power to communicate grace to souls and sanctify them in Our Lord Jesus Christ, the power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

    At the same time, the reflection on these three powers and their relation with the treasures of the Sacred Heart proves and explains why the solution to the present crisis of the Church resides in the Catholic priesthood, in its sanctity and fidelity.

    The Liberal, Modernist spirit that has penetrated into the Church opposed Our Lord and His action.

    Our Lord is the Way – and religious freedom dissolves the social Kingship of Christ. The Church is the only way of salvation, and the Modernist spirit relativizes this and leads to religious indifferentism.

    The situation in the Church is clear: there is a doctrinal, dogmatic relativism, which in turn leads to moral relativism and ends into the acceptance and promotion of sin, of scandal.

    A clear example of this is the question of the communion to the divorced and supposedly "remarried.” There is a new attitude of the Church regarding these de facto unions, and even unnatural unions. An unconceivable situation, directly opposed to Our Lord as Life, Truth and Way.

    If the ecclesiastical authorities have reached to the point of calling the evil good, it is because they have first called the error truth. All this holds together – between all these things there is coherence, logic, causality.

    Our Lord taught us that the tree is recognized by its fruits, and the good tree produces good fruits. Therefore, if the fruit is bitter, corrupted, an incitement to sin, then most certainly the tree from which it comes is a bad tree. And if the tree is bad, it is because the seed was bad.

    The problem we live today in the Church is not only of consequences, but the whole of the post-Council is the bad tree, and all of it is virtually contained in its seed, the Second Vatican Council.

    If today we are faced with the scandal of communion of the divorced “remarried,” it is on account of the legislation and practice of the post-Council, which allowed the inversion of the ends of marriage, weakened the indissolubility, and introduced personalism by inventing a new good of marriage: the personal good of the spouses.

    All these doctrines, which for years now have been entering into the Church, are contained in the Council, in Gaudium et Spes, which establishes these principles. And when the present Pope permits all these things, there is only the homogenous development of error.

    At the same time, we are amazed that there is no general reaction in the Church against these measures, that there is no group of Bishops or Cardinals who publicly oppose this scandal. This shows the gravity of Modernism, which firstly disarms, makes the antibodies disappear.

    While there are some improvements, a certain dissolution of this spirit, regarding us it is always the same: to be recognized we will have to accept the conciliar novelties…

    Not long ago, Pope Francis felt obliged to correct Mgr. Pozzo’s words, stating that the recognition of the SSPX is possible, but only with the previous acknowledgment of Vatican II, because it has its value.

    The hierarchical superior of Mgr. Pozzo, Cardinal Mueller, explains that to be Catholic one has to accept the Pope and the Council – religious liberty, ecuмenism, etc., are doctrine, common doctrine, that is, doctrine of faith. He compares this with the case of the resurrection of Our Lord, a truth of faith, but one that has not been explicitly defined. And he concludes saying that to demand the acknowledgment of the Council is not an unreasonable demand and should not be an unsurmountable obstacle for the SSPX. In fact, this acknowledgment will lead us to “full communion,” a communion in error. It is clear that the condition is the acceptance of the Council and post-Council.

    Therefore, it is also clear that the combat continues. As our General Superior, Bishop Fellay, has said, if we have to choose between faith and a compromise, the choice is already made – no compromise.


    God may certainly change the circuмstances, put us in a different situation, and that is our firm hope. But reality is what it is.

    The Sacred Heart of Jesus is also, essentially, the Heart of the Redeemer, a Heart of reparation. St. Margaret Mary says that Our Lord showed her that there were two sanctities, that of love and that of justice, and both are demanding, strict, each in its own way.

    There is a double holiness and reparation, to justice and charity, and the priest must offer himself together with Our Lord for the redemption of men and in reparation. Our Lord Himself gave to His apostles this golden rule when He said: “I sacrifice Myself for them, for them to be sanctified in Truth.”

    That must be our attitude towards those who are of the family of the Church, the authorities. That is the solution for those errors and weaknesses that we denounce. We have the key, in our true identification with the priestly Heart of Jesus.

    As St. John says, we must believe in love, in the love of Our Lord, we must trust in the powerful aid of His grace. We have to answer love with love, gift with our own gift, sacrifice with our own sacrifice. That is the way of redemption and restoration.

    Let us go to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the heart of a Mother, full of love, goodness, mercy, constancy and patience, as the love of a mother is. And Her heart is the surest, most perfect and shortest way to the sacred Heart of Jesus.

    Amen.
    "I think that Catholicism, that's as sane as people can get."  - Jordan Peterson


    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #1 on: June 07, 2016, 08:09:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: MaterDominici


    The hierarchical superior of Mgr. Pozzo, Cardinal Mueller, explains that to be Catholic one has to accept the Pope and the Council – religious liberty, ecuмenism, etc., are doctrine, common doctrine, that is, doctrine of faith. He compares this with the case of the resurrection of Our Lord, a truth of faith, but one that has not been explicitly defined. And he concludes saying that to demand the acknowledgment of the Council is not an unreasonable demand and should not be an unsurmountable obstacle for the SSPX. In fact, this acknowledgment will lead us to “full communion,” a communion in error. It is clear that the condition is the acceptance of the Council and post-Council.

    Therefore, it is also clear that the combat continues. As our General Superior, Bishop Fellay, has said, if we have to choose between faith and a compromise, the choice is already made – no compromise.


    God may certainly change the circuмstances, put us in a different situation, and that is our firm hope. But reality is what it is.



    So what it seems to come down to is that it's really only the acceptance of the Council that is an impediment to reconciliation. It is mentioned above that it is a firm hope that they will be put in different situation through a change in circuмstance. Does this perhaps mean that if Rome decides that they don't have to accept the Council, then they can then reconcile? Or something like that?

    There's just so much more wrong with Rome and the conciliar church than just the Council.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41883
    • Reputation: +23934/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #2 on: June 07, 2016, 09:47:54 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So much for the imminent deal.

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #3 on: June 07, 2016, 10:02:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1

  • Poor seminarians and their families.
    Their Ordinations homily was a robotic, calculated political statement with window dressing.

    In hindsight, for the past 18 years, from GREC onwards, we know the SSPX has continually "dialogued" with and sought "communion with error".  

    "No Compromise"... is mere tough talk from a cowardly Bishop, the head of a pseudo order of newDominicans.


    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline hollingsworth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2787
    • Reputation: +2892/-513
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #4 on: June 07, 2016, 10:02:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bp.deG:
    Quote
    The priest has a triple power: “postestas regendi, potestas docendi, potestas sanctificandi.” The power to rule, to direct souls in the Way that is Our Lord Jesus Christ. The power to teach the truth, only the truth, integral, supernatural truth. The power to communicate grace to souls and sanctify them in Our Lord Jesus Christ, the power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.


    If priests today have this "triple power," and exercise it consistently, why would any of us have left his priest(s) in the SSPX?  Why should any of us have left his priest(s) in the NO, for that matter?  If priests, generally speaking were exercising this "triple power," most of us would have stayed right where we were.  I mean, it's for the very reasons of not teaching the truth, of not directing souls properly, of not communicating grace to souls, that the Catholic faithful are scattering in all directions.

    Bp.deG:
    Quote
    Therefore, it is also clear that the combat continues. As our General Superior, Bishop Fellay, has said, if we have to choose between faith and a compromise, the choice is already made – no compromise.


    Gosh, I remember a letter written by three of the Society bishops to the SG in 2012.  Remember that one?  Has Bp deG. forgotten about it?  He, after all, was one of its authors.  Now, apparently, Bp. Fellay has become Bp.deG's bellwether for non-compromise.  What a shameless remark!

    BpdeG. , IMO, does not exercise "triple power" in this particular sermon,  unless groveling before the Society's SG constitutes an expression of "triple power."  No, my friends, most priests today, including their bishops, are off the power grid.


    Offline 1st Mansion Tenant

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1765
    • Reputation: +1446/-127
    • Gender: Female
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #5 on: June 07, 2016, 10:50:19 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  •  Strong statements by the other two bishops don't seem to slow down the third's mosey towards Rome.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31189
    • Reputation: +27105/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #6 on: June 07, 2016, 11:31:48 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In my opinion,

    Bishop Fellay is planning on there being just one bishop in the "regularized" SSPX, that is, himself.

    After all, just look at all the other "former Traditional" organizations that were absorbed into Rome. How many bishops do any of them have? Has ANY of them EVER had more than one bishop?

    More than one bishop is spiritual survivalism (which is a good thing of course), and Archbishop Lefebvre agreed, calling June 30, 1988 "Operation Survival". It is also independence and a certain degree of power.

    But one bishop? That is an administrator or leader (like the Superior General) for a regular organization during normal times (no emergency), part of a larger whole.

