For whatever truth and good reasoning may be found in this EC (and there is indeed plenty), it seems rather paradoxical to be coming from a bishop who not only has clung so tenaciously for so many years to Valtorta and her Poem of the Man-God, as well as the backwards running girls' Garabandal narrative, but has actually gone so far as to continually and publicly promote it all.  I could only imagine what many in the Resistance -- and with very good reason -- would be saying if we had Bp. Fellay privately, let alone, publicly promoting same!

*******************************************************************************
Bishop Fellay – II

Let us be hard in mind, in manners gentle.
Softness of mind makes silly, sentimental.

An error is never properly refuted until it is uprooted. In other words truly to overcome an error one needs to show not only that it is an error, but why it is an error. Let us suppose, with last week’s “Comments,” that the June 28 statement of the Superior General of the Society of St Pius X, by looking forward to the Society’s pious priesthood resolving the Church’s crisis of Faith, commits the error of putting the cart of the priesthood before the horse of the Faith. Then let us show that this error has its roots in our age’s almost universal undervaluing of the mind and overvaluing of the will, resulting even unconsciously in a scorn for doctrine (except for the Beatles’ doctrine of “All you need is luv”).

Already towards the beginning of the Statement there occurs a hint of this error when the Statement says that the central principle condemned in Pascendi, Pius X’s great condemnation of modernism, is that of “independence.” No. The principle he constantly condemns as being at the root of modernism is rather agnosticism, the doctrine that the mind can know nothing behind what appears to the senses. Upon that unknowing follows the independence of the mind from its object, followed in turn by the will’s declaration of independence from everything else on which it does not want to depend. It is in the nature of things that the mind must first be ѕυιcιdєd before the will can declare its independence. So when the Statement puts independence before agnosticism at the heart of Pascendi, that is a hint that the Statement is a part rather of the Church’s problem than of its solution.

And where does this downgrading of the mind and doctrine in turn come from? Primarily from Luther who called human reason a “prostitute, ” and who more than anybody else launched Chistendom on the sentimental path to its self-destruction today. But that took all of 500 years? Yes, because there was natural and Catholic resistance along the way. But Luther was right when he told the Pope that in the end he would destroy him – “Pestis eram vivus, functus tua mors ero, Papa” – A plague to you I was when I had breath, But once I’m dead, O Pope, I’ll be your death.

To this radical and gigantic error of the downgrading of mind and doctrine may be attributed two sub-errors in the case of the author of the June 28 Statement: firstly, his misunderstanding of Archbishop Lefebvre, and secondly his too great understanding of Madame Cornaz (pen-name Rossinière).

Like many of us seminarians in Écône when Archbishop Lefebvre himself presided there, Bernard Fellay was rightly enchanted and bewitched by the outstanding example before our very eyes of what a Catholic priest could and should be. But the back bone of his priesthood and of his heroic fight for the Faith was not his piety – many modernists are “pious” – but his doctrine, doctrine of the eternal priesthood, profoundly allergic to liberalism and modernism. Nor did the Archbishop ever say that his Society would save the Church. Rather its priests were to safeguard the Church’s priceless treasures for better days.

The person who did say that the Society’s priests would save the Church, as Fr Ortiz has reminded us, was Madame Cornaz, a family mother from Lausanne, Switzerland, whose life spanned most of the 20th century, and who between 1928 and 1969 received communications supposedly from Heaven on how married couples should sanctify the priesthood (!). The communications started again in 1995 (!) when she met a Society priest whom she persuaded, and through him Bishop Fellay, that it was the SSPX priests who were destined by Providence to save the Church by propagating her “Homes of Christ the Pr iest.” With all his authority the Superior General supported her project, but the negative reaction of Society priests made him rapidly renounce it in public. Inwardly however, did her mystical vision of the Society’s exalted future stay with him? It seems quite possible. Like Martin Luther King, the Superior General “has a dream.”

Kyrie eleison

klas:

For whatever truth and good reasoning may be found in this EC (and there is indeed plenty), it seems rather paradoxical to be coming from a bishop who not only has clung so tenaciously for so many years to Valtorta and her Poem of the Man-God, as well as the backwards running girls' Garabandal narrative, but has actually gone so far as to continually and publicly promote it all.

Madame Comaz prophesied that sspx, i.e. Fellay & Co. would be instrumental in saving the Church through some wacky group called "Homes of Christ the Priest."  Wasn't that her sole claim to fame?  I think we can safely say at this point that sspx is not going to accomplish this mission.  SSPX can not even keep its own house in order, much less provide the inspiration and leadership to right the stricken Vatican ship. So the predictions of M. Comaz seem highly unlikely of fulfillment, which, of course, would make her a false seer.

Valtorta, on the other hand, wrote the entire life of Christ through continuous visions supplied by the Lord Jesus Himself.  You can choose to believe or not believe her recorded visions.  Many people, however, including the bishop and myself, do.

Comaz prophesied events which have not, and never will take place. Valtorta, on the other hand, recorded historical events which have already occurred.  You may say that she falsely embellished and fabricated about those historical events.  Fine, but Comaz's prophetic narrative falls off altogether.  She was obviously a phony.  The very notion that Fellay & Co.  are going to help bring about the Church's salvation is laughable on its face.  The neo-sspx has all but abandoned the original mission of ABL.