Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: suger on March 09, 2013, 02:02:46 PM

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: suger on March 09, 2013, 02:02:46 PM
The resistance French priest of La Sapiniere have leaked +Fellay's doctrinal declaration which he sent on behalf on the whole Society to Cardinal Levada on 04.15, 2012.


It is so unbelievable,
that I have to give a warning : Fasten yourself to your chair before reading, in case you overreact...
Not recommended for the faithful with heart problems.


http://www.lasapiniere.info/declaration-doctrinale/

Quote


DECLARATION DOCTRINALE DU 15 AVRIL 2012 QUE MGR FELLAY AVAIT ENVOYÉE AU CARDINAL LEVADA

I

Nous promettons d’être toujours fidèles à l’Eglise catholique et au Pontife romain, son Pasteur suprême, Vicaire du Christ, successeur de Pierre et chef du Corps des évêques.

II

Nous déclarons accepter les enseignements du Magistère de l’Eglise en matière de foi et de morale, en donnant à chaque affirmation doctrinale le degré d’adhésion requis, selon la doctrine contenue dans le nº 25 de la Constitution dogmatique Lumen Gentium du Concile Vatican II (1).

III En particulier :

1 Nous déclarons accepter la doctrine sur le Pontife romain et sur le Collège des évêques, avec son chef, le Pape, enseignée par la Constitution dogmatique Pastor æternus du Concile Vatican I et par la Constitution dogmatique Lumen Gentium du Concile Vatican II, chapitre 3 (De constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiæ et in specie de episcopatu), expliquée et interprétée par la Nota explicativa prævia à ce même chapitre.

2 Nous reconnaissons l’autorité du Magistère auquel seul est confié la tâche d’interpréter authentiquement la Parole de Dieu écrite ou transmise (2) dans la fidélité à la Tradition, se souvenant que « le Saint Esprit n’a pas été promis aux successeurs de Pierre pour qu’ils fassent connaître, sous sa révélation, une nouvelle doctrine, mais pour qu’avec son assistance ils gardent saintement et expriment fidèlement la révélation transmise par les Apôtres, c’est-à-dire le dépôt de la foi » (3).

3 La Tradition est la transmission vivante de la Révélation « usque ad nos » (4) et l’Eglise dans sa doctrine, dans sa vie et dans son culte, perpétue et transmet à toutes les générations ce qu’elle est et tout ce qu’elle croit. La Tradition progresse dans l’Eglise avec l’assistance du Saint Esprit (5), non comme une nouveauté contraire (6) mais par une meilleure compréhension du depositum fidei (7).

4 L’entière Tradition de la foi catholique doit être le critère et le guide de la compréhension des enseignements du Concile Vatican II, lequel à son tour éclaire – c’est-à-dire approfondit et explicite ultérieurement – certains aspects de la vie et de la doctrine de l’Eglise, implicitement présents en elle ou non encore formulés conceptuellement (8).

5 Les affirmations du Concile Vatican II et du Magistère pontifical postérieur relatives à la relation entre l’Eglise catholique et les confessions chrétiennes non-catholiques, ainsi qu’au devoir social de religion et au droit à la liberté religieuse, dont la formulation est difficilement conciliable avec les affirmations doctrinales précédentes du Magistère, doivent être comprises à la lumière de la Tradition entière et ininterrompue, de manière cohérente avec les vérités précédemment enseignées par le Magistère de l’Eglise, sans accepter aucune interprétation de ces affirmations qui puisse porter à exposer la doctrine catholique en opposition ou en rupture avec la Tradition et avec ce Magistère.

6 C’est pourquoi il est légitime de promouvoir par une légitime discussion l’étude et l’explication théologique d’expressions et de formulations du Concile Vatican II et du Magistère qui a suivi, dans le cas où elles ne paraissent pas conciliables avec le Magistère antérieur de l’Eglise (9).

7 Nous déclarons reconnaître la validité du sacrifice de la Messe et des Sacrements célébrés avec l’intention de faire ce que fait l’Eglise selon les rites indiqués dans les éditions typiques du Missel romain et des Rituels des Sacrements légitimement promulgués par les papes Paul VI et Jean-Paul II.

