Author Topic: Eleison Comments Issue CCLXI - 261 (Read 2346 times)

Kelley · « **on:** July 13, 2012, 07:42:03 PM »

Number CCLXI (261) 14 July 2012

BENEDICT’S EcuмENISM VI

It was promised that in the last of this series of “Eleison Comments” articles inspired by Dr Wolfgang Schuler’s book on “Benedict XVI and the Church’s View of Itself” its main lesson would be applied to the present situation of the Society of St Pius X. The application has already been suggested: if one can only be Catholic by belonging to the living organism of the Catholic Church, then one will become Conciliar by belonging to the organism of the Conciliar Church.

Benedict XVI holds that Catholic pieces cut off from the Catholic Church still belong to the Church of Christ. Dr Schuler, following Our Lord (Jn. XV, 1-7), argues on the contrary that the Church being a living organism, then branches cut off it wither and die, because it is the plant that gives them its life. It follows that if the SSPX is grafted onto the Conciliar plant which is wholly diseased with the Vatican II religion of man, then the Conciliar plant will transmit its disease to the SSPX. Here are three quotes of Archbishop which express this reality:--

In 1984, well before the Episcopal consecrations of 1988, he condemned in advance the illusion that the SSPX, by “getting back inside the Church would be able to fight, to do this, to do that”. He replied, “That is absolutely untrue. You don’t get back inside a structure, putting yourself beneath its superiors, and expect that once inside you are going to turn everything upside down. The reality is that they have everything they need to strangle us. They have all the authority.”

In 1988, just before the consecrations, he said, “Rome wants everything to go Vatican II, while they leave us a little bit of Tradition. (...) They are not changing their position. We cannot put ourselves in the hands of those people. We would be fooling ourselves. We do not mean to let ourselves be eaten up. (...) Little by little Tradition would be compromised.”

In 1989, soon after the consecrations, he answered the objection that the SSPX would have done more good for the Church by staying inside than by getting itself put outside. He replied,“What Church are we talking about ? If you mean the Conciliar Church, then we who have struggled against the Council for 40 years because we want the Catholic Church, we would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion. It is not the subjects that make the superiors, it is the superiors that make the subjects. Amidst the whole Roman Curia, amidst all the world’s bishops who are progressives, I would have been completely swamped. I would have been able to do nothing.”

In conclusion, if by any practical agreement or canonical regularization the SSPX were to put itself under the Conciliar authorities of the Church that are still firmly attached to the ideas of Vatican II, as the Doctrinal Discussions of 2009-2011 amply proved, then its defence of the true Faith would be “strangled, eaten up, swamped”. Grafted into the living Conciliar whole, it could not help receiving from it the diseased Conciliar life. God forbid !

Kyrie eleison.

AntiFellayism · « **Reply #1 on:** July 13, 2012, 07:57:23 PM »

I wish I could say much with only a few lines just as the good bishop does... :idea:

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #2 on:** July 13, 2012, 08:19:04 PM »

Without going so far as to actually say it, H.E. gives me the image of a person
putting his mouth on the exhaust pipe of a car, and breathing. That's the "grafting
on" he speaks of. Or, that the SSPX is being asked to come in, and join the party,
when the party is a bunch of people sitting in sewage, and smiling and loving it.

He wouldn't say that. But he doesn't have to.

"Grafted into the living Conciliar whole, it could not help receiving from it the
diseased Conciliar life." That says enough.

With all the talk of how little the resistance is in the SSPX, that only 3% would
leave, and that 40% would go right along, agreeably, with "rapproachement,"
I will be waiting for the other shoe to fall in December, when everyone will be
faced with having to buy a "New 1962 Missal" so they can imbibe the "diseased
Conciliar life" in the form of new Collects that abandon the Faith of our Fathers and
truck in the Jєωιѕн Cabal non-Catholic screeds of Muller, DiNoia, Ratzinger et. al.,
for our general sewage party, where everyone is happy. ----------- NOT!

