Sean Johnson addressed a shill who came in to the CCCC thread with ham fists a-thumping --I didn't want to delete Sean's comments, but I also want to keep the CCCC thread for CCCC material only -- no thank yous, no discussion, no apologetics for the thread itself.
Gimme some context on this, bother! Make it go away with context!https://www
"In the last issue of Fideliter, the 250th since its creation in 1978, we can read on page 42 the following corrigendum from the Director of Publication:
"In n° 248[March-April 2019] of our review on page 39, there is mention of a military chaplain (1) who, in Reunion Island, would be "of a very good doctrine". When taken together, it turns out that he celebrates not only according to the traditional rite, but also according to the rite of Paul VI, which is incompatible with good doctrine. We apologize to our readers for this, but we hope they appreciated the inspiring account of the Fraternity's apostolate on the other side of the planet, which was offered to us by its kind editor. »
In the process, Fideliter officially confirms MPI's information. This will prevent the Liberals from calling us liars when we expose their compromises
In summary, and contrary to what the superior of the African district, Father Henry WUILLOUD (3), publicly wrote (2), the District of France through his official review, claims that attending a Mass of Saint Pius V celebrated by a conciliar priest cannot be a good thing because the doctrine he otherwise professes is bad.
This is what Bishop Lefebvre has always taught, but it is worth recalling in these times of confusion when liberalism is insidiously creeping in everywhere.
1 - Excerpt from the article in issue 248 of March-April 2019: "With the local clergy, our priests have relations of simple courtesy. They are sometimes helped in their heavy tasks by other priests who then come from the metropolis. Our faithful also have the grace of being able to benefit from the presence of a military chaplain of very good doctrine, pious and very attached to the Mass of Saint Pius V."
2 - See our article "The Superior of the African District of the FSSPX claims his request to call upon conciliar or ecclesiadaeist priests to serve the faithful of the FSSPX!!!!
3 - Father WUILLOUD writes, among other things: "On Reunion Island, we called upon (Father Demornex with my agreement) a priest who also celebrates the new liturgy, but who agrees to celebrate the sacraments in the same way as we do in our chapel, who is traditional in his doctrine and who, in my faith, is not opposed to us"."
So let's boil this down:
Context is Menzingen's weapon to explain away all contradictions.
Here is how it works:
Essentially, since some facts, circumstances, or conditions will always be different in the comparison of two events, therefore, there can never be a contradiction. Kind of like the saying "every analogy limps."
But if you boil it all down, here is what the Shill's attempt actually amounts to:
There is no contradiction because in 2011, Bishop de Galarreta was addressing one audience with his personal opinion against the agreement, but in 2012 he was addressing a different audience with the SSPX's official position in favor of the agreement.
Is the Shill implying de Galarreta is saved from contradiction because he opposes the official policy of the SSPX?
That would allow de Galarreta to maintain that his opinion has not changed, but he has not done so.
The major superiors of a "congregation" are presumed to accept theofficial positions of that congregation, and hence, so is de Galarreta.
But the Shill has done more damage to himself he that he appears to realize:
He has, in the course of his refuted rebuttal, actually admitted what this book set out to demonstrate in the first place: That the SSPX had chnged, and contradicted itself:
In 2011, Bishop de Galarreta had one opinion.
In 2012, he had forgone that opinion, and embraced the official (contradictory) policy of the SSPX.
No, the diversion is your attempt to divert readers from seeing Fideliter denounce the African scandal:
"When taken together, it turns out that he celebrates not only according to the traditional rite, but also according to the rite of Paul VI, which is incompatible with good doctrine. We apologize to our readers for this
Funny Fideliter didn't say something along the lines of, "The Society has always, throughout its history, called upon non-member priests to administer to the faithful where Society priests are unable to," as you suggest!