8 En suivant les critères énoncés ci-dessus (III, 5), ainsi que le canon 21 du Code, nous promettons de respecter la discipline commune de l’Eglise et les lois ecclésiastiques, spécialement celles qui sont contenues dans le Code de droit canonique promulgué par le pape Jean-Paul II (1983) et dans le code de droit canon des Eglises orientales promulgué par le même Pontife (1990), restant sauve la discipline à concéder à la Fraternité Sacerdotale Saint Pie X par une loi particulière.
—————————————–
On lit en note :–
(1) Cf. aussi la nouvelle formule de la Profession de foi et du Serment de fidélité pour assumer une charge exercée au nom de l’Eglise, 1989 ; cf. CIC cann 749 ; 750, 1et 2 ; 752 ; CCEO cann. 597 ; 598, 1 et 2 ; 599.
(2) Cf. Pie XII, encyclique Humani Generis.
(3) Vatican I, Constitution dogmatique, Pastor aeternus, Dz. 3070.
(4) Concile de Trente, Dz. 1501 : « Toute vérité salutaire et toute règle morale (Mt. XVI, 15) sont contenues dans les livres écrits et dans les traditions non écrites qui, reçues par les Apôtres de la bouche du Christ lui-même ou transmises comme de la main à la main par les Apôtres sous la dictée de l’Esprit Saint, sont parvenues jusqu’à nous. »
(5) Cf. Concile Vatican II, Constitution dogmatique Dei Verbum, 8 et 9, Denz.4209-4210.
(6) Vatican I, Constitution dogmatique Dei Filius, Dz. 3020 : « Aussi doit-on toujours retenir le sens des dogmes sacrés que la sainte Mère l’Eglise a déterminé une fois pour toutes, et ne jamais s’en écarter sous le prétexte et au nom d’une intelligence supérieure de ces dogmes. Croissent donc et se multiplient abondamment, dans chacun comme dans tous, chez tous les hommes aussi bien que dans toute l’Eglise, durant le cours des âges et des siècles, l’intelligence, la science et la sagesse ; mais seulement dans le rang qui leur convient, c’est-à-dire dans l’unité du dogme, de sens et de manière de voir (St. Vincent de Lérins, Commonitorium, 28). »
(7) Vatican I, Constitution dogmatique Dei Filius, Dz. 3011 ; Serment antimoderniste, nº 4 ; Pie XII, Lettre encyclique Humani Generis, Dz 3886 ; Concile Vatican II, Constitution dogmatique Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.
(8) Comme par exemple l’enseignement de la sacramentalité de l’épiscopat in Lumen Gentium, nº 21.
(9) On trouve un parallèle dans l’histoire avec le Décret des Arméniens du Concile de Florence, où la porrection des instruments était indiquée comme matière du sacrement de l’Ordre. Néanmoins les théologiens discutèrent légitimement, même après ce décret, sur l’exactitude d’une telle assertion ; finalement la question fut résolue d’une autre façon par le pape Pie XII.



Who said +Fellay was not a traitor?

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Mithrandylan on March 09, 2013, 02:07:00 PM
Anglais?
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: suger on March 09, 2013, 02:11:05 PM
I just started to translate it myself (manually), please give me about 15 min.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: SeanJohnson on March 09, 2013, 02:13:19 PM
I guess I will have to take your word for it?
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: PAT317 on March 09, 2013, 02:34:20 PM
Quote from: Seraphim
I guess I will have to take your word for it?


Well, parts of it look like the part that Fr. Pfluger revealed last year (http://www.gloria.tv/?media=301352):

Quote

68:33 minutes
The entire tradition of catholic faith must be the criteria and guide in understanding the teaching of the second Vatican council, which, in turn, enlightens certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself and not yet formulated.

The affirmations of the second Vatican council […] and of the posterior pontifical Magisterium concerning relations between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian confessions […] must be understood in the light of the entire and uninterrupted Tradition in a manner which is coherent with truths previously taught by the Church and without accepting any interpretation whatsoever.

That is why it is legitimate to promote through a legitimate discussion the study and theological explanation of expressions or formulas of the second Vatican council and the ensuing Magisterium whenever these do not appear reconcilable with the Church’s previous Magisterium.


If you listen to Fr. Pfluger, you can match the French words with the written text in this thread.  Then if you don't understand French, do a google translate, and see if the (soon to be out) English translation looks essentially the same.  Except it's a little confusing because he inserts commentary I think, so he's not following the text exactly.