I've already lived through the Vatican II revolution.

I've already seen the invasion of the unclean spirit of Vatican II and what it can do.

And I don't want any part of it.

Bishop Williamson, I hope I can find out where and when you're saying Mass, so
I will be able to take a long train ride to be there...............

Kelley · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2012, 09:07:01 PM »

Please note:
His Excellency made the following special emphasis of the Archbishop's words... of which, (mea culpa) I failed to copy a such.

Number CCLXI (261) 14 July 2012

BENEDICT’S EcuмENISM VI

It was promised that in the last of this series of “Eleison Comments” articles inspired by Dr Wolfgang Schuler’s book on “Benedict XVI and the Church’s View of Itself” its main lesson would be applied to the present situation of the Society of St Pius X. The application has already been suggested: if one can only be Catholic by belonging to the living organism of the Catholic Church, then one will become Conciliar by belonging to the organism of the Conciliar Church.

Benedict XVI holds that Catholic pieces cut off from the Catholic Church still belong to the Church of Christ. Dr Schuler, following Our Lord (Jn. XV, 1-7), argues on the contrary that the Church being a living organism, then branches cut off it wither and die, because it is the plant that gives them its life. It follows that if the SSPX is grafted onto the Conciliar plant which is wholly diseased with the Vatican II religion of man, then the Conciliar plant will transmit its disease to the SSPX. Here are three quotes of Archbishop which express this reality:--

In 1984, well before the Episcopal consecrations of 1988, he condemned in advance the illusion that the SSPX, by “getting back inside the Church would be able to fight, to do this, to do that”. He replied, “That is absolutely untrue. You don’t get back inside a structure, putting yourself beneath its superiors, and expect that once inside you are going to turn everything upside down. The reality is that they have everything they need to strangle us. They have all the authority.”

In 1988, just before the consecrations, he said, “Rome wants everything to go Vatican II, while they leave us a little bit of Tradition. (...) They are not changing their position. We cannot put ourselves in the hands of those people. We would be fooling ourselves. We do not mean to let ourselves be eaten up. (...) Little by little Tradition would be compromised.”

In 1989, soon after the consecrations, he answered the objection that the SSPX would have done more good for the Church by staying inside than by getting itself put outside. He replied,“What Church are we talking about ? If you mean the Conciliar Church, then we who have struggled against the Council for 40 years because we want the Catholic Church, we would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion. It is not the subjects that make the superiors, it is the superiors that make the subjects. Amidst the whole Roman Curia, amidst all the world’s bishops who are progressives, I would have been completely swamped. I would have been able to do nothing.”

In conclusion, if by any practical agreement or canonical regularization the SSPX were to put itself under the Conciliar authorities of the Church that are still firmly attached to the ideas of Vatican II, as the Doctrinal Discussions of 2009-2011 amply proved, then its defence of the true Faith would be “strangled, eaten up, swamped”. Grafted into the living Conciliar whole, it could not help receiving from it the diseased Conciliar life. God forbid !

Kyrie eleison.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2012, 09:21:21 PM »

Re: Kelley's special emphasis:

I'm not surprised. Those are important words.

REMEMBER THIS: the young Fr. Williamson was the first name that +Lefebvre
submitted to Rome when he first applied for JPII's approval to consecrate one.

If we find ourselves daring to wonder, as +Fellay would have us do (shudder!), what
+ABL would have to say these days, if he were still around to tell us, we really
should not wonder at all. For if JPII had given approval to this first recommendation,
we would have had ONE bishop, not 4, and after +ABL had passed away to his
eternal reward, may God rest his soul (a bit more probable, we could be asking
+ABL to pray for US!), any more bishops that we would have had by now would
have been ONLY those that +Williamson had chosen, and you can be pretty close
to 100% confident that it would NOT have included Fr. Bernard Fellay. JMHO.

