Author Topic: Declaration of LeFebvre Priests Vienna Viginia (Read 32813 times)

KyrieEleison · « **Reply #45 on:** August 13, 2012, 06:07:04 AM »

Archived

Domitilla · « **Reply #46 on:** August 13, 2012, 06:39:47 AM »

This just keeps getting curiouser and curiouser. Is it correct to state that this "seer" has been in close contact with +Fellay and +Williamson? Is it also correct to state that this "seer" has provided the details to the Crusader website? In any case, I look forward to the unveiling of this "seer" who has allegedly been so deeply involved in the Rome-SSPX Agreement

Ethelred · « **Reply #47 on:** August 13, 2012, 06:51:50 AM »

We don't have any substance in our hands concerning this alleged private-apparition.
If something sounds nice or logical (which isn't the case here) it's still no proof whatsoever for a private-revelation. Most private-revelation are false ones, by the way. So let's be very critical.

Nemmersdorf's report on Ignis Ardens about Bishop Williamson's words (which was posted somewhere here too) underlines that the good Bishop doesn't have or doesn't want to have anything to do with this alleged private-revelation. That'll do me fine.

Well, the front lines inside the SSPX are clear since the three bishops' letter and the reply from Menzingen in April 2012, with or without alleged private-revelation.

Our Lady helps those who stand behind the traditional Catholic Faith anyway. That's why the declaration of the five brave priests mentions in its first line Our Lady.

This excellent declaration of the five priests says what needs to be said. Let us stay on topic, instead of derailing this thread, too. (Those who must discuss the alleged private-revelation could open a new thread, please...!)

KyrieEleison · « **Reply #48 on:** August 13, 2012, 06:53:39 AM »

Archived

Ethelred · « **Reply #49 on:** August 13, 2012, 06:55:34 AM »

Quote from: KyrieEleison

Not sure who thumbed down this post but...

Not me for sure. :-)

Ethelred · « **Reply #50 on:** August 13, 2012, 10:07:01 AM »

Quote from: KyrieEleison

Could someone make a new thread for this? I have some questions and Ethelred is right this is not the topic to discuss it.

Here it is:

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Rosary-crusade-for-the-Consecration-of-Russia

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #51 on:** August 13, 2012, 10:10:45 AM »

Archived

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #52 on:** August 13, 2012, 10:16:45 AM »

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: KyrieEleison
Not sure who thumbed down this post but...

Not me for sure. :-)

KyrieEleison,

I was away yesterday and I handed to my daughter my phone to read the comments and she said that she had just given a thumbs up or down to someone accidently and we tried turning of the phone to prevent it. I hope it was not to you.

MA

Ethelred · « **Reply #53 on:** August 13, 2012, 10:17:20 AM »

Marie Auxiliadora, could you please "move" i.e. re-post your 2nd-newest post to the new thread which is dedicated to the private-revelation topic? (You can "quote" yourself and then copy the edit box' content to the new thread for example)

Here is the new thread :

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Rosary-crusade-for-the-Consecration-of-Russia

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #54 on:** August 14, 2012, 12:42:27 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

+“ONLY SHE CAN HELP YOU”+

Vienna, Virginia, 10th August 2012 Priest Meeting

TODAY'S SITUATION

1. The Society of St. Pius X declaration of July 14th, 2012, while proclaiming the notion of the Divinity of Christ and His Kingship, actually moves in the opposite direction by using ambiguous language and by preparing to place the SSPX under the authorities of “the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies.” (1974 Declaration)

2. There has been a longtime slide in the SSPX towards Vatican II and a growing silence about Novus Ordo scandals against the Faith.

3. There is an illusion that one can join the Vatican II Church without accepting Vatican II.

4. There is a need to assure souls that the combat for Catholic Tradition, maintained by Archbishop Lefebvre against Modernist Rome, will continue.

5. A new attitude favoring compromise has infected the leadership of the SSPX.

6. This new attitude now prevails in publications, websites, seminaries and pulpits.

7. The priests who resist this new attitude are being punished or threatened with punishment and in all cases are being silenced. The present crisis demands a public response of priests and faithful against this compromise with Modernist Rome.

8. Many priests are personally disillusioned with Menzingen for doctrinal reasons but are unsure, cowed or do not know what to do.

9. Many independent priests trust the SSPX less and less. They hope to pass on their parishes to doctrinally reliable priests.

10. There is a replacement of the original Fatima solution, which is the consecration of Russia by the pope united with the bishops, by a belief that the SSPX can negotiate Modernist Rome back to the Catholic Faith.

11. The imprudent and reckless willingness to agree to a “suitable condition” of abandoning the flock to the “wolves” of the diocesan bishops.

