Author Topic: "How far he has come" (Read 1475 times)

Militia Jesu · « **on:** March 20, 2013, 11:18:20 AM »

Source: Militia Jesu Christi

by Arsenius

With the recent publication of the Doctrinal Statement of Bishop Fellay, sent to Cardinal Levada on April 15, 2012, several observations have been made but there is something that looks like it is going unnoticed: that is the reference Bishop Fellay makes to the profession of faith of 1989. Indeed, he cites in a note, on paragraph 2 of its statement, as a docuмent that would be the way to accept the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church. Here is a passage of that profession of faith: "I adhere with a religious obedience of will and faith to doctrines that, either the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops, speak when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they don't have the intention to proclaim a definitive act. "[1] Note that this profession of faith is preceded by an introductory text that explains the meaning to be given to such a profession. However, this introduction reads: "It seemed essential to prepare adapted texts, in order to make them updated with regard to your style and your content and put in accordance with the teachings of Vatican II and the docuмents from the same." [ 2]

And now let us hear Archbishop Lefebvre, with his piercing eyes, giving us a proper appreciation of this docuмent by Cardinal Ratzinger:

"The mistakes of the Council and its reforms remain the official norm consecrated by the profession of faith of Cardinal Ratzinger in March 1989" (Mgr Lefebvre, Itinéraire spirituel, p. 10-11) [3]

"The new profession of faith which was written by Cardinal Ratzinger contains explicit acceptance of the Council and its consequences. It was the Council and its aftermath that destroyed the Holy Mass, which destroyed our Faith, destroyed the Catechisms and the kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ in civil societies. How can we accept it? (...) It is necessary to keep the Catholic Faith, protect it by all means "(Mgr Lefebvre, Paris, le 23 septembre 1979) [4]

"This is to put us in a contradiction, because while Rome gives the Fraternity of St. Peter, for example, or the Abbey of Barroux and other groups permission to celebrate the Traditional Mass, at the same time they call the new priests to sign a profession of faith in which you must admit the spirit of the Council. It is a contradiction: the spirit of the Council is expressed in the new mass. How do you want to keep the Traditional Mass accepting the spirit that destroys this very same traditional Mass? You put yourself in a complete contradiction. One day, little by little, will be required of those to whom was granted the Mass of St. Pius V, the Mass of all time, it will be required that they also accept the new mass. And it will be said that it is simply that they conform to what they signed, for they have signed because they accept the spirit of the Council and the reforms of the Council. You can not put yourself in such a contradiction, in an aberrant illogic. It's an uncomfortable situation entirely. That's the difficult of these groups who signed it and who currently find themselves in a kind of deadlock. "(Homily, Friedrichshafen, April 29, 1990, quoted in La messe of toujours, p. 428)

What I like especially is to underline the extent to which Bishop Fellay came to cave in order to achieve its objective: the legalization of Society of St. Pius X.

With or without agreement with Rome, the evil is already at the head of Bishop Fellay. And his position is increasingly contaminating the minds of those who trust him.
Our vows that everyone open their eyes, do not be fooled and join those who resist him in the face (cf. Gal. 2, 11-14): ut fideles inveniantur.

Arsenius

___________________

[1] J’adhère aussi avec une obéissance religieuse de la volonté et de la foi aux doctrines que, soit le pontife Romain, soit le collège des évêques, prononcent quand ils exercent le magistère authentique, même s’ils n’ont pas l’intention de les proclamer dans un acte définitif.
[2] Il est apparu donc indispensable de préparer des textes adaptés pour les mettre à jour en ce qui concerne leur style et leur contenu et les mettre plus en phase avec les enseignements de Vatican II et des docuмents qui en étaient issus.
[3] Les erreurs du Concile et ses réformes demeurent la norme officielle consacrée par la profession de foi du Cardinal Ratzinger de mars 1989.
[4] La nouvelle profession de foi qui a été rédigée par le cardinal Ratzinger contient explicitement l’acceptation du Concile et de ses conséquences. C’est le Concile et ses conséquences qui ont détruit la Sainte Messe, qui ont détruit notre Foi, qui ont détruit les catéchismes et le règne de Notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ dans les Sociétés civiles. Comment pouvons-nous l’accepter ! […] Il nous faut garder la Foi catholique, la protéger par tous les moyens.

http://spessantotomas.blogspot.com/2013/03/ate-que-ponto-ele-chegou-por-arsenius.html

John Grace · « **Reply #1 on:** March 20, 2013, 11:42:08 AM »

It's probably a good idea to print this off and distribute. It might take time for the word to spread though. For example one woman in Ireland read the first posting of 'William of Norwich' about 6 months after it was posted.

Not wishing to discourage you, Militia Jesu, you won't convince the likes of John McFarland though. Others will believe this is "internet rumour".

Who are you trying to convince with this piece though? Many have already made up their minds regarding a deal with Rome.

bowler · « **Reply #2 on:** March 20, 2013, 12:13:01 PM »

Quote from: Militia Jesu

Source: Militia Jesu Christi

by Arsenius

With the recent publication of the Doctrinal Statement of Bishop Fellay, sent to Cardinal Levada on April 15, 2012, several observations have been made but there is something that looks like it is going unnoticed: that is the reference Bishop Fellay makes to the profession of faith of 1989. Indeed, he cites in a note, on paragraph 2 of its statement, as a docuмent that would be the way to accept the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church. Here is a passage of that profession of faith: "I adhere with a religious obedience of will and faith to doctrines that, either the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops, speak when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they don't have the intention to proclaim a definitive act. "[1] Note that this profession of faith is preceded by an introductory text that explains the meaning to be given to such a profession. However, this introduction reads: "It seemed essential to prepare adapted texts, in order to make them updated with regard to your style and your content and put in accordance with the teachings of Vatican II and the docuмents from the same." [ 2]

Can you explain this in more detail, I can't follow the map laid out.

John Grace · « **Reply #3 on:** March 20, 2013, 12:27:47 PM »

Is it a google translation as I am not clear what is meant by

Quote

What I like especially is to underline the extent to which Bishop Fellay came to cave in order to achieve its objective: the legalization of Society of St. Pius X.

What is meant by the "legalization of Society St. Pius X."? I am guessing you meant "regularisation"?

Militia Jesu · « **Reply #4 on:** March 20, 2013, 06:20:40 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

Is it a google translation as I am not clear what is meant by

Quote
What I like especially is to underline the extent to which Bishop Fellay came to cave in order to achieve its objective: the legalization of Society of St. Pius X.

What is meant by the "legalization of Society St. Pius X."? I am guessing you meant "regularisation"?

Yes and yes.

Militia Jesu · « **Reply #5 on:** March 20, 2013, 06:30:18 PM »

Quote from: bowler

Quote from: Militia Jesu
Source: Militia Jesu Christi

by Arsenius

With the recent publication of the Doctrinal Statement of Bishop Fellay, sent to Cardinal Levada on April 15, 2012, several observations have been made but there is something that looks like it is going unnoticed: that is the reference Bishop Fellay makes to the profession of faith of 1989. Indeed, he cites in a note, on paragraph 2 of its statement, as a docuмent that would be the way to accept the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church. Here is a passage of that profession of faith: "I adhere with a religious obedience of will and faith to doctrines that, either the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops, speak when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they don't have the intention to proclaim a definitive act. "[1] Note that this profession of faith is preceded by an introductory text that explains the meaning to be given to such a profession. However, this introduction reads: "It seemed essential to prepare adapted texts, in order to make them updated with regard to your style and your content and put in accordance with the teachings of Vatican II and the docuмents from the same." [ 2]

Can you explain this in more detail, I can't follow the map laid out.

He's talking about the Doctrinal Preamble of Bp. Fellay:

Quote

DOCTRINAL DECLARATION FROM APRIL 15, 2012, WHICH MGR FELLAY SENT TO CARDINAL LEVADA

I

We plight to always be faithful to the Catholic Church and to the Roman Pontiff, her supreme pastor, Christ's vicar, successor of Peter and head of the body of bishops.