Maybe it would include Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, or Fr. David Hewko, or Fr. Cardozo, to
name a few. Chew on THAT.

PAT317 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 13, 2012, 10:17:35 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

REMEMBER THIS: the young Fr. Williamson was the first name that +Lefebvre submitted to Rome when he first applied for JPII's approval to consecrate one.

If we find ourselves daring to wonder, as +Fellay would have us do (shudder!), what +ABL would have to say these days, if he were still around to tell us, we really should not wonder at all. For if JPII had given approval to this first recommendation, we would have had ONE bishop, not 4, and after +ABL had passed away to his eternal reward, may God rest his soul (a bit more probable, we could be asking +ABL to pray for US!), any more bishops that we would have had by now would have been ONLY those that +Williamson had chosen, and you can be pretty close to 100% confident that it would NOT have included Fr. Bernard Fellay. JMHO.

Actually, I think he initially wanted 3 bishops. He sometimes refers to "the three candidates" (in Bp. Tissier's book). But Rome was saying, "no, you can only consecrate one." So, if that had worked out, and Rome let him choose the candidate, it would have been +BW. But otherwise, he had in mind 3 candidates, and my understanding is that +BF was not one of those original 3.

magdalena · « **Reply #6 on:** July 13, 2012, 11:01:08 PM »

Psalm 76

76:1 I cried to the Lord with my voice; to God with my voice, and He gave ear to me.

76:2 In the day of my trouble I sought God, with my hands lifted up to Him in the night, and I was not deceived.

http://www.drbo.org/chapter/21076.htm

Matthew · « **Reply #7 on:** July 13, 2012, 11:21:03 PM »

That's from Friday Compline!

A beautiful melody goes with that.

magdalena · « **Reply #8 on:** July 13, 2012, 11:29:19 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

That's from Friday Compline!

A beautiful melody goes with that.

I know! I had just finished praying it. So often the psalms match with what's going on in our lives and the Church. I love the breviary. What melody are you speaking of? May God bless and protect +Williamson.

InstaurareEcclesiam · « **Reply #9 on:** July 14, 2012, 04:13:47 AM »

I entirely agree with His Lordship on this one.

The other question which remains, however, is that whether the Conciliar 'church' is still the Roman Catholic Church and whether Conciliar 'popes, bishops, curates, abbots and orders' are still legitimate Roman Catholic popes, bishops, curate, abbots and orders.

I strongly tend to believe the answer is no. But Bp. Williamson always fervently and extrovertly promoted the idea of 'split minds and souls', that 'on the one hand they are Catholic, on the other hand not'. That is a senseless exercise, as this would also mean that due to Martin Luther's praise for Our Lady and his sparing of crucifix and Lady altars in Lutheran German churches, he was "on the one hand an heretic, on the other Catholic". Of course Luther was not cryptological sophistical and ambiguous like the characterics of Modernism are.

Legitimate authority and Holy Mother Church cannot prescribe poison to their children. THe Church is infallible and indefectible. She would no longer be, if "one part" of Her would be killing her own infants.

I suspect from Bp. Williamson's column, that the General Chapter indeed is speaking about an agreement - although seemingly postponing or opposing it, and Gerhard Ludwig Mueller.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #10 on:** July 14, 2012, 10:00:52 AM »

Quote from: InstaurareEcclesiam

I entirely agree with His Lordship on this one.

The other question which remains, however, is that whether the Conciliar 'church' is still the Roman Catholic Church and whether Conciliar 'popes, bishops, curates, abbots and orders' are still legitimate Roman Catholic popes, bishops, curate, abbots and orders.

I strongly tend to believe the answer is no. But Bp. Williamson always fervently and extrovertly promoted the idea of 'split minds and souls', that 'on the one hand they are Catholic, on the other hand not'. That is a senseless exercise, as this would also mean that due to Martin Luther's praise for Our Lady and his sparing of crucifix and Lady altars in Lutheran German churches, he was "on the one hand an heretic, on the other Catholic". Of course Luther was not cryptological sophistical and ambiguous like the characterics of Modernism are.

