Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta  (Read 5256 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Neil Obstat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17656
  • Reputation: +8118/-609
  • Gender: Male
Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta
« Reply #15 on: June 28, 2012, 07:03:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ethelred
    Quote from: J.Paul
    Quote from: MaterDominici
    Quote from: Seraphim
    so why do we care about this critique, made irrelevent by several secret modifications since then?


    Quote from: Fr Thouvenot
    On the 13th June, 2012, Cardinal Levada returned to our Superior General his text of April, but it was amended in such a way that it still took up, in substance, the propositions of September, 2011. Msgr. Fellay also made known to him that he could not sign this new document, which was clearly unacceptable. The coming General Chapter will permit the analysis of the entire dossier.


    It looks as though what they are "analyzing" now is essentially the same as what was critiqued and rejected then.


    No doubt with a little more dung added to the heap.


    Mater & J.Paul, that's just too hilarious! Thanks for your comments.

    We really have to take all this with much humour.


    Dung heap!   HAHAHAHAHAHA            :laugh1:

    A leopard doesn't change his stripes, and a scorpion will do what its nature demands.

    +Fellay has endeavored to prevent +Williamson and +de Mallerais from attending
    the General Chapter since their voiced opposition to any "practical agreement."

    Bishop de Galarreta has been conspicuously missing from the spotlight, with a
    rumor here or there from private conversations with him that he is not in favor of
    making a "deal" at this time. I would like to think that he is keeping quiet so as to
    give +Fellay no cause to try elbowing him out of the Chapter meeting. If he does
    show up, at the ordinations tomorrow or at the Chapter next month, you know that
    he will have an audience, because he is a bishop. It will look really BAD if he is
    not given any opportunity to be heard. With the anxiety level what it is right now,
    such a thing could be "the last straw."

    We saw these same tactics used at the start of Vatican II: Step one, eliminate the
    opposition. Been there, done that. It's time for action, folks!
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Sunbeam

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 246
    • Reputation: +275/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta
    « Reply #16 on: June 29, 2012, 07:59:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I regret that my attempt to produce a thoroughly intelligible translation of Bishop de Gallaretta’s critique has finished in an irrecoverable crash.

    Nevertheless, the exercise has convinced me that this Bishop will remain firmly against any compromise with modernist Rome.

    Some of the comments made above appear to be somewhat dismissive of the critique, for example, the fact that it contains many quotations from Archbishop Lefebvre, and the fact that things have moved on since the text was first presented to the meeting at Albano. But surely this latter is a typically-modernist attitude. Nothing that is worth saying truly goes out of date, and insofar as the Bishop has got to the root of the matter at hand, what he has said remains valid.

    It seems to me that the text was thoughtfully put together, and the quotations from Archbishop Lefebvre were intended as a powerful reminder to the clergy of the SSPX of the reason that they exist.

    From what I have read in this text, I believe it is a safe bet that Bishop de Gallaretta (quiet man though he may be) is not a man for turning, and that he will remain opposed to any deal designed to amalgamate the SSPX with the Conciliar Church.


    Offline Ecclesia Militans

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 985
    • Reputation: +12/-35
    Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta
    « Reply #17 on: July 06, 2012, 09:57:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Check out here for a translation and summary in pdf file format:

    http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10068&st=0&#last

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17656
    • Reputation: +8118/-609
    • Gender: Male
    Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta
    « Reply #18 on: July 08, 2012, 09:15:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    Check out here for a translation and summary in pdf file format:

    http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10068&st=0&#last



    Bad translation!!!

    Examples:


    It is as if the time of Arianism had been told, now you agree with all that think the Arian bishops.


    One may wonder if we did not want to Rome, thereby correcting the text of the Protocol.


    They are likely to sign these documents to the seminarians of the Fraternity of St. Peter before their ordination and priests of the Fraternity, which will then be obliged to make an official act of rallying to the conciliar Church.


    Do you think the situation has deteriorated further since you had before-the sacred-initiated conversations that led to the drafting of the Protocol of 5 May 1988?



    Following the proposal Roman, the real question, crucial, is: should we, can we, we take the path of a "possible" agreement first practice?



    The problem is not the subjective intentions, but objective, clear, the observation that we have just made their desire:



    Therefore what can be appears as a concession is actually a ploy to reach away from us as possible to the faithful.



    How then do not go against the defense and public confession of faith, against the public need protection the faithful and the Church?



    We can not do it either ignores the context, that is to say, events and constant teachings in the life of the Church today: repeated visits to Protestant churches and synagogues, beatification (soon to be canonized) by Jean Paul II, III Sitting, preaching time and inconvenience of religious freedom, and a long etcetera.






    Please pass the asprin.











    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline PAT317

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 331
    • Reputation: +395/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta
    « Reply #19 on: July 08, 2012, 02:54:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Neil Obstat
    Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    Check out here for a translation and summary in pdf file format:

    http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10068&st=0&#last


    Bad translation!!!

    Examples:

    It is as if the time of Arianism had been told, now you agree with all that think the Arian bishops.

    That is the wrong translation.  I think the link EM was referring to was this post:

    http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10068&view=findpost&p=22017936

    by Br. Anthony, T.O.S.F. Posted: Jul 7 2012, 02:15 AM
     
    Quote
    Here is a link to an English translation.

    Attached File ( Number of downloads: 23 )
      Reflections_about_the_Roman_Proposal___Complete_Transcript_with_Quotes.pdf (57.36 kb)


    I think it might be a better one.  e.g. the first line you quoted:
    "It is as if the time of Arianism had been told, now you agree with all that think the Arian bishops. "
    is rendered:
    "It is as if in the times of Arianism one had said, 'Now you are in agreement with everything that all the Arian bishops think.'"



    Offline JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3833
    • Reputation: +3712/-282
    • Gender: Male
    Critique of Doctrinal Preamble by Mgr de Galarreta
    « Reply #20 on: July 08, 2012, 03:04:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ethelred
    Quote from: Wessex
    Well, Bp. Tissier was uncompromising in his Confirmations sermon in Idaho about the "heretical perversion of the new religion". And Bp. Williamson is being excluded because of his well-known position. The remaining bishop surely has to stick with what he has written, making the three a formidable opposition if they have a joint strategy to circumvent Menzingen's tactics.

    That's the point.

    There's no indication that Bishop de Galarreta abandoned the formal and united position of the three bishop's letter from 7 April 2012 against an agreement with New-Rome.
    On the contrary there's recent sources (aprox one week ago) who confirm that Bishop de Galarreta also today opposes any practical agreement with New-Rome.

    So, let's see.


    By the way, dear Wessex, do you as Englishman in the land of the brave British SSPX district have any hint or information about the question if Bishop Williamson will ignore the illegal expulsion from the General Chapter?



    Perhaps the two can present Bishop Williamson's vote by proxy?

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16