Author Topic: Bp. Fellay on Francis: "What we have before us is a genuine Modernist!" (Read 25911 times)

Machabees · « **Reply #30 on:** October 14, 2013, 06:59:39 PM »

Let's see.

Bishop Fellay in front of Traditional Catholics said that "Pope Francis is a genuine Modernist!”

And, in front of the Modernist Catholics, he says that the New mass is Legitimately promulgated, the new code of canon law is good that gives communion in the hand, 95% of Vatican II is good, religious liberty is "limited", so on, and so on... in putting incense on the false god and idols of ecuмenism and religious liberty.

So, lets put this in the context of who is willing to spill their blood for God with these modernist words.

Catholic Modernists: in unselfish desire to put God and His Faith first = 0

Traditional Catholic Martyrs throughout history: in unselfish desire to put God and His Faith first = MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Saints.

Therefore, I really would like ask this "traditional" Bishop Fellay on what side of history does he want to be on...?

Oh...we already have his consent and signatures (which have not been retracted), on his Modernist April 15, 2012 Docuмent, His Modernist reply in the letter to the 3-SSPX Bishops, and the SSPX General Council's 6-compromising conditions with all of the other superiors of the SSPX showing us, with belief and proof, that this "traditional" Bishop Fellay does desire and want the Catholic Modernist side; like so many other sorry souls that have gone before him in the 50-years of Vatican II, the French Revolution, and the Reformation?

Let your speech be SI SI...NO NO!

Sigismund · « **Reply #31 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:05:52 PM »

Quote from: Azul

There you have it. And that should be good enough for everyone. No one has the right to say that Bishop Fellay does not mean what he is saying. No one can read his mind, not Bishop Williamson or anyone else.

And maybe those who are so base as to call him "Bernie" can start to show the proper respect.

I say, Deo Gratias! He is back.

Well, either he doesn't mean what he says now, or he didn't mean what he said then. I don't see a third option.

Jerry · « **Reply #32 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:10:28 PM »

Stop focusing on what he says, and consider his actions and policies.

Sienna629 · « **Reply #33 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:15:12 PM »

Quote from: Jerry

Stop focusing on what he says, and consider his actions and policies.

Father John O'Conner always said, "Don't just look at what they say; watch what they do."

hollingsworth · « **Reply #34 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:36:44 PM »

I believe Francis is a godsend for Bp. Fellay. The pope is so overtly goofy and unhinged that Fellay can confidently create distance between himself and the pontiff, and not run the risk of having people think he has reneged upon his plan of full regularization with the Holy See. He escapes his earlier Romeward faux pas and comes out relatively unscathed in the minds of his confreres. He gives Fellay's defenders the ability once again to say to the SG's foes: "I told you so."

Machabees · « **Reply #35 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:39:08 PM »

Quote

Rome/SSPX

Bishop Fellay alluded to the SSPX/Vatican drama of 2012: “When we see what is happening now [under Pope Francis] we thank God, we thank God, we have been preserved from any kind of Agreement from last year. And we may say that one of the fruits of the [Rosary] Crusade we did is that we have been preserved from such a misfortune. Thank God. It is not that we don’t want to be Catholics, of course we want to be Catholics and we are Catholics, and we have a right to be recognized as Catholics. But we are not going to jeopardize our treasures for that. Of course not.”

This is called "fish-hook humility".

Rather, thank God for the Blessed Mother in using those good SSPX priests and +W for speaking out so early, and timely, to disrupt your secret plans of your April 15 docuмent and again in your 6-compromising conditions with the rest of the SSPX superiors to subvert the entire SSPX and faithful under the conciliar modernist apostation!

Tisk- tisk Monseigneur...the blame is still at your feet.

Machabees · « **Reply #36 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:53:40 PM »

Quote

Rome/SSPX

He continued, “To imagine that some people continue to pretend we are decided [still] to get an Agreement with Rome. Poor people. I really challenge them to prove they mean. They pretend that I think something else from what I do. They are not in my head.”

That is simple.

Your very own signed April 15, 2012 Legal Docuмent sent to the Roman Authorities that was never retracted from you; in addition, you reprinted that same April 15, 2012 Docuмent in its entity within the Official SSPX Cor Unum just a few months ago (in 2013) as still valid for all of your priests to read as still being in your consent to do.

How about you, and the rest of Menzingen, still throwing out in the streets to this day the faithful sons of ABL who are still standing up to you in these very errors of modernism that you continue to adopt?

Shall I add more proof of your own doing...or are we just "pretending"?

Really?

JPaul · « **Reply #37 on:** October 14, 2013, 07:53:48 PM »

In the final objective analysis, public relations, damage control, and shifting of responsibility once again. Nothing new. Nothing of import.

Machabees · « **Reply #38 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:08:22 PM »

Quote

Rome/SSPX

As for the discussions with Rome: “Any kind of direction for recognition ended when they gave me the docuмent to sign on June 13, 2012. That very day I told them, ‘this docuмent I cannot accept.’ I told them from the start in September the previous year that we cannot accept this ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ because it is not true, it is not real. It is against the reality. So we do not accept it. The Council is not in continuity with Tradition. It’s not. So when Pope Benedict requested that we accept that the Second Vatican Council is an integral part of Tradition, we say, ‘sorry, that’s not the reality, so we’re not going to sign it. We’re not going to recognize that’.”

The "direction for recognition" has not ended! Far from it!