    We in the SSPX might be used to "sacrament dispenser" bishops with no jurisdiction, but I don't think Rome is! For Rome, a Bishop is a certain rank, with a certain authority and jurisdiction. I don't think they'll understand why the SSPX needs 3 bishops.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline TheRealMcCoy

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1238
    • Reputation: +861/-173
    • Gender: Female
    • The Thread Killer
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #7 on: June 07, 2016, 01:27:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew
    In my opinion,

    Bishop Fellay is planning on there being just one bishop in the "regularized" SSPX, that is, himself.

    After all, just look at all the other "former Traditional" organizations that were absorbed into Rome. How many bishops do any of them have? Has ANY of them EVER had more than one bishop?

    More than one bishop is spiritual survivalism (which is a good thing of course), and Archbishop Lefebvre agreed, calling June 30, 1988 "Operation Survival". It is also independence and a certain degree of power.

    But one bishop? That is an administrator or leader (like the Superior General) for a regular organization during normal times (no emergency), part of a larger whole.

    We in the SSPX might be used to "sacrament dispenser" bishops with no jurisdiction, but I don't think Rome is! For Rome, a Bishop is a certain rank, with a certain authority and jurisdiction. I don't think they'll understand why the SSPX needs 3 bishops.


    So wouldn't it further his plans if the other two bishops left?


    Offline richard

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 336
    • Reputation: +227/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #8 on: June 07, 2016, 02:26:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew
    In my opinion,

    Bishop Fellay is planning on there being just one bishop in the "regularized" SSPX, that is, himself.

    After all, just look at all the other "former Traditional" organizations that were absorbed into Rome. How many bishops do any of them have? Has ANY of them EVER had more than one bishop?

    More than one bishop is spiritual survivalism (which is a good thing of course), and Archbishop Lefebvre agreed, calling June 30, 1988 "Operation Survival". It is also independence and a certain degree of power.

    But one bishop? That is an administrator or leader (like the Superior General) for a regular organization during normal times (no emergency), part of a larger whole.

    We in the SSPX might be used to "sacrament dispenser" bishops with no jurisdiction, but I don't think Rome is! For Rome, a Bishop is a certain rank, with a certain authority and jurisdiction. I don't think they'll understand why the SSPX needs 3 bishops.


    Does the FSSP even have a bishop?

    Offline Ekim

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 791
    • Reputation: +818/-103
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #9 on: June 07, 2016, 06:31:36 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • What I find most curious is how quickly the sermon was removed from the website.  It wasn't up for much more than a day.

    The SSPX of yesteryear would have displayed such rightious condemnation of Modernism for all to see,  with courage!  Now they quickly put it up and took it down even quicker!

    Offline Pilar

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 215
    • Reputation: +264/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #10 on: June 07, 2016, 09:48:56 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: TheRealMcCoy
    Quote from: Matthew
    In my opinion,

    Bishop Fellay is planning on there being just one bishop in the "regularized" SSPX, that is, himself.

    After all, just look at all the other "former Traditional" organizations that were absorbed into Rome. How many bishops do any of them have? Has ANY of them EVER had more than one bishop?

    More than one bishop is spiritual survivalism (which is a good thing of course), and Archbishop Lefebvre agreed, calling June 30, 1988 "Operation Survival". It is also independence and a certain degree of power.

    But one bishop? That is an administrator or leader (like the Superior General) for a regular organization during normal times (no emergency), part of a larger whole.

    We in the SSPX might be used to "sacrament dispenser" bishops with no jurisdiction, but I don't think Rome is! For Rome, a Bishop is a certain rank, with a certain authority and jurisdiction. I don't think they'll understand why the SSPX needs 3 bishops.


    So wouldn't it further his plans if the other two bishops left?


    It would seem that way, and maybe that is the reason they stay while they continue to make these strong statements. The bishops love the Society, the priests who left, apparently love the Society, certainly Fr. Pierre Roy makes clear his love for the Society and there are great numbers of layfolk who have loved the Society since His Excellency founded it. We are not anxious for it to fail and it isn't time to "go through pockets for loose change" yet. So it is quite possible that the two bishops remain to try to save it. When the father of a family goes off the rails, the members try to contain the trouble and keep it quiet for the sake of the family's reputation and unity while trying to hold things together and fix the trouble. Maybe that is their thinking. I don't expect Bishop Fellay to turn away from Rome easily, but anything is possible these days and nothing would surprise me. After all, it was just a few years ago, he was saying any deal with Modernist Rome was impossible. I think it is a tug of war and I don't think Bishop Fellay is strong. Look how interviewers make mincemeat out of him. We need to keep praying for the Society. But the two are already bishops, so, if they are sloughed off of the SSPX, they would most likely swell the ranks of resistance bishops to five. Can't imagine Rome would like that?