DECLARATION

The heart of the Faith is the Divinity of Christ and his Kingship over all nations: “Oportet illum regnare”. The errors of Vatican II are an indirect attack against his Divinity and a direct attack on his Social Kingship. They will forever remain the Revolution of 1789 within the Church.

Today's Vatican has only changed for the worse since the Council (more damage, more new heresies, more effective semi-modernism), to such an extent that we can repeat the Archbishop's words of 1974 and 1976: “The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is therefore not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, bishops, priests or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.” (June 29, 1976)

The Pope has allowed the True Mass, but only within the Pantheon of modernist liturgies. Further, he has made clear his espousing of the false doctrine of Religious Liberty by preaching it to be the model of how the Church and State are to relate one to another. Lastly the doctrine of Ecuмenism has been widely and consistently professed by the Pontiff in his visits to protestant temples, ѕуηαgσgυєs and mosques and Assisi III confirms that the spirit of Assisi is alive and well. It was this spirit that moved the Archbishop to undertake an “Operation Survival”, that is now itself in great peril.

Today's SSPX clearly wants to place itself under this Conciliar Church, mitigates the poison of Vatican II, is more and more silent in face of the abuses by the conciliar hierarchy, uses ambiguous language referring to two opposite Magisteria. At the same time that it is ever ready to believe in a constant debate with obdurate Roman officials, it uses strong arm tactics toward those standing against wicked reconciliation.

We must wait for Our Lady to convert the Pope and inspire him to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart in union with all the bishops and we must persevere in the Charity of the Truth and the Truth of Charity, organized in a united corps of priests faithful to the position always maintained by Archbishop Lefebvre.

Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, Fr. Ronald J. Ringrose, Fr. Richard Voigt, Fr. David Hewko, Fr. François Chazal

I'm happy to have this announcement, because nobody I'm aware of in my area
has seen it. Some kinds of news travels very slowly, somehow....

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #55 on:** August 14, 2012, 01:02:06 AM »

Wasn't this supposed to be the meeting where +Williamson would be present?

Now, if he wasn't there, I'd like to know why -- was he not invited? That seems
rather unlikely. Did he cancel? He would have to be pretty infirm for that to happen.
And there's been no word of him sick. Or, what seems more likely, he was there
but for now, they're keeping that private, out of political purposes. But I'm not
convinced that would be a good idea.

So what's up with that?

Ethelred · « **Reply #56 on:** August 14, 2012, 03:12:20 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Wasn't this supposed to be the meeting where +Williamson would be present?

I too heard that this was a possitibilty, but unfortunately it wasn't in the end.

However, the bishop sent the priests a written docuмent of his thoughts for the meeting. Maybe some of these thoughts influenced the wise declaration.

CathMomof7 · « **Reply #57 on:** August 14, 2012, 06:40:34 AM »

Quote from: Lucca Back

Only three out of 568 SSPX priests are present in this historic meeting!!

Other two priests are independent pro SSPX.

Maybe these three SSPX priests would become independent by the wrath of Bishop Fellay soon.

Three in United States, One in Europe, One in Asia. Thank you so much God for this extremely rare precious preists!

I myself, catholic faithful feel like standing on the Cliff. I'm very disappointed with SSPX.

Two Inds

https://sites.google.com/site/stjohnboscochapel/our-pastors

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?topic=3425361.0

Fr. H
http://op54rosary.ning.com/forum/topics/farewell-fr-david-hewko?xg_source=activity

What?

I was not told this!!! Fr. Hewko is leaving us! I am crushed. My older sons love him so much. It has been his gentleness and wisdom that has brought my teenage son out of despair and confusion.

I am sick now.

I don't know if I can handle this...

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #58 on:** August 14, 2012, 07:25:43 AM »

Someone close to Fr. Hewko told me on Sunday that he was being transferred to
Chicago, to the monastery where Bishop de Mallerais is stationed now. So
apparently that is now obsolete information?

CathMomof7 · « **Reply #59 on:** August 14, 2012, 08:13:59 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Someone close to Fr. Hewko told me on Sunday that he was being transferred to
Chicago, to the monastery where Bishop de Mallerais is stationed now. So
apparently that is now obsolete information?

This may be obsolete now but I did not know.

A month ago, Fr. Hewko was at our chapel. We had a party after Mass in honor of the anniversary of his Ordination. He then immediately left for pilgrimage in Spain with another priest.

They returned last week, I believe, but we were not able to attend Mass last week due to financial constraints and gas for our big van. So I did not know.

In his sermon this week, our "regular" priest did not mention this. He only talked about his pilgrimage.

I also do not know if anyone at our chapel knew. I sent out an e-mail, so someone will tell me if this is old news at our chapel. We are small and we do not always get information in a timely manner.