Author Topic: Analysis of the Rome-SSPX deal - by Fr Cekada (Read 15902 times)

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #30 on:** May 12, 2012, 07:45:28 AM »

Quote from: Seraphim

Quote from: Anthony M
My main point is that the Sede's and other crack pots want you to falsely believe that just because the SSPX may receive approval from Rome that somehow it has sold out. That is madness. Did the Archbishop sell out the SSPX during the time it was approved by Rome ? NO. And the same applies today.

Those spreading false rumours and promiting division have a serious amount to answer for before God.

And yes, if you want to speak about respect for Fr. Cekada, granted, then the same applies for Bishop Fellay who is both a bishop and superior of the SSPX !

Hey look: Another pro-deal newbie who joined on May 10!

Does he realize he is also implicitly accusing the 3 bishops with his line of reasoning?

Notice how opposition to a deal now equals sedevacantism?

Remember when Bishop fellay himself refuted that idea when camps used it against the Sspx?

And most importantly: Notice the weak attempt to cite Archbishop Lefebvre's implicit approval on the grounds that the modernist once allowed him a regularization (as though you were not supposed to reflect upon all the reasons over the last 40 year why that approval was yanked!).

Mending does not want you to remember these words: No practical agreement until the doctrinal issues are resolved.

To pretend any other path is consistent with the often published position of archbishop lefebvre is calculated dishonesty.

Should say:

"Menzingen does not want.....

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #31 on:** May 12, 2012, 10:25:34 AM »

Quote from: Anthony M

SP denies affirming that the other bishops have sold out long ago, when he practically implies it since they have been aligned with the SSPX (Ergo with bishop Fellay) till now.

That is absurd logic. Just because they haven't broken away yet means they have sold out? You don't know what you're talking about.

Quote

How is it that Archbishop Lefebvre who could call a spade a spade, and even use some harsh words to refer to the Conciliar Church leaders long before 1987, could also turn around (as I already showed you all in my posting on the issue) and ask the Holy See for recognition without becoming a traitorous apostate by your reasoning? Given also he had already written great expositions on the conciliar errors and the new Mass and yet he would ask for recognition of his work by the Holy See. Please explain to me how you can then claim that you are representing this saintly giant of man?

Once again, you leave out the fact that the Archbishop NEVER SIGNED A DEAL. You're being dishonest.

Quote

How is it that the 3 other bishops are not seen by your reasoning as traitorous apostates for asking the Holy See (in writing with their own hand written signatures) to remove the excommunications with the Archbishop himself never considered as just or binding in the first place?

This is crazy.

Quote

How is it that the other 3 bishops could go along with Bishop Fellay till now without making an open contentions regarding the negotiations and the doctrinal discussions, without being seen as traitorous apostates?

The other Bishops have not "gone along" with it. You are lying. May I remind you that Bishop Williamson is practically limited to his Eleison Comments blog to speak the truth given his de facto boot from his position in the Society? Oh, but according to you he's gone along with it. You're a liar.

Quote

My point is that you are selective in try to make it all a "Bishop Fellay" issue, when the entire SSPX is in on this position. Reality is just hard for some people to handle for some. Hence planet Earth, well . . . for some Mars seems to be the preference?

I think you deserve to be banned.

Quote

The crack pots on the list try to shift the issue by attacking Fellay and saying well, you are 'Liberal, Modernist, etc if you don't follow us self appointed pontiffs who great at putting out venomous invectives against anyone without scruple that we shall answer to God for it, since, well, we are Trad Cats !

More insanity.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #32 on:** May 12, 2012, 10:42:32 AM »

Quote from: Anthony M

Telesphorus

More dishonest nonsense.

Once again you didn't answer the questions. You simply replied with same, crack pot "I am the pope' nonsense.

It is the very spirit of the 9 crack pots who betrayed the Archbishop that you are advocating. The very statements that you are making against Bishop Fellay they were making against the Archbishop and the SSPX back then. Just read the correspondence.

Beyond that I never claimed to advocate Bishop Fellay, but simply the solid position upon which the SSPX has stood and continues to stand. Never made a defense of Bishop Fellays personal behavior which I may not agree with and equally find reprehensible, but I also am not one to cast a stone, since who is there without fault on a personal level? But what I do agree with is the position of the faith that he holds. His personal actions and idea are his own. That goes for everyone !

It isn't about personalities, and that is what you are using to attack the Trad cause to deceive people into your 'I am pope' position.

The point is you fail to answer the questions. When you are ready to use your brain and act like a real person, rather than spit out your venomous trash let me know.

I simply showed clearly the illogical trash of your own erroneous position ! Reality again, well it's hard . . .

You may not be a modernist, etc, but you are certainly on the road to perdition by placing yourself out of the faith and out of reality which you refuse to submit to. The devil doesn't care how he gets souls to hell, either by one extreme or the other, either way it works for his cause.

Beyond that, sorry to disappoint you, but Bishop Williamson et alia have no intention of splitting from the SSPX you can call and ask them yourself if you want confirmation of that point. Bishop Williamson and the other bishops are not shallow nitwits like the crack pots who have been advocating your nonsense.

You need to make a serious examination of conscience on this issue (and perhaps a confession for all your insulting words against a Catholic prelate? or does that apply only to those who say or act against prelates you may happen to like?) .

Fr:

I will support Bishop Fellay's initiative to sign with Rome if you can demonstrate 2 things:

1) Signing a purely practical deal while all the doctrinal issues remain unresolved is not an implicit acceptance of doctrinal pluralism;

2) You cite post-1988 citations of archbishop lefebvre asserting a purely practical solution would be an acceptable response to the crisis in the church.

Everything else in this dialogue is an irrelevant distraction.

PereJoseph · « **Reply #33 on:** May 12, 2012, 11:09:39 AM »

Anthony M, you keep asserting that those who do not believe Benedict is the Pope therefore objectively treat themselves as if they can make judgments that only one with papal authority can. Yet those who hold to this theological opinion -- which has the backing of many approved theologians prior to the Latrocinium -- do so precisely out of obedience to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, being uncomfortable with the SSPX's position of "sifting" through magisterial statements and deciding which are binding and which are not. You have not established your central claim, yet you keep repeating the charge despite the fact that, if anything, you are guilty of it whereas those you accuse are not. Perhaps that is why you rely on using middle class political epithets like "crackpot," which is the equivalent of the term "extremist," which seems to imply that one who holds opinions that are rejected by the majority of the mediocre crowd are somehow not of sound mind. Do you not see how un-Catholic such a social attitude is ? Do you not see how unfair and unjust you are being and how you therefore objectively embarrass yourself and your position ?

Those are just a few things for you to consider before, during, and after you post over the course of... however long you are still a member here (the next few days ?).

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #34 on:** May 13, 2012, 06:13:20 PM »

Fr. Anthony Cekeda will be interviewed on Restoration Radio tomorrow
Monday 5/14/2012 at 8pm and can be heard on the Internet on the possible
deal with the SSPX and the Vatican.