Cryptological, sophistical and ambiguous: ain't it the truth! We've got a real can o'
worms going on these days, or, as +de Galarreta puts it, "Pandora's box."

Quote

Legitimate authority and Holy Mother Church cannot prescribe poison to their children. The Church is infallible and indefectible. She would no longer be, if "one part" of Her would be killing her own infants.

We've got that in the USA -- abortion is "tolerated" by bishops, while they preach
(sometimes) against it. But their duplicity is excused by B16 on the grounds of his
effective denial of the principle of non-contradiction. He didn't do so well in
seminary when he had to study St. Thomas Aquinas, you know.

Quote

I suspect from Bp. Williamson's column, that the General Chapter indeed is speaking about an agreement - although seemingly postponing or opposing it, and Gerhard Ludwig Mueller.

My hunch is, they'll be content with establishing some manner of precept at the
Chapter, and then use that principle later, when the Chapter is concluded, as the
basis for adopting the "New 1962 Missal" in December. Then, when all the SSPX
chapels are praying the "reformed" prayers at Mass, devoid of "sacrifice" and
containing nothing spiritual but only worldly, mundane pablum, then by next
summer, they'll be ready for phase two, like a vote for regularization again.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #11 on:** July 16, 2012, 05:45:03 PM »

Quote from: Kelley

Number CCLXI (261) 14 July 2012

BENEDICT’S EcuмENISM VI

It was promised that in the last of this series of “Eleison Comments” articles inspired by Dr Wolfgang Schuler’s book on “Benedict XVI and the Church’s View of Itself” its main lesson would be applied to the present situation of the Society of St Pius X. The application has already been suggested: if one can only be Catholic by belonging to the living organism of the Catholic Church, then one will become Conciliar by belonging to the organism of the Conciliar Church.

Benedict XVI holds that Catholic pieces cut off from the Catholic Church still belong to the Church of Christ. Dr Schuler, following Our Lord (Jn. XV, 1-7), argues on the contrary that the Church being a living organism, then branches cut off it wither and die, because it is the plant that gives them its life. It follows that if the SSPX is grafted onto the Conciliar plant which is wholly diseased with the Vatican II religion of man, then the Conciliar plant will transmit its disease to the SSPX. Here are three quotes of Archbishop which express this reality:--

In 1984, well before the Episcopal consecrations of 1988, he condemned in advance the illusion that the SSPX, by “getting back inside the Church would be able to fight, to do this, to do that”. He replied, “That is absolutely untrue. You don’t get back inside a structure, putting yourself beneath its superiors, and expect that once inside you are going to turn everything upside down. The reality is that they have everything they need to strangle us. They have all the authority.”

In 1988, just before the consecrations, he said, “Rome wants everything to go Vatican II, while they leave us a little bit of Tradition. (...) They are not changing their position. We cannot put ourselves in the hands of those people. We would be fooling ourselves. We do not mean to let ourselves be eaten up. (...) Little by little Tradition would be compromised.”

In 1989, soon after the consecrations, he answered the objection that the SSPX would have done more good for the Church by staying inside than by getting itself put outside. He replied,“What Church are we talking about ? If you mean the Conciliar Church, then we who have struggled against the Council for 40 years because we want the Catholic Church, we would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion. It is not the subjects that make the superiors, it is the superiors that make the subjects. Amidst the whole Roman Curia, amidst all the world’s bishops who are progressives, I would have been completely swamped. I would have been able to do nothing.”

In conclusion, if by any practical agreement or canonical regularization the SSPX were to put itself under the Conciliar authorities of the Church that are still firmly attached to the ideas of Vatican II, as the Doctrinal Discussions of 2009-2011 amply proved, then its defence of the true Faith would be “strangled, eaten up, swamped”. Grafted into the living Conciliar whole, it could not help receiving from it the diseased Conciliar life. God forbid !