Bishop Fellay, with the rest of the SSPX superiors, had also signed another legal Docuмent together, in Econe with the solemnity before the Blessed Sacrament, in July 2012 and is still binding as a General Chapter with the 6-compromising conditions!

In other words, those 6-compromising conditions have NOT been retracted by you, and the other superiors, within another convoked General Chapter! Therefore, as you know, conciliar Rome can still accept [your] binding conditions which would make a "deal" for you.

Please do not play with our intelligence, or the propriety of a contract, and basic Law...Monseigneur.

In addition, you had said Bishop Fellay, that Vatican II is 95% acceptable for you. Therefore, by your own standards, Vatican II is "95% in conformity with Tradition".

Why the double speech...a different audience?

Machabees · « **Reply #39 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:18:43 PM »

Quote

Rome/SSPX

“The same for the Mass. The want us to recognize not only that the [New] Mass is valid provided it is celebrated correctly, etc., but that it is licit. I told them: we don’t use that word. It’s a bit messy, our faithful have enough [confusion] regarding the validity, so we tell them, ‘The New Mass is bad, it is evil’ and they understand that. Period!’” Of course the Roman authorities “were not very happy with that.”

He continues, “It has never been our intention to pretend either that the Council would be considered as good, or the New Mass would be ‘legitimate’”.

My...My Bishop Fellay! Your nose is getting longer...

Have you forgotten your own April 15, 2012 Docuмent when you said that the new mass is legitimately promulgated?

DOCTRINAL PREAMBLE OF APRIL 15, 2012 that Bishop Fellay offered to Rome.

Quote

7. We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments, celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does, according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals, legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II.

Shame on you!

s2srea · « **Reply #40 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:23:18 PM »

Wowzer. Great job Macabees.

Machabees · « **Reply #41 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:33:42 PM »

Quote

Rome/SSPX

“The [April 15, 2012] text we presented to Rome was a very, shall we say, delicate text that was supposed to be understood correctly; it was supposed to be read with a big principle which was leading the whole thing. This big principle was no novelty in the Church: ‘The Holy Ghost has not been promised to Saint Peter and his Successor in such a way that through a new revelation the Pope would teach something new, but under his help, the pope would the Pope would saintly conserve and faithfully transmit the deposit of the Faith.’ It belongs to the definition of infallibility [from Vatican I]. That was the principle, the base of the whole docuмent, which excludes from the start any kind of novelty.

“And so take any kind of sentences from the text without this principle is just to take sentences that have never been our thinking and our life. These phrases in themselves are ambiguous, so to take away the ambiguity we wanted to put [in] this principle [from Vatican I]. Unfortunately, maybe that was too subtle and that’s why we withdrew that text, because it was not clear enough as it was written.

"The [April 15, 2012] text we presented to Rome was a very, shall we say, delicate text that was supposed to be understood correctly; ... Unfortunately, maybe that was too subtle and that’s why we withdrew that text, because it was not clear enough as it was written."

You can also add, Bishop Fellay, that it was also ambiguous, misleading, treacherous, deceitful, and treasonous!

In addition, you were very clear in your own modernist thinking that you have formally penned on that April 15, 2012 paper making it another Legal Docuмent, that you have willfullied wanted to submitt all of the SSPX priests, Brothers, and Sisters under your compromises and conciliar recognition.

Sorry...your masquerading around this is NOT accepted.

Johnnier · « **Reply #42 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:37:46 PM »

More personality cult mentality publications.

An attempt to demonize Bp. Fellay as to justify the blind resistance movement since it has no justification for it's position other than a childish rebellion against the SSPX. Such liberalism will end up destroying the resistance itself, which in part we are already seeing with the same childish infighting and division amongst the clergy and laity. But such is the fruits of the poison taken to their logical conclusion.

s2srea · « **Reply #43 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:40:08 PM »

Quote from: Johnnier

More personality cult mentality publications.

An attempt to demonize Bp. Fellay as to justify the blind resistance movement since it has no justification for it's position other than a childish rebellion against the SSPX. Such liberalism will end up destroying the resistance itself, which in part we are already seeing with the same childish infighting and division amongst the clergy and laity. But such is the fruits of the poison taken to their logical conclusion.

Because things in the Society are so peachy on their own eh?

By the way, nice job avoiding the facts again.

Quick quick- before you see anything which may make sense to you:

Frances · « **Reply #44 on:** October 14, 2013, 08:47:14 PM »

Sounds great, by itself! I'll begin to take Bp. Fellay's words seriously when he begins to take my concerns and the concerns of the Resistance seriously. For me, that means he must formally retract his earlier ambiguous and heretical statements and humble himself by apologising to the souls he has injured. Better he humble himself here, than wait until he is forced at his particular judgement. Bp. Fellay is himself, in a precarious spiritual condition because of the souls scandalized these last two and a half years. While he did not personally scandalise everyone, as Superior General, he is ultimately responsible before God. He needs our prayers, even if we no longer attend or support sspx chapels. Charity demands it of us who call ourselves the resistance.

What about an extra decade a day for Bp. Fellay? Start on Thursday, Oct. 17, end on All Soul's Eve. Those who care to join me may PM me through CI. I will do what I can to get a spiritual bouquet to H.E. If anyone has any ideas on how that might be accomplished, please let me know. The emails and letters I've sent have received not so much as an acknowledgement of receipt. Two Resistance priests have told me most correspondance, including theirs, never makes it to his desk or inbox. I can't travel to Menzingen in person, but maybe someone on here already lives nearby or knows of a willing messenger?
:dancing-banana: