Author Topic: "I Was Decieved by Benedict XVI", (Read 33826 times)

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #30 on:** September 11, 2012, 06:11:54 PM »

Yeah, that comment ticked me off.

I pretty much lost my respect for Patricius after that.

sspxbvm · « **Reply #31 on:** September 11, 2012, 06:12:48 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

So today, in lieu of any apology, or official posting of +Fellay's "turnabout", we have THIS on SSPX.org:

http://www.sspx.org/District_Superiors_Ltrs/2012_ds_ltrs/Public_Announcement_about_Fathers_Chazal_and_Pfeiffer.pdf

Fr. Couture's shameful slander against faithful Fathers Chazal and Pfeiffer.

AND an equally outrageous piece against +Williamson.

Oh, and meanwhile NO MENTION of the "new position" of Bishop Fellay as regards a deal with Rome, let alone any apology.

WHY?

What is going on?

It's the smoke of satan.

finegan · « **Reply #32 on:** September 11, 2012, 06:34:44 PM »

This garbage is revolting. Honest Catholics frequent SSPX chapels in hopes of receiving valid sacraments, and thus saving their souls. Instead, they're forced to play a role in Bishop Fellay's ongoing edition of "Masterpiece Theater." :detective:

It's all too much for me.

My family and I will not assist at a Society Mass until there's been a complete changing of the guard in Menzingen.

John Grace · « **Reply #33 on:** September 11, 2012, 06:42:04 PM »

This was at the height of 'Krahgate' when questions based on facts were being asked of Bishop Fellay. 'Krahgate' is simply "Explain this, Bishop Fellay".

http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10805&st=75

Quote

Dear All,

It has been a while since I have posted anything on Ignis Ardens. The reason I left this forum - it must be at least 12 months ago - was because of the decidely 'Unchristian Comments' that were being placed by many members at that time.

I could not believe that Genuine Catholic people were actually posting such barborous and hate-filled comments about each other.

So I drifted on to Facebook and I now find that I am on about ten Traditional Catholic blogsites there and the same percentage of 'righteous people' are posting about the same amount of decidely 'Unchristian Comments' about each other.

Nevertheless, from time to time, because someone would place a post linking this Forum to a Facebook article, I would come back to this forum to have a peak at what was being said here.

My particular interest is in joining with those persons who have been working to support the 3 SSPX bishops who made it very clear that 'until a doctrinal agreement is reached with Rome there should be no practical agreement'.

I have received severe criticisms from some SSPX priests and others because I decided to publicly oppose this incredibly short-sighted deal. I wrote to Bishop Fellay personally to express my opposition to what he was doing. I never received a reply. I even questioned him publicly at a Conference he gave in Sydney recently which was clearly a whistle-stop tour he was making of Mass Centres in Australia to shore up support for his on-going Suicidal Dialogue with Rome!

I suggested to him that if the SSPX was placed under the control of the diocesan bishops that this would lead to the fragementation of the SSPX - he denied that this was likely.

Almost unbelievably he could not see the danger in placing this as merely a Desirable/Non-essential condition!

If the post relating to 'I Was Deceived by Benedict XVI' is actually correct, and if Bishop Fellay has actually said this or words to this effect, then I think it should be fairly obvious to anyone who is able to reason correctly that those who previously supported Bishop Fellay should now remain completely silent!

I expect that there should be a lot of soul-searching and eating of humble pie!

We genuine Traditional Catholics have to forgive our brothers and sisters for all of the outrageous comments they have been making in support of the Suicidal Bishop Fellay mission.

If the SSPX has any credibility left it should immediately ensure that Bishop Fellay is removed from his post and that he be replaced by one of the other three SSPX bishops.

Yours in Christ
Lawrence (aka Laurie) Myers
Christian Activist,
Sydney, Australia
12 September 2012

Faber · « **Reply #34 on:** September 11, 2012, 07:01:10 PM »

Dumb Ox does not report, that +Fellay admits any guilt. He reports that +Fellay says that it's all the Popes fault.

GertrudetheGreat · « **Reply #35 on:** September 11, 2012, 07:04:09 PM »

Let's analyse this text.

Dumb Ox is a political operative.

First para:

Bishop Fellay has given a conference at Econe.

He is said to have stated that he was "utterly deceived" by Benedict. The notion that Bishop Fellay admits to being deceived is not news. He said it, in equivalent terms, all across Australia when he was here a few weeks ago, in the conferences he presented. What is potentially new is his emphatic statement of it, but since we are not being given any actual quotes, we can't make anything of that.

Second and Third paras:

The "bitter arguing" appears to be Dumb Ox's interpellation, not a reference to what Bishop Fellay said in Econe.

There will be no reconciliation now until "rome" converts.

As I have explained several times, the thinking of the General Chapter regarding the "Six Conditions" was that if #1 was agreed, the rest wouldn't matter. This is why the hard-liners agreed to the soft remainder of the conditions. In the light of that, what Dumb Ox presents Bishop Fellay saying at Econe is not really news either, it's just more explicit. But again, we are given no quotes.

So, what is going on?

Well, we know that Bishop Fellay recently made his visit to see Di Noia, to deliver his formal reply to the June 13 text. We also know that the Fraternity has been threatened several times with re-excommunication and even a declaration of schism by "rome". So it seems likely that this threat was reiterated in Rome during the recent visit.

What would Bishop Fellay's reaction be to such a confirmation of this threat? Prepare the Fraternity and its faithful for new attacks by "rome". Stiffen them up, and discredit "rome" as much as possible.

What is Dumb Ox doing, then? Spinning this to place Bishop Fellay in as bad a light as possible, and to colour the communications from the Fraternity which will appear shortly. It's clear from the last paragraph, "Official announcements and explanations giving more detail are expected in the weeks to come."

This is a pre-emptive strike to undermine the image of the Fraternity as hard-line, no matter how hard-line Bishop Fellay talks in future.

Politics is ugly!

Caraffa · « **Reply #36 on:** September 11, 2012, 07:07:39 PM »

The tactics of the Neo-SSPX seem very similar to the Concilliar Church and its relationship to Tradition. The leadership will say that they were deceived, but then attack Frs. Chazal and Pheiffer on the same day. One step foward, two steps back.

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

If this is true, it's awesome. But now Bishop Fellay needs to apologise to the other three Bishops, especially +Williamson, and also needs to apologise to the priests he kicked out (Pheiffer, Cardozo, Chazal, etc) and offer to let them back in. And finally, he needs to apologise to all the SSPXers and SSPX chapel-goers for this soap opera.

He probably won't apologize or do the proper restitution I'm afraid. Its why he says that he was deceived, its a subtle way to to say that he is not at fault or to blame for some of the problems. He's sees himself as being only the victim here rather than also a co-conspirator. There is no real metanoia or penitence here.

Incredulous · « **Reply #37 on:** September 11, 2012, 07:17:19 PM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

Let's analyse this text.

Dumb Ox is a political operative.

First para:

Bishop Fellay has given a conference at Econe.

He is said to have stated that he was "utterly deceived" by Benedict. The notion that Bishop Fellay admits to being deceived is not news. He said it, in equivalent terms, all across Australia when he was here a few weeks ago, in the conferences he presented. What is potentially new is his emphatic statement of it, but since we are not being given any actual quotes, we can't make anything of that.

Second and Third paras:

The "bitter arguing" appears to be Dumb Ox's interpellation, not a reference to what Bishop Fellay said in Econe.

There will be no reconciliation now until "rome" converts.

As I have explained several times, the thinking of the General Chapter regarding the "Six Conditions" was that if #1 was agreed, the rest wouldn't matter. This is why the hard-liners agreed to the soft remainder of the conditions. In the light of that, what Dumb Ox presents Bishop Fellay saying at Econe is not really news either, it's just more explicit. But again, we are given no quotes.

So, what is going on?

Well, we know that Bishop Fellay recently made his visit to see Di Noia, to deliver his formal reply to the June 13 text. We also know that the Fraternity has been threatened several times with re-excommunication and even a declaration of schism by "rome". So it seems likely that this threat was reiterated in Rome during the recent visit.

What would Bishop Fellay's reaction be to such a confirmation of this threat? Prepare the Fraternity and its faithful for new attacks by "rome". Stiffen them up, and discredit "rome" as much as possible.

What is Dumb Ox doing, then? Spinning this to place Bishop Fellay in as bad a light as possible, and to colour the communications from the Fraternity which will appear shortly. It's clear from the last paragraph, "Official announcements and explanations giving more detail are expected in the weeks to come."

This is a pre-emptive strike to undermine the image of the Fraternity as hard-line, no matter how hard-line Bishop Fellay talks in future.

Politics is ugly!

Oh I get it now!

Dumb Ox is a "political operative"... he's Jєωιѕн, an attorney into commie
politics with friends in the mossad (a counterpart to Max Krah).

Bp. Fellay is a victim... of course and the rest of us are "evil sedes".

It makes perfect sense!

Telesphorus · « **Reply #38 on:** September 11, 2012, 07:17:57 PM »

Bishop Fellay says he was "totally deceived" - but he keeps shifting his position.

If his position had integrity, then it wouldn't depend on his ability to gauge Benedict XVI's stated intentions. Nor would it require the "iron hand of Menzingen" - the bold words about being willing to cause a split, the words to CNS.

Benedict XVI did not bamboozle Bishop Fellay into acting this way.

And even supposing it were somehow possible for Benedict XVI to completely "pull the wool over" Bishop Fellay's eyes (and put a tow around his neck!) then it wouldn't excuse Bishop Fellay - on the contrary, it would mean he wasn't suitable for leadership.

magdalena · « **Reply #39 on:** September 11, 2012, 08:26:12 PM »

I don't see anything that different from what +Fellay has always said, he merely puts a new spin on the words he's uttering--to quiet the lay folk, I assume. It will be on with negotiations as usual.

finegan · « **Reply #40 on:** September 11, 2012, 08:43:07 PM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

Let's analyse this text.

Dumb Ox is a political operative.

First para:

Bishop Fellay has given a conference at Econe.

He is said to have stated that he was "utterly deceived" by Benedict. The notion that Bishop Fellay admits to being deceived is not news. He said it, in equivalent terms, all across Australia when he was here a few weeks ago, in the conferences he presented. What is potentially new is his emphatic statement of it, but since we are not being given any actual quotes, we can't make anything of that.

Second and Third paras:

The "bitter arguing" appears to be Dumb Ox's interpellation, not a reference to what Bishop Fellay said in Econe.

There will be no reconciliation now until "rome" converts.

As I have explained several times, the thinking of the General Chapter regarding the "Six Conditions" was that if #1 was agreed, the rest wouldn't matter. This is why the hard-liners agreed to the soft remainder of the conditions. In the light of that, what Dumb Ox presents Bishop Fellay saying at Econe is not really news either, it's just more explicit. But again, we are given no quotes.

So, what is going on?

Well, we know that Bishop Fellay recently made his visit to see Di Noia, to deliver his formal reply to the June 13 text. We also know that the Fraternity has been threatened several times with re-excommunication and even a declaration of schism by "rome". So it seems likely that this threat was reiterated in Rome during the recent visit.

What would Bishop Fellay's reaction be to such a confirmation of this threat? Prepare the Fraternity and its faithful for new attacks by "rome". Stiffen them up, and discredit "rome" as much as possible.

What is Dumb Ox doing, then? Spinning this to place Bishop Fellay in as bad a light as possible, and to colour the communications from the Fraternity which will appear shortly. It's clear from the last paragraph, "Official announcements and explanations giving more detail are expected in the weeks to come."

This is a pre-emptive strike to undermine the image of the Fraternity as hard-line, no matter how hard-line Bishop Fellay talks in future.

Politics is ugly!

Really? Wow, just wow.

This saga has all of the twists of a daytime soap opera, but without the entertainment value. We're supposed to be believe this rubbish about "political operatives?" Operatives of who, and for what possible reason?

Please, get a grip on reality. :tinfoil:

If the crowd in Menzingen spent half the time defending the true faith as they do justifying their bizarre behavior, they'd be on the road to sainthood by now.

Domitilla · « **Reply #41 on:** September 11, 2012, 08:59:58 PM »

So ... Gertrude the Great is the "Great John Lane", sedevacantist extraordinaire - always ready, willing, and able to lecture us poor, unlettered hicks on the machinations of so called anti-Fellay "political operatives" and their spin. Please, spare us!

Sienna629 · « **Reply #42 on:** September 11, 2012, 10:08:18 PM »

Quote from: finegan

This garbage is revolting. Honest Catholics frequent SSPX chapels in hopes of receiving valid sacraments, and thus saving their souls. Instead, they're forced to play a role in Bishop Fellay's ongoing edition of "Masterpiece Theater." :detective:

It's all too much for me.

My family and I will not assist at a Society Mass until there's been a complete changing of the guard in Menzingen.

Are you near an independent Chapel, then?

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #43 on:** September 11, 2012, 10:21:21 PM »

Quote from: GertrudetheGreat

Let's analyse this text.

Dumb Ox is a political operative.

First para:

Bishop Fellay has given a conference at Econe.

He is said to have stated that he was "utterly deceived" by Benedict. The notion that Bishop Fellay admits to being deceived is not news. He said it, in equivalent terms, all across Australia when he was here a few weeks ago, in the conferences he presented. What is potentially new is his emphatic statement of it, but since we are not being given any actual quotes, we can't make anything of that.

Second and Third paras:

The "bitter arguing" appears to be Dumb Ox's interpellation, not a reference to what Bishop Fellay said in Econe.

There will be no reconciliation now until "rome" converts.

As I have explained several times, the thinking of the General Chapter regarding the "Six Conditions" was that if #1 was agreed, the rest wouldn't matter. This is why the hard-liners agreed to the soft remainder of the conditions. In the light of that, what Dumb Ox presents Bishop Fellay saying at Econe is not really news either, it's just more explicit. But again, we are given no quotes.

So, what is going on?

Well, we know that Bishop Fellay recently made his visit to see Di Noia, to deliver his formal reply to the June 13 text. We also know that the Fraternity has been threatened several times with re-excommunication and even a declaration of schism by "rome". So it seems likely that this threat was reiterated in Rome during the recent visit.

What would Bishop Fellay's reaction be to such a confirmation of this threat? Prepare the Fraternity and its faithful for new attacks by "rome". Stiffen them up, and discredit "rome" as much as possible.

What is Dumb Ox doing, then? Spinning this to place Bishop Fellay in as bad a light as possible, and to colour the communications from the Fraternity which will appear shortly. It's clear from the last paragraph, "Official announcements and explanations giving more detail are expected in the weeks to come."

This is a pre-emptive strike to undermine the image of the Fraternity as hard-line, no matter how hard-line Bishop Fellay talks in future.

Politics is ugly!

Apparently Gerty is John Lane (or a sympathizer/plaigerizer of John Lane).

Verbatim posts per IA.

1531 · « **Reply #44 on:** September 12, 2012, 02:55:00 AM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

If this is true, it's awesome. But now Bishop Fellay needs to apologise to the other three Bishops, especially +Williamson, and also needs to apologise to the priests he kicked out (Pheiffer, Cardozo, Chazal, etc) and offer to let them back in. And finally, he needs to apologise to all the SSPXers and SSPX chapel-goers for this soap opera.

B. Fellay should not just offer, but welcome them back in, fully reinstated. The faithful who supported them should also be welcomed back. We can be magnanimous and charitable and say that B. Fellay was grievously misled, but has now heard the voice of reason and that our prayers have been answered.