Kyrie eleison.

Don't forget the DONATE feature!

Quote

Donate:

While Eleison Comments is provided free of charge, there are administrative and technical costs associated with making it available to subscribers worldwide and with operating this site. Contributions to offset these costs are appreciated, and may be made via the button below or by contacting:

donate@dinoscopus.org

paypal

In these uncertain times, when we might want to withhold contributions to our
SSPX chapels until this mess gets sorted out and we are sure they won't be using
the NEW AND IMPROVED VERSION of the 1962 missal (!) even so, we may want
to continue to support +Williamson and the various priests who are being punished
for nothing more than saying the things that +ABL would have said in these same
conditions.

I told my friend who sends regular contributions to Winona for the seminary, that
he ought to send it to Dinoscopus instead, so that +Williamson will have control of
it. Otherwise, Winona will just forward it over to Menzingen and it will be like a
donation to reward +Fellay for his twisted antics.

So go to your own EC Comments e-mail and use the Donate feature, or use the
copy of it that I put here, above, if you want +Williamson to be reassured of our
prayers and support.

Kelley · « **Reply #12 on:** July 16, 2012, 08:04:08 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Don't forget the DONATE feature!
Quote

Donate:

While Eleison Comments is provided free of charge, there are administrative and technical costs associated with making it available to subscribers worldwide and with operating this site. Contributions to offset these costs are appreciated, and may be made via the button below or by contacting:

donate@dinoscopus.org

paypal

In these uncertain times, when we might want to withhold contributions to our
SSPX chapels until this mess gets sorted out and we are sure they won't be using
the NEW AND IMPROVED VERSION of the 1962 missal (!) even so, we may want
to continue to support +Williamson and the various priests who are being punished
for nothing more than saying the things that +ABL would have said in these same
conditions.

I told my friend who sends regular contributions to Winona for the seminary, that
he ought to send it to Dinoscopus instead, so that +Williamson will have control of
it. Otherwise, Winona will just forward it over to Menzingen and it will be like a
donation to reward +Fellay for his twisted antics.

So go to your own EC Comments e-mail and use the Donate feature, or use the
copy of it that I put here, above, if you want +Williamson to be reassured of our
prayers and support.

:applause: Great point, Neil! H.E greatly needs our spiritual and our material support as well...

paypal

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #13 on:** July 16, 2012, 08:28:17 PM »

Quote from: Kelley

Number CCLXI (261) 14 July 2012

BENEDICT’S EcuмENISM VI

It was promised that in the last of this series of “Eleison Comments” articles inspired by Dr Wolfgang Schuler’s book on “Benedict XVI and the Church’s View of Itself” its main lesson would be applied to the present situation of the Society of St Pius X. The application has already been suggested: if one can only be Catholic by belonging to the living organism of the Catholic Church, then one will become Conciliar by belonging to the organism of the Conciliar Church.

Benedict XVI holds that Catholic pieces cut off from the Catholic Church still belong to the Church of Christ. Dr Schuler, following Our Lord (Jn. XV, 1-7), argues on the contrary that the Church being a living organism, then branches cut off it wither and die, because it is the plant that gives them its life. It follows that if the SSPX is grafted onto the Conciliar plant which is wholly diseased with the Vatican II religion of man, then the Conciliar plant will transmit its disease to the SSPX. Here are three quotes of Archbishop which express this reality:--

In 1984, well before the Episcopal consecrations of 1988, he condemned in advance the illusion that the SSPX, by “getting back inside the Church would be able to fight, to do this, to do that”. He replied, “That is absolutely untrue. You don’t get back inside a structure, putting yourself beneath its superiors, and expect that once inside you are going to turn everything upside down. The reality is that they have everything they need to strangle us. They have all the authority.”

