Quote from: Matthew

There are several so-called "traditional" organizations in the bosom of Rome today: The FSSP, Institute of Christ the King, Institute of the Good Shepherd, Campos Brazil, etc. If they haven't functioned as the "leaven" to root out Modernism from Rome, what makes anyone think the SSPX will succeed today if it tries?

Does that mean that the SSPX should not try? If something is difficult or appears impossible, does that mean that one should not try? Our Lord Himself teaches that finding salvation will be difficult. Perhaps we ought not to even try.

Should a woman marry a man who'd been divorced six times, and ignore all the past history, and the warnings of all? What makes her think she will be any different?

In such a confusion, grey area, it is a great error to say: everything that is not white is black!

Is what was condemned in the Council from the Council or just from a common interpretation of it?

Does the Church teach religious liberty, so long as it's "very limited"?

Does Benedict XVI profess an integral Catholic Faith?

Is the SSPX intentionally fuzzy about its historic positions?  Is that why you attempt to confuse us with "shades of grey"?

What is certainly black and white is the extent to which the SSPX tries to control and manipulate its priests, as it tries to shift its theological position.

Does the SSPX believe that the Church is the spotless Bride of Christ and the Pope is Her earthly head or not?

In the past Bishop Fellay has said that the Church has cancer.  

Yes, it certainly causes theological difficulties to accept a Pope who prays with Muslims in mosques.  Who tolerates innumerable outrages while refusing to tolerate integral Catholicism.

How can teachings described as follows belong to the "great Tradition" of the spotless Bride of Christ?

“The more one analyzes the docuмents of the Vatican II and their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, and the more one realizes that they are neither superficial errors nor a few particular errors such as ecuмenism, religious freedom, collegial structure, but rather a total perversion of the spirit, a whole new philosophy founded upon Subjectivism… It is very serious! A total perversion! … That is really alarming.”

Quote from: Pepsuber

Quote from: Matthew

There are several so-called "traditional" organizations in the bosom of Rome today: The FSSP, Institute of Christ the King, Institute of the Good Shepherd, Campos Brazil, etc. If they haven't functioned as the "leaven" to root out Modernism from Rome, what makes anyone think the SSPX will succeed today if it tries?

Does that mean that the SSPX should not try? If something is difficult or appears impossible, does that mean that one should not try? Our Lord Himself teaches that finding salvation will be difficult. Perhaps we ought not to even try.

This kind of logic makes me go huh?!

If there is a [bonfire] going and twenty people decide to get in line and touch it because they are sure they will not get burned, touch it and then suffer third degree burns, how can it stand to reason that the guys behind them will not get equally burned?

Should the ones who have not yet touched the fire say, "hey we should at least try, we might not get burned, God will protect us".

Stupid analogy maybe, but hope it gets the point across that your thinking may be lacking in simple sense.

It seems to me that some pro-accordistas are forgetting what is at stake. Matthew was trying to remind us, using the example of "FSSP, Institute of Christ the King, Institute of the Good Shepherd, Campos Brazil, etc."

What does it mean to "try" to root out Modernism from Rome?

Some analogies were mentioned but they seem to lack a crucial element. This bonfire example leaves the participants with 3rd degree burns. But they're still able to get away from the bonfire.

Can the FSSP, ICK, IGS, or Campos get away from Rome, without schism?

Quote from: nadieimportante

Should a woman marry a man who'd been divorced six times, and ignore all the past history, and the warnings of all? What makes her think she will be any different?

That's not an apt analogy. Does the SSPX believe that the Church is the spotless Bride of Christ and the Pope is Her earthly head or not? For a marriage analogy, should the married couple who is separated try to live in common or not? Is it too hard? There is no "objective" reason (such as divorce and remarriage) that would render an SSPX-Rome agreement "invalid."

It seems to me the divorcee isn't a good analogy, either, but for a different reason. The woman still has her life, and her autonomy, regardless of the marriage. She's still herself; she hasn't become a different person.

When the FSSP, ICK, IGS or Campos made a "deal" with Rome, they became something else, and there is no going back. Meanwhile, Rome isn't giving up its golden calf of Modernism.

I suggest the comparison of a poor man with a rare golden coin, who faces financial trouble, and thinks that he can use the coin to reform the financial system that's giving him trouble. But by selling the coin, he has to give it up, and by losing the coin he can't get it back. He will have something in trade for the coin, some money, but the money might not be enough to relieve his troubles.

When Fellay signs a deal with Rome, he is giving up something that he can't get back. It would be foolish for him to believe that he can convert Rome from the inside any better than he can from the outside. This is a very dangerous concept, and perhaps one that Rome wants him to believe -- for Rome's advantage and to the Society's disadvantage.

So long as a deal is NOT made with Rome, the Society has bargaining power. And Rome knows that. As soon as a deal is signed, the Society loses its bargaining power, and Rome knows that, too. If a deal is made and then the Society realizes, as the FSSP, ICK, IGS and Campos have, that they are on a shelf, in a cage, and unable to function with the freedom they had before their respective deals, at that time it will be too late. The coin is sold, the Society got its payment, and now the coin is no longer obtainable: it's all gone.

ABL recognized the inherent problem of dealing with a Rome that has lost its divine compass, as Our Lady of Good Success prophesied 400 years ago. We ought to appreciate his foresight, because Our Lady's words were not made known yet when ABL recognized the problem. Our point of perspective is better than his would seem to have been, for we have both his example and the words of Our Lady. He had neither of those.

When Roman clerics have lost their divine compass, we won't get any chance to return their compass to them by becoming part of the wandering, lost infrastructure of Rome. The Society has already demonstrated that recognition by Rome is a desirable goal, but now it's the Society's place to demonstrate that making doctrinal concessions of any kind whatsoever is never all right, must be avoided like the PLAGUE that it is, and will be refused at all cost.

Only by holding this power will Tradition be preserved, for any deal with Rome, so long as Rome continues to worship its golden calf of Modernism, will be the same thing as turning over Tradition itself, to Rome. It would be like putting the fox in charge of the hen house.

Quote from: Fr. Laisney

Of course you – and I – would sometime wish to know what is going on.

Once again, we can't make any judgment because we have been kept completely in the dark.  If what was going on was "good", it would not be kept under a bushel basket.  Only evil plots must be kept hidden from view.  Archbishop Lefebvre told people what was going on in his discussions with Rome, not so with Bishop Fellay.

When I read comments from those who wish to be blind, my mind simply cannot comprehend the motives.

I think Fr Laisney, a pro-dealer, had a fair idea of what was going on. When I asked him some months ago, he referred me to what was being put out by DICI. But from his conversation with me, I felt that he was enthusiastic about the deal and that he felt it would come about soon. He obviously feels that the SSPX will have much to offer the "Church" from the inside. Hah! Just let these dinosaurs come into contact with the liberated women of the Novus Ordo!.

Many of the Novus Ordo seminarians already have a college degree ( some are post-graduates ) by the time they are ordained. Quite a few of them obtain doctorates in various disciplines especially Church related. Somehow I dont think that the SSPX clergy, most of them with just a 5 or 6 year seminary course behind them, will be able to make an impact. Bishop Fellay, one of the latter, seems to have been completely bowled over by the highly educated and articulate clerics he came across in Rome, so much so that he seems to have forgotten why the SSPX came into being.