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Telesphorus on March 09, 2013, 02:37:06 PM
Quote
sans accepter aucune interprétation de ces affirmations qui puisse porter à exposer la doctrine catholique en opposition ou en rupture avec la Tradition et avec ce Magistère.


So then one would not be allowed to say that Nostra Aetate or Religious Liberty were a rupture.

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Nishant on March 09, 2013, 02:53:38 PM
A perfunctory Google translation.

Quote
DECLARATION OF DOCTRINAL April 15, 2012 MGR THAT WAS SENT TO CARDINAL FELLAY LEVADA

I

We promise to always be faithful to the Catholic Church and the Roman Pontiff, the supreme Shepherd, the Vicar of Christ, Successor of Peter and head of the body of bishops.

II

We declare to accept the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church in matters of faith and morals, giving each doctrinal affirmation degree of membership required, according to the doctrine contained in No. 25 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican II (1).

III In particular:

1 We declare to accept the doctrine of the Roman Pontiff and the College of Bishops, with its head, the Pope taught by the Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus of Vatican I and the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican II, Chapter 3 ( of constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiae and in specie of episcopatu), explained and interpreted by the Note explicativa previa in this chapter.

2 We recognize the authority of the Magisterium which alone is entrusted the task of authentically interpreting the word of God written or handed (2) fidelity to the tradition, remembering that "the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors Peter to know that they do, in his revelation, a new doctrine, but with the assistance they might religiously guard and faithfully express the revelation transmitted through the Apostles, that is to say, the deposit of faith " (3).

3 The Tradition is the living transmission of Revelation "usque ad nos" (4) and the Church in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she is and that this it believes. Tradition progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit (5), not as a novelty contrast (6) but with a better understanding of depositum fidei (7).

4 The whole tradition of the Catholic faith should be the criterion and guide understanding of the teachings of Vatican II, which in turn lights - that is to say, deepens and explicit later - some aspects of life and the doctrine of the Church, implicitly present in it or not yet formulated conceptually (8).

5 The statements of Vatican II and Papal Magisterium post on the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian denominations, as well as social duty of religion and the right to religious freedom, the formulation is difficult consistent with the doctrinal affirmations previous Magisterium, must be understood in the light of Tradition complete and uninterrupted, consistent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these assertions can wear to expose Catholic doctrine in opposition or break with tradition and with the Magisterium.

6 Therefore it is legitimate to promote a legitimate discussion the study and theological explanation of expressions and formulations of the Second Vatican Council and the Magisterium that followed, in case they do not seem to reconcile with the previous Magisterium of the Church (9).

7 We declare recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing what the Church according to the rites shown in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and Rituals of the Sacraments legitimately promulgated by Pope Paul VI and John Paul II.

8 In accordance with the criteria set out above (III, 5), and the canon 21 of the Code, we pledge to respect the common discipline of the Church and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by Pope John Paul II (1983) and the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches promulgated by the same Pontiff (1990), without prejudice to the discipline to grant to the Society of Saint Pius X by a special law.
- ------------
We read rating: -
(1) See also the new formula for the Profession of Faith and Oath of Fidelity to take a load exerted on behalf of the Church, 1989 cf. Cann CIC 749, 750, 1 and 2, 752; CCEO cann. 597, 598, 1 and 2 599.
(2) Pius XII encyclical Humani Generis.
(3) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, Dz. 3070.
(4) Council of Trent, Dz. 1501: "Any saving truth and moral teaching (Matt. XVI, 15) are contained in books and in the unwritten traditions which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself or transmitted as hand hand by the Apostles at the dictation of the Holy Spirit, have come down to us. "
(5) See Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 8 and 9, Denz.4209-4210.
(6) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3020: "So should we always retain the meaning of the sacred dogmas that Holy Mother the Church has determined once and for all, and never deviate under the guise and name of a superior intelligence of these dogmas. Grow so abundantly and multiply in each as in all, all men as well as in the whole Church, in the course of ages and centuries, intelligence, knowledge and wisdom, but only in the row that suits them, that is to say, in the unity of dogma, meaning and way of seeing (St. Vincent of Lérins, Commonitorium, 28). "
(7) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3011 Oath antimodernist, No. 4, Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Dz 3886, the Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.
(8) As such the teaching of the sacramentality of the episcopate in Lumen Gentium, No. 21.
(9) There is a parallel in the history of Armenians with the Decree of the Council of Florence, where the porrection instruments was indicated as the matter of the sacrament of Order. Nevertheless theologians discussed legitimately, even after this decree, the accuracy of such an assertion, and finally the issue was resolved in another way by Pope Pius XII.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on March 09, 2013, 02:59:13 PM
Quote
5 The statements of Vatican II and Papal Magisterium post on the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian denominations, as well as social duty of religion and the right to religious freedom, the formulation is difficult consistent with the doctrinal affirmations previous Magisterium, must be understood in the light of Tradition complete and uninterrupted, consistent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these assertions can wear to expose Catholic doctrine in opposition or break with tradition and with the Magisterium.