    Offline hollingsworth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2787
    • Reputation: +2892/-513
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #11 on: June 08, 2016, 09:42:42 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!1
  • Pilar: So it is quite possible that the two bishops remain to try to save it (the Society).

    It is equally possible, as well, that these two bishop remain in the Society to save themselves.  They, apparently, have no contact with Bp. Williamson and the two recently consecrated bishops.  They, also apparently, do not seem to be working on Bp. Fellay in order to restore some kind of relationship with the +Williamson.  They, again apparently, are willing to go along with Fellay in branding the good bishop as a loose cannon, a "grenade,"  a "h0Ɩ0cαųst denier."  They have never tried to correct the narrative about the charges of "imprudence" leveled against him.  They came out briefly in 2012 to put their signatures to a letter of warning to +Fellay.  But after that brief display of solidarity, they quickly retreated back into Fellay's Society 'stockade.'  That these two bishops remain in the Society "to try to save it" I find rather unlikely.  I think the very notion is somewhat amusing, in fact.

    Offline bishopcharriere

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 5
    • Reputation: +3/-9
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #12 on: June 09, 2016, 11:44:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!3
  • Quote from: Ekim
    What I find most curious is how quickly the sermon was removed from the website.  It wasn't up for much more than a day.

    The SSPX of yesteryear would have displayed such rightious condemnation of Modernism for all to see,  with courage!  Now they quickly put it up and took it down even quicker!


    Right, because your assumption (that it was removed because it condemned modernism) is exactly the reason it was removed.  :facepalm:
    Not, perhaps, because the sermon he gave differed from the prepared remarks which were published (granted, too quickly), and the Fathers wanted to make sure they were as faithful and factual to the bishop's ACTUAL words.

    For someone who wants the SSPX to stand unapologetically for the truth (and be transparent), it's curious that you now want them to post a sermon that was not given - essentially lie on their website. Instead of doing what they did - remove an article that was not factually correct.

    But that doesn't quite fit with your narrative, does it?
    The revised sermon will be published soon, either on the STAS site or SSPX.

    God forbid there's a grammatical error in it... Actually I hope there is. Id love to see what sort of palm reading that will bring about.

    Offline MaterDominici

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 5438
    • Reputation: +4152/-96
    • Gender: Female
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #13 on: June 10, 2016, 01:54:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No need to wait with bated breath. The audio is available now online. Jump ahead to 5 minutes for the part quoted below.

    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/NwMmcpb4PKM[/youtube]

    Quote from: Bp de Galarreta
    While there are some improvements, a certain dissolution of this spirit, regarding us it is always the same: to be recognized we will have to accept the conciliar novelties…

    Not long ago, Pope Francis felt obliged to correct Mgr. Pozzo’s words, stating that the recognition of the SSPX is possible, but only with the previous acknowledgment of Vatican II, because it has its value.

    The hierarchical superior of Mgr. Pozzo, Cardinal Mueller, explains that to be Catholic one has to accept the Pope and the Council – religious liberty, ecuмenism, etc., are doctrine, common doctrine, that is, doctrine of faith. He compares this with the case of the resurrection of Our Lord, a truth of faith, but one that has not been explicitly defined. And he concludes saying that to demand the acknowledgment of the Council is not an unreasonable demand and should not be an unsurmountable obstacle for the SSPX. In fact, this acknowledgment will lead us to “full communion,” a communion in error. It is clear that the condition is the acceptance of the Council and post-Council.

    Therefore, it is also clear that the combat continues. As our General Superior, Bishop Fellay, has said, if we have to choose between faith and a compromise, the choice is already made – no compromise.


    God may certainly change the circuмstances, put us in a different situation, and that is our firm hope. But reality is what it is.
    "I think that Catholicism, that's as sane as people can get."  - Jordan Peterson

    Offline RogerThat

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 70
    • Reputation: +64/-114
    • Gender: Male
    Bp de Galarreta Sermon
    « Reply #14 on: June 10, 2016, 03:03:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Does anyone know how the bishop is selected that will conduct the ordinations? I find it odd that Bishop de Gallaretta would celebrate the ordinations in the US when he is the only Bishop that doesn't speak Spanish. I know the other Bishops were present too. Interesting.