Author Topic: Did Bishop Fellay Lie? (Read 21965 times)

SJB · « **Reply #150 on:** July 29, 2012, 01:36:31 PM »

It seems to me this thread degraded rather quickly, which isn't suprising around here. After reading the first few pages, it is clear to me where the degradation started.

No, Spiritus S, I don't think GtG was bullying anybody, just fighting back.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #151 on:** August 01, 2012, 12:19:29 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

From page 4 of this thread:

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
... Confirmed: High-Ranking Vatican Prelate Predicted End of Novus Ordo Missae

And finally, shortly after Pope Benedict XVI issued his motu proprio Summorum Pontificuм, thereby affirming the right of every Latin-rite priest to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments without his bishop’s permission, while confirming the traditional Mass had never been abrogated, a few reports included a statement by Bishop Fellay regarding his conversation with a Vatican official on the MP’s potential effect on the future of the Novus Ordo Missae.

Despite news of a new translation of the Novus Ordo missal becoming available for use in Advent 2011, this new missal, as Remnant readers know, retained only 17 percent of the original orations from the 1962 missal.

Bishop Fellay today confirmed that after Summorum Pontificuм was issued, “the high-ranking prelate thought we would have 20 to 25 years before the New Mass would disappear.”
Posted Jul 6, 2012, 6:24 am
Ignored by: 0

Does anyone know who the "high-ranking prelate" was? And does his expectation
for the disappearance of the Novus Ordo liturgy have any direct basis in the rise
in use of the Canonized Traditional Latin Mass? The context seems to be the MP SP,
but that might be merely coincidental.

It has been stated that B16's goal is to phase the 1962 missal into a hybrid of the
Novus Ordo liturgy, in order to finally consign the Canonized Latin Mass to the
dustbin of history, using an organic process over 10 years. Is that what the prelate,
above, was talking about when he said the new mass would "disappear?" That is,
that by "disappear" he means merged with the 1962 missal to produce one,
unified mass for the Roman Church? (I use lower case for new mass and unified
mass because it's not a proper noun when it keeps changing: it does not refer to
the same thing from day to day!)

Yes, he was talking about the hybrid "reform of the reform" missal that would begin by dressing up the N.O (which already begun last Advent) and watering down the 1962 (which is being done now) with the idea of having both masses side by side until they convince the indult and N.O crowd that there is no difference between them and releasing the final version: "the reform of the reform" hybrid.

The article you quote above is from The Remnant: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Main%20Remnant%20Site%202011/Archives/2010-0831-mershon-fellay-interview.htm which I posted as an example of +Fellay having no scruples accusing his fellow bishop (Williamson) of gossip. In "The Remnant" article + Fellay is angry about +Williamson's Eleison Comments CLXII (Aug. 21, 2010), I found this link with it:

http://nonnisite.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html

EC CLXII ends: "... The rumour from Rome is precisely that he is thinking of a "Motu Proprio" which would accept the SSPX "back into the Church" once and for all, yet require from the SSPX no explicit acceptance of Vatican II or the New Mass, but only, for instance, the acceptance of John-Paul II's 1992 "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which is substantially modernist but in a quiet way. Thus the SSPX would not appear to its followers to be accepting the Council or the New Mass, yet it would be softly, softly, beginning to go along with the substance of neo-modernism.

Thus all seekers of unity would be content. Only not believers in Catholic doctrine.

DANGER !

Kyrie eleison

Now we know from the Meeting at Albano that that was exactly one of the conditions: The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" of JPII.

Incredulous · « **Reply #152 on:** August 01, 2012, 12:28:18 PM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

Quote from: Neil Obstat
From page 4 of this thread:

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
... Confirmed: High-Ranking Vatican Prelate Predicted End of Novus Ordo Missae

And finally, shortly after Pope Benedict XVI issued his motu proprio Summorum Pontificuм, thereby affirming the right of every Latin-rite priest to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments without his bishop’s permission, while confirming the traditional Mass had never been abrogated, a few reports included a statement by Bishop Fellay regarding his conversation with a Vatican official on the MP’s potential effect on the future of the Novus Ordo Missae.