In 1988, just before the consecrations, he said, “Rome wants everything to go Vatican II, while they leave us a little bit of Tradition. (...) They are not changing their position. We cannot put ourselves in the hands of those people. We would be fooling ourselves. We do not mean to let ourselves be eaten up. (...) Little by little Tradition would be compromised.”

In 1989, soon after the consecrations, he answered the objection that the SSPX would have done more good for the Church by staying inside than by getting itself put outside. He replied,“What Church are we talking about ? If you mean the Conciliar Church, then we who have struggled against the Council for 40 years because we want the Catholic Church, we would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion. It is not the subjects that make the superiors, it is the superiors that make the subjects. Amidst the whole Roman Curia, amidst all the world’s bishops who are progressives, I would have been completely swamped. I would have been able to do nothing.”

In conclusion, if by any practical agreement or canonical regularization the SSPX were to put itself under the Conciliar authorities of the Church that are still firmly attached to the ideas of Vatican II, as the Doctrinal Discussions of 2009-2011 amply proved, then its defence of the true Faith would be “strangled, eaten up, swamped”. Grafted into the living Conciliar whole, it could not help receiving from it the diseased Conciliar life. God forbid !

Kyrie eleison.

I usually get these newsletters but i never received this one in my regular email. that is odd.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #14 on:** July 18, 2012, 01:37:02 PM »

Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey

I usually get these newsletters but i never received this one in my regular email. that is odd.

You can send an e-mail to the help desk in case they've deleted your account.
It's possible someone sent them a fraudulent cancellation of your subscription, or,
maybe they accidentally dropped your email address by a glitch or whatever.
But if they don't know you missed a copy, they can't help you. And while you're at
it, throw a few bucks in their general direction to help out!

donate@dinoscopus.org :soapbox:

Quote from: Kelley

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Don't forget the DONATE feature!
Quote

Donate:

While Eleison Comments is provided free of charge, there are administrative and technical costs associated with making it available to subscribers worldwide and with operating this site. Contributions to offset these costs are appreciated, and may be made via the button below or by contacting:

donate@dinoscopus.org

paypal

In these uncertain times, when we might want to withhold contributions to our
SSPX chapels until this mess gets sorted out and we are sure they won't be using
the NEW AND IMPROVED VERSION of the 1962 missal (!) even so, we may want
to continue to support +Williamson and the various priests who are being punished
for nothing more than saying the things that +ABL would have said in these same
conditions.

I told my friend who sends regular contributions to Winona for the seminary, that
he ought to send it to Dinoscopus instead, so that +Williamson will have control of
it. Otherwise, Winona will just forward it over to Menzingen and it will be like a
donation to reward +Fellay for his twisted antics.

So go to your own EC Comments e-mail and use the Donate feature, or use the
copy of it that I put here, above, if you want +Williamson to be reassured of our
prayers and support.

:applause: Great point, Neil! H.E greatly needs our spiritual and our material support as well...

paypal

Two kinds of readers:

1) Those who have been getting EC and donating at their local SSPX parish or
sending contributions to Winona or Fr. Rostand or whatever, and

2) Those who have been getting EC for free and not sending any donations to
anyone in the SSPX --

Both of these can make a difference now, if they DOUBLE the contribution that
they would have sent, and send it to Dinoscopus, instead. This one act alone
might make little difference to us and our expenses, but will make a HUGE
difference to our good Bishop Williamson, who needs not only our spiritual support
but material support. It will literally have the effect of taking the wind out of
+Fellay's sails, for he has committed a moral CRIME by enforcing +Williamson's
banning from the General Chapter. It is only right that there is a direct
consequence, and we are able to do this, therefore we SHOULD.

Think of it this way: When an SSPX priest speaks out in opposition to +Fellay's
little tyranny agenda, he gets the heavy, iron fist RIGHT AWAY.

Fight fire with fire. Two can play this game! If +Fellay wants to play hardball
(and he obviously is playing hardball) then he ought to get it where it counts.

Just DO IT!