 :facepalm:

This is just embarrassing.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: suger on March 09, 2013, 03:00:36 PM
Here a quick translation, intense work, I hope I left no mistakes.
I did not translate the footnotes (= references to councils, etc.)




DOCTRINAL DECLARATION FROM APRIL 15 AVRIL, 2012, WHICH MGR FELLAY SENT TO CARDINAL LEVADA

I

We plight to always be faithful to the Catholic Church and to the Roman Pontiff, Christ's vicar, successor of Peter and head of the body of bishops.

II

We declare that we accept the teachings of the Church's magisterium regarding matters of faith and morals, giving to each doctrinal statement the required degree of assent, according to the doctrine contained in item 25 of the Lumen Gentium dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council (1).

 III In particular:

1 We declare accepting the doctrine re. the Roman Pontiff and the College of bishops, with its head, the Pope, as taught by the Pastor Aeternus dogmatic constitution of the first Vatican Council and by the Lumen Gentium dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council, chapter 3 (De constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiæ et in specie de episcopatu), explained and interpreted by the Nota explicativa prævia to this very chapter.

2 We recognize the authority of the Magisterium to which only is entrusted the task of authentically  interpreting the Word of God written or transmitted (2) in faithfulness to the Tradition, remembering that « the Holy Spirit was not promised to Peter's successors so that they may make known, under his revelation, a new doctrine, but so as to, with its assistance, they may saintly keep and faithfully express the revelation handed over by the Apostles, i.e. the deposit of faith » (3).

3 The Tradition is the living transmission of the Revelation « usque ad nos » (4) and the Church in its doctrine, in its life and in its cult, perpetuates and transmits to all generations what it is and all what it believes. The Tradition progresses within the Church with the assistance of the Holy Spirit (5), not as a contrary novelty (6) but by a better understanding of the depositum fidei (7).

4 The entire Tradition of the Catholic faith must be the criterion and the guide for understanding the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, which in turn illuminates – i.e. deepens and further clarifies– some aspects of the life and of the doctrine of the Church, implicitly presents in its midst or not yet conceptually formulated (8).

5 The statements of the Second Vatican Council and of the later pontifical magisterium re. the  relationship between the Catholic Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, also re. the social duty of of religion and the right to religious freedom, whose formulation is difficult to reconcile with the former doctrinal statements of the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the entire and uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner consistent with the truths previously taught by the Church's magisterium, without accepting any interpretation of these statements which may lead to expound the Catholic doctrine in opposition or in rupture with the Tradition and with this Magisterium.

6 This is why it is legitimate to promote by a legitimate discussion the study and the theological explanation of expressions and of formulations of the Second Vatican Council and of  the consecutive magisterium, in the case where it appears that they cannot be reconciled with the previous Church Magisterium (9).

7 We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and of the Sacraments celebrated with the intent of doing what the Church does with the rites referred in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramental Ritual legitimately promulgated by popes Paul VI and  Jean-Paul II.