Despite news of a new translation of the Novus Ordo missal becoming available for use in Advent 2011, this new missal, as Remnant readers know, retained only 17 percent of the original orations from the 1962 missal.

Bishop Fellay today confirmed that after Summorum Pontificuм was issued, “the high-ranking prelate thought we would have 20 to 25 years before the New Mass would disappear.”
Posted Jul 6, 2012, 6:24 am
Ignored by: 0

Does anyone know who the "high-ranking prelate" was? And does his expectation
for the disappearance of the Novus Ordo liturgy have any direct basis in the rise
in use of the Canonized Traditional Latin Mass? The context seems to be the MP SP,
but that might be merely coincidental.

It has been stated that B16's goal is to phase the 1962 missal into a hybrid of the
Novus Ordo liturgy, in order to finally consign the Canonized Latin Mass to the
dustbin of history, using an organic process over 10 years. Is that what the prelate,
above, was talking about when he said the new mass would "disappear?" That is,
that by "disappear" he means merged with the 1962 missal to produce one,
unified mass for the Roman Church? (I use lower case for new mass and unified
mass because it's not a proper noun when it keeps changing: it does not refer to
the same thing from day to day!)

Yes, he was talking about the hybrid "reform of the reform" missal that would begin by dressing up the N.O (which already begun last Advent) and watering down the 1962 (which is being done now) with the idea of having both masses side by side until they convince the indult and N.O crowd that there is no difference between them and releasing the final version: "the reform of the reform" hybrid.

The article you quote above is from The Remnant: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Main%20Remnant%20Site%202011/Archives/2010-0831-mershon-fellay-interview.htm which I posted as an example of +Fellay having no scruples accusing his fellow bishop (Williamson) of gossip. In "The Remnant" article + Fellay is angry about +Williamson's Eleison Comments CLXII (Aug. 21, 2010), I found this link with it:

http://nonnisite.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html

EC CLXII ends: "... The rumour from Rome is precisely that he is thinking of a "Motu Proprio" which would accept the SSPX "back into the Church" once and for all, yet require from the SSPX no explicit acceptance of Vatican II or the New Mass, but only, for instance, the acceptance of John-Paul II's 1992 "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which is substantially modernist but in a quiet way. Thus the SSPX would not appear to its followers to be accepting the Council or the New Mass, yet it would be softly, softly, beginning to go along with the substance of neo-modernism.

Thus all seekers of unity would be content. Only not believers in Catholic doctrine.

DANGER !

Kyrie eleison

Now we know from the Meeting at Albano that that was exactly one of the conditions: The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" of JPII.

Incredible duplicity on the part of the Pope and Bp. Fellay.
In effect, this is the next phase to the one-world religion.
They both "scattereth" as our Lord warned and assist the anti-christ.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #153 on:** August 01, 2012, 05:40:06 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
Quote from: Neil Obstat
From page 4 of this thread:

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
... Confirmed: High-Ranking Vatican Prelate Predicted End of Novus Ordo Missae

And finally, shortly after Pope Benedict XVI issued his motu proprio Summorum Pontificuм, thereby affirming the right of every Latin-rite priest to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments without his bishop’s permission, while confirming the traditional Mass had never been abrogated, a few reports included a statement by Bishop Fellay regarding his conversation with a Vatican official on the MP’s potential effect on the future of the Novus Ordo Missae.

Despite news of a new translation of the Novus Ordo missal becoming available for use in Advent 2011, this new missal, as Remnant readers know, retained only 17 percent of the original orations from the 1962 missal.

Bishop Fellay today confirmed that after Summorum Pontificuм was issued, “the high-ranking prelate thought we would have 20 to 25 years before the New Mass would disappear.”
Posted Jul 6, 2012, 6:24 am
Ignored by: 0

Does anyone know who the "high-ranking prelate" was? And does his expectation
for the disappearance of the Novus Ordo liturgy have any direct basis in the rise
in use of the Canonized Traditional Latin Mass? The context seems to be the MP SP,
but that might be merely coincidental.

It has been stated that B16's goal is to phase the 1962 missal into a hybrid of the
Novus Ordo liturgy, in order to finally consign the Canonized Latin Mass to the
dustbin of history, using an organic process over 10 years. Is that what the prelate,
above, was talking about when he said the new mass would "disappear?" That is,
that by "disappear" he means merged with the 1962 missal to produce one,
unified mass for the Roman Church? (I use lower case for new mass and unified
mass because it's not a proper noun when it keeps changing: it does not refer to
the same thing from day to day!)

Yes, he was talking about the hybrid "reform of the reform" missal that would begin by dressing up the N.O (which already begun last Advent) and watering down the 1962 (which is being done now) with the idea of having both masses side by side until they convince the indult and N.O crowd that there is no difference between them and releasing the final version: "the reform of the reform" hybrid.

The article you quote above is from The Remnant: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Main%20Remnant%20Site%202011/Archives/2010-0831-mershon-fellay-interview.htm which I posted as an example of +Fellay having no scruples accusing his fellow bishop (Williamson) of gossip. In "The Remnant" article + Fellay is angry about +Williamson's Eleison Comments CLXII (Aug. 21, 2010), I found this link with it:

http://nonnisite.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html

EC CLXII ends: "... The rumour from Rome is precisely that he is thinking of a "Motu Proprio" which would accept the SSPX "back into the Church" once and for all, yet require from the SSPX no explicit acceptance of Vatican II or the New Mass, but only, for instance, the acceptance of John-Paul II's 1992 "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which is substantially modernist but in a quiet way. Thus the SSPX would not appear to its followers to be accepting the Council or the New Mass, yet it would be softly, softly, beginning to go along with the substance of neo-modernism.

Thus all seekers of unity would be content. Only not believers in Catholic doctrine.

DANGER !

Kyrie eleison

Now we know from the Meeting at Albano that that was exactly one of the conditions: The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" of JPII.

Incredible duplicity on the part of the Pope and Bp. Fellay.
In effect, this is the next phase to the one-world religion.
They both "scattereth" as our Lord warned and assist the anti-christ.

Luke xi. 23 He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.

It used to be that converting pagans was rewarded, and it was a goal of the Church.

Now, a priest gets in trouble for converting pagans:

I learned from my friend that about 5 or so years before he was removed from his parish, he had found a priest to teach him the Tridentine Mass. He was removed from the diocese because he was witnessed converting a Buddhist on his deathbed, administering the man's Baptism and hearing his confession.

Since his faculties were removed by the diocese, he has remained underground. He has a Mass daily. That evening his chapel was full with familiar faces from my SSPX chapel.

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #154 on:** August 01, 2012, 10:58:02 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: Incredulous
Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
Quote from: Neil Obstat
From page 4 of this thread:

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
... Confirmed: High-Ranking Vatican Prelate Predicted End of Novus Ordo Missae

And finally, shortly after Pope Benedict XVI issued his motu proprio Summorum Pontificuм, thereby affirming the right of every Latin-rite priest to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments without his bishop’s permission, while confirming the traditional Mass had never been abrogated, a few reports included a statement by Bishop Fellay regarding his conversation with a Vatican official on the MP’s potential effect on the future of the Novus Ordo Missae.

Despite news of a new translation of the Novus Ordo missal becoming available for use in Advent 2011, this new missal, as Remnant readers know, retained only 17 percent of the original orations from the 1962 missal.

Bishop Fellay today confirmed that after Summorum Pontificuм was issued, “the high-ranking prelate thought we would have 20 to 25 years before the New Mass would disappear.”
Posted Jul 6, 2012, 6:24 am
Ignored by: 0

Does anyone know who the "high-ranking prelate" was? And does his expectation
for the disappearance of the Novus Ordo liturgy have any direct basis in the rise
in use of the Canonized Traditional Latin Mass? The context seems to be the MP SP,
but that might be merely coincidental.

It has been stated that B16's goal is to phase the 1962 missal into a hybrid of the
Novus Ordo liturgy, in order to finally consign the Canonized Latin Mass to the
dustbin of history, using an organic process over 10 years. Is that what the prelate,
above, was talking about when he said the new mass would "disappear?" That is,
that by "disappear" he means merged with the 1962 missal to produce one,
unified mass for the Roman Church? (I use lower case for new mass and unified
mass because it's not a proper noun when it keeps changing: it does not refer to
the same thing from day to day!)

Yes, he was talking about the hybrid "reform of the reform" missal that would begin by dressing up the N.O (which already begun last Advent) and watering down the 1962 (which is being done now) with the idea of having both masses side by side until they convince the indult and N.O crowd that there is no difference between them and releasing the final version: "the reform of the reform" hybrid.

The article you quote above is from The Remnant: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Main%20Remnant%20Site%202011/Archives/2010-0831-mershon-fellay-interview.htm which I posted as an example of +Fellay having no scruples accusing his fellow bishop (Williamson) of gossip. In "The Remnant" article + Fellay is angry about +Williamson's Eleison Comments CLXII (Aug. 21, 2010), I found this link with it:

http://nonnisite.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html

EC CLXII ends: "... The rumour from Rome is precisely that he is thinking of a "Motu Proprio" which would accept the SSPX "back into the Church" once and for all, yet require from the SSPX no explicit acceptance of Vatican II or the New Mass, but only, for instance, the acceptance of John-Paul II's 1992 "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which is substantially modernist but in a quiet way. Thus the SSPX would not appear to its followers to be accepting the Council or the New Mass, yet it would be softly, softly, beginning to go along with the substance of neo-modernism.

Thus all seekers of unity would be content. Only not believers in Catholic doctrine.

DANGER !

Kyrie eleison

Now we know from the Meeting at Albano that that was exactly one of the conditions: The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" of JPII.

Incredible duplicity on the part of the Pope and Bp. Fellay.
In effect, this is the next phase to the one-world religion.
They both "scattereth" as our Lord warned and assist the anti-christ.

Luke xi. 23 He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.

It used to be that converting pagans was rewarded, and it was a goal of the Church.

Now, a priest gets in trouble for converting pagans:

I learned from my friend that about 5 or so years before he was removed from his parish, he had found a priest to teach him the Tridentine Mass. He was removed from the diocese because he was witnessed converting a Buddhist on his deathbed, administering the man's Baptism and hearing his confession.

Since his faculties were removed by the diocese, he has remained underground. He has a Mass daily. That evening his chapel was full with familiar faces from my SSPX chapel.

The 1962 was used as a phase right before the vatican II orginal novus ordo mass which they keep changing. Most parishes even do their own thing including pagan rituals such as liturgical dancing as an example.
Some of the new changes to the novus ordo mass was to take certain parts of Latin mass and combining in English form of novus ordo mass.

A priest recently got thrown out of novus ordo washington DC diocese for refusing to give communion to lesbian budist. So, there is no surpise to learn that priest gets in trouble for converting pagans.

With novus ordo, if you are ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, liberals etc. get rewarded just like the pedophile who were protected for so many years while at the same time they were excommunicating traditional catholics over disobedience.

The novus ordor act like a bunch of communists by closing churches and schools and allowing secular to buy or rent these properties.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #155 on:** August 02, 2012, 10:56:54 PM »

Quote from: SJB

No, Spiritus S, I don't think GtG was bullying anybody, just fighting back.

Wrong.

SJB · « **Reply #156 on:** August 03, 2012, 04:29:02 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: SJB
No, Spiritus S, I don't think GtG was bullying anybody, just fighting back.

Wrong.

SS, your posts on Cathinfo have become, at least in the SSPX debate area, a lot like Angelqueen was back around 2006. Lacking substantive arguments and getting nasty with those who disagree with you.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #157 on:** August 03, 2012, 04:40:34 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Quote from: SJB
No, Spiritus S, I don't think GtG was bullying anybody, just fighting back.

Wrong.

SS, your posts on Cathinfo have become, at least in the SSPX debate area, a lot like Angelqueen was back around 2006. Lacking substantive arguments and getting nasty with those who disagree with you.

You're entitled to your opinion.

Incredulous · « **Reply #158 on:** August 03, 2012, 05:53:15 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: Incredulous
Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
Quote from: Neil Obstat
From page 4 of this thread:

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
... Confirmed: High-Ranking Vatican Prelate Predicted End of Novus Ordo Missae

And finally, shortly after Pope Benedict XVI issued his motu proprio Summorum Pontificuм, thereby affirming the right of every Latin-rite priest to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments without his bishop’s permission, while confirming the traditional Mass had never been abrogated, a few reports included a statement by Bishop Fellay regarding his conversation with a Vatican official on the MP’s potential effect on the future of the Novus Ordo Missae.

Despite news of a new translation of the Novus Ordo missal becoming available for use in Advent 2011, this new missal, as Remnant readers know, retained only 17 percent of the original orations from the 1962 missal.

Bishop Fellay today confirmed that after Summorum Pontificuм was issued, “the high-ranking prelate thought we would have 20 to 25 years before the New Mass would disappear.”
Posted Jul 6, 2012, 6:24 am
Ignored by: 0

Does anyone know who the "high-ranking prelate" was? And does his expectation
for the disappearance of the Novus Ordo liturgy have any direct basis in the rise
in use of the Canonized Traditional Latin Mass? The context seems to be the MP SP,
but that might be merely coincidental.

It has been stated that B16's goal is to phase the 1962 missal into a hybrid of the
Novus Ordo liturgy, in order to finally consign the Canonized Latin Mass to the
dustbin of history, using an organic process over 10 years. Is that what the prelate,
above, was talking about when he said the new mass would "disappear?" That is,
that by "disappear" he means merged with the 1962 missal to produce one,
unified mass for the Roman Church? (I use lower case for new mass and unified
mass because it's not a proper noun when it keeps changing: it does not refer to
the same thing from day to day!)

Yes, he was talking about the hybrid "reform of the reform" missal that would begin by dressing up the N.O (which already begun last Advent) and watering down the 1962 (which is being done now) with the idea of having both masses side by side until they convince the indult and N.O crowd that there is no difference between them and releasing the final version: "the reform of the reform" hybrid.

The article you quote above is from The Remnant: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Main%20Remnant%20Site%202011/Archives/2010-0831-mershon-fellay-interview.htm which I posted as an example of +Fellay having no scruples accusing his fellow bishop (Williamson) of gossip. In "The Remnant" article + Fellay is angry about +Williamson's Eleison Comments CLXII (Aug. 21, 2010), I found this link with it:

http://nonnisite.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html

EC CLXII ends: "... The rumour from Rome is precisely that he is thinking of a "Motu Proprio" which would accept the SSPX "back into the Church" once and for all, yet require from the SSPX no explicit acceptance of Vatican II or the New Mass, but only, for instance, the acceptance of John-Paul II's 1992 "Catechism of the Catholic Church", which is substantially modernist but in a quiet way. Thus the SSPX would not appear to its followers to be accepting the Council or the New Mass, yet it would be softly, softly, beginning to go along with the substance of neo-modernism.

Thus all seekers of unity would be content. Only not believers in Catholic doctrine.

DANGER !

Kyrie eleison

Now we know from the Meeting at Albano that that was exactly one of the conditions: The "Catechism of the Catholic Church" of JPII.

Incredible duplicity on the part of the Pope and Bp. Fellay.
In effect, this is the next phase to the one-world religion.
They both "scattereth" as our Lord warned and assist the anti-christ.

Luke xi. 23 He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.

It used to be that converting pagans was rewarded, and it was a goal of the Church.

Now, a priest gets in trouble for converting pagans:

I learned from my friend that about 5 or so years before he was removed from his parish, he had found a priest to teach him the Tridentine Mass. He was removed from the diocese because he was witnessed converting a Buddhist on his deathbed, administering the man's Baptism and hearing his confession.

Since his faculties were removed by the diocese, he has remained underground. He has a Mass daily. That evening his chapel was full with familiar faces from my SSPX chapel.

This is a dramatic and beautiful story.
Thanks for telling it.
The traditional Catholic priest of the remnant have true zeal for souls.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #159 on:** August 23, 2012, 09:20:32 PM »

Quote from: Thursday Jul 5, 2012, 12:27 am ~ page 2

Remember when Fellay was saying that the pope was saying the Latin Mass privately and then a Vatican official came out and said that he did not.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2010/07/19/so-the-pope-says-the-old-mass-privately-well-probably-not/

According to Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the SSPX, the Pope says the old rite of Mass privately. (Hat tip to Fr Z at WDTPRS.)

This story has been around for some time, but is it true? Probably not.

So far as I can make out the story first appeared in Catholic World News on July 16, 2007. Beneath the headline “Pope Benedict uses older ritual for his private Mass,” CWN reported:

“Pope Benedict XVI, who recently issued a Motu Proprio allowing all Catholic priests to celebrate the old Latin Mass, uses the older ritual himself for his private Mass, CWN has learned.

“Informed sources at the Vatican have confirmed reports that the Holy Father regularly celebrates Mass using the 1962 Roman Missal.”

That story is still being presented as news today, but think about it for a moment. CWN says it “has learned” that the Pope says the old Mass. No, it hasn’t. All it has learned is that unnamed sources have “confirmed reports” that he does so. Not the same thing at all.

The day after CWN released its story, the Vatican declared that the story was not true.

According to the Catholic News Service (CNS):

“Claims that the Pope celebrates his private Mass using the Tridentine rite are incorrect, Jesuit Fr Federico Lombardi told Catholic News Service July 17.”

Fr Lombardi is the director of the Vatican press office, and seems an honest man. It is hard to believe anyway that if the rumours had been true, the Vatican (and therefore ultimately the Pope) would have denied them.

Quote from: Thursday

Fellay just has to go, how many more times are we going to be duped?!
The man is not trustworthy. The whole "the pope says the mass in private" was to get the SSPX to think Razinger was traditional and one doesn't have to do much digging disprove that.

I think he is a mole but if he isn't he should still be removed for incompetence.

Goodbye Bishop Fellay.

+Fellay was quoted in CFN back in October 2010 saying this:

Bishop Fellay noted that Pope Benedict does not like the New Mass. As Cardinal Ratzinger, he stated in print that it is a “banal on-the-spot fabrication.” He prefers the Old Mass, and there is word he celebrates it from time to time. Yet due to the pressure from bishops, he allows himself to be intimidated into not celebrating it publicly.
The opposition is so fierce from the progressivists that even mildly conservative Novus Ordo prelates are denounced as “ultra conservative.”
Along the same line, in 2007 the Vatican noted that “pro multis” in the words of consecration must be translated as “for many”, since “for all” is inaccurate. The German bishops recently stated that in spite of the Vatican’s order, they plan to keep “for all,” because – and this is priceless – “it is tradition, and we have to keep to tradition.”

If Bishop Fellay lied, perhaps it's because he's been schmoozing with Vatican liars,
and these German bishop liars who say they "must keep to tradition," and he is
learning their vices and bad habits? -- If so, that's all the more reason to stay
away from these Modernists!