II

We declare that we accept the teachings of the Church's magisterium re. matters of faith and morals, giving to each doctrinal statement the required degree of assent, according to the doctrine contained in item 25 of the Lumen Gentium dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council (1).

III In particular:

1 We declare accepting the doctrine re. the Roman Pontiff and the College of bishops, with its head, the Pope, as taught by the Pastor Aeternus dogmatic constitution of the First Vatican Council and by the Lumen Gentium dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council, chapter 3 (De constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiæ et in specie de episcopatu), explained and interpreted by the Nota explicativa prævia to this very chapter.

2 We recognize the authority of the Magisterium to which alone is entrusted the task of authentically interpreting the Word of God written or handed down (2) in faithfulness to the Tradition, remembering that « the Holy Spirit was not promised to Peter's successors so that they may make known, under his revelation, a new doctrine, but so that, with His assistance, they may keep in a holy manner and faithfully express the revelation handed over by the Apostles, i.e. the deposit of faith » (3).

3 The Tradition is the living transmission of the Revelation « usque ad nos » (4) and the Church in its doctrine, in its life and in its cult, perpetuates and transmits to all generations what it is and all what She believes. The Tradition progresses within the Church with the assistance of the Holy Spirit (5), not as a contrary novelty (6) but through a better understanding of the depositum fidei (7).

4 The entire Tradition of the Catholic faith must be the criterion and the guide for understanding the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, which in turn illuminates – i.e. deepens and further makes explicit– some aspects of the life and of the doctrine of the Church, implicitly present in her midst or not yet conceptually formulated (8).

5 The statements of the Second Vatican Council and of the later pontifical magisterium re. the relationship between the Catholic Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, as well as re. the social duty of religion and the right to religious freedom, whose formulation is difficult to reconcile with the former doctrinal statements of the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the entire and uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner consistent with the truths previously taught by the Church's magisterium, without accepting any interpretation of these statements which may lead to expound the Catholic doctrine in opposition or in rupture with the Tradition and with this Magisterium.

6 This is why it is legitimate to promote through a legitimate discussion the study and the theological explanation of expressions and of formulations of the Second Vatican Council and of the consecutive magisterium, in the case where it appears that they cannot be reconciled with the previous Church's Magisterium (9).

7 We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and of the Sacraments celebrated with the intent of doing what the Church does according the rites referred to in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramental Ritual legitimately promulgated by popes Paul VI and Jean-Paul II.

8 By following the criteria set out above (III, 5), as well as canon 21 of the Code, we plight to respect the Church's common discipline and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by pope John-Paul II (1983) in the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches promulgated by the same Pontiff (1990), reserving the right of a discipline to be conceded to the Society of Saint Pius X by a particular law.

—————————————–
Notes--
(1) See the new formula for the Profession of the faith and the oath of fidelity for assuming a charge exercised in the name of the Church, 1989; cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 749; 750, §1 and §2; 752; CCEO canon 597; 598, §1 and §2; 599.

(2) See Pius XII, Humani Generis encyclical.

(3) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor aeternus, Dz. 3070.

(4) Council of Trent, Dz. 1501: “All saving truth and rules of conduct (Matt. 16:15) are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves,[3] the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand.”

(5) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 8 and 9, Denz. 4209-4210.

(6) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3020: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding "Therefore […] let the understanding, the knowledge, and wisdom of individuals as of all, of one man as of the whole Church, grow and progress strongly with the passage of the ages and the centuries; but let it be solely in its own genus, namely in the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.'' [Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, 28].”

(7) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3011; Anti-modernist Oath, § 4; Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Dz 3886; Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.

(8) E.g. like the teaching on the sacramentality of the episcopacy in Lumen Gentium, § 21.

(9) There is a parallel in history in the Decree for the Armenians of the Council of Florence, where the porrection of the instruments was indicated as the matter of the sacrament of Holy Orders. Nevertheless theologians legitimately discussed, even after this decree, the accuracy of such an assertion. Finally the issue was resolved in another way by Pope Pius XII.