8 By following the criteria set out above (III, 5), as well as canon 21 of the Code, we plight to respect the Church's common discipline and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of canon law promulgated  by pope John-Paul II (1983) in the code of canon law of the Eastern Churches promulgated by the same Pontiff (1990), reserving the right of a discipline to be conceded to the Society of Saint Pius X by a particular law.
—————————————–
On lit en note :–
(1) Cf. aussi la nouvelle formule de la Profession de foi et du Serment de fidélité pour assumer une charge exercée au nom de l’Eglise, 1989 ; cf. CIC cann 749 ; 750, 1et 2 ; 752 ; CCEO cann. 597 ; 598, 1 et 2 ; 599.
(2) Cf. Pie XII, encyclique Humani Generis.
(3) Vatican I, Constitution dogmatique, Pastor aeternus, Dz. 3070.
(4) Concile de Trente, Dz. 1501 : « Toute vérité salutaire et toute règle morale (Mt. XVI, 15) sont contenues dans les livres écrits et dans les traditions non écrites qui, reçues par les Apôtres de la bouche du Christ lui-même ou transmises comme de la main à la main par les Apôtres sous la dictée de l’Esprit Saint, sont parvenues jusqu’à nous. »
(5) Cf. Concile Vatican II, Constitution dogmatique Dei Verbum, 8 et 9, Denz.4209-4210.
(6) Vatican I, Constitution dogmatique Dei Filius, Dz. 3020 : « Aussi doit-on toujours retenir le sens des dogmes sacrés que la sainte Mère l’Eglise a déterminé une fois pour toutes, et ne jamais s’en écarter sous le prétexte et au nom d’une intelligence supérieure de ces dogmes. Croissent donc et se multiplient abondamment, dans chacun comme dans tous, chez tous les hommes aussi bien que dans toute l’Eglise, durant le cours des âges et des siècles, l’intelligence, la science et la sagesse ; mais seulement dans le rang qui leur convient, c’est-à-dire dans l’unité du dogme, de sens et de manière de voir (St. Vincent de Lérins, Commonitorium, 28). »
(7) Vatican I, Constitution dogmatique Dei Filius, Dz. 3011 ; Serment antimoderniste, nº 4 ; Pie XII, Lettre encyclique Humani Generis, Dz 3886 ; Concile Vatican II, Constitution dogmatique Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.
(8) Comme par exemple l’enseignement de la sacramentalité de l’épiscopat in Lumen Gentium, nº 21.
(9) On trouve un parallèle dans l’histoire avec le Décret des Arméniens du Concile de Florence, où la porrection des instruments était indiquée comme matière du sacrement de l’Ordre. Néanmoins les théologiens discutèrent légitimement, même après ce décret, sur l’exactitude d’une telle assertion ; finalement la question fut résolue d’une autre façon par le pape Pie XII.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: SeanJohnson on March 09, 2013, 03:05:54 PM
Will wait for a more precise translation, but at cursory review, I think there are some major problems with #4, 7, and 8.

#4 opens a floodgate for every novelty;

#7 says the new sacraments were legitimately promulgated and certainly valid;

#8 says we ought not have any issue with many scandalous things promoted in the new code, such as communicatio in sacris.


Oops: Just saw Suger made a translation too........
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Telesphorus on March 09, 2013, 03:06:56 PM
It seems to me that a critical point is to state the new Rites were legitimately promulgated.

(that we didn't know about before)

That is hidden by the smokescreen of admitting they are valid -

The Church cannot legitimately promulgate harmful rites.

So if the SSPX accepted this then it would mean it implicitly accepts the Novus Ordo.

Just as the docuмent admits that Vatican II is implicit in Church Tradition.

And gives to Vatican II the level of assent required in Lumen Gentium.

Quote
This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the docuмents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.


So Vatican II is admitted to be authentic magisterium, the new rites are admitted to be "legitimately promulgated"

So to accept the preamble is to accept Vatican II and the New Mass.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Matto on March 09, 2013, 03:06:56 PM
This is troubling. :smash-pc:

This sounds like wolves howling.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on March 09, 2013, 03:07:55 PM
Quote from: Seraphim
Will wait for a more precise translation, but at cursory review, I think there are some major problems with #4, 7, and 8.

#4 opens a floodgate for every novelty;

#7 says the new sacraments were legitimately promulgated and certainly valid;

#8 says we ought not have any issue with many scandalous things promoted in the new code, such as communicatio in sacris.


Oops: Just saw Suger made a translation too........


Yeah, those are all bad, especially #8.

But #5 is bad as well.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: suger on March 09, 2013, 03:08:25 PM
A small translation note :

when translating, I realise the text was not written in a logical manner re. grammar and semantics. I did not change (improve) those things, which show how intellectually limited Fellay and co. are.
Likewise, they are not even lexically consistent, (although this is crucial for a legal docuмent)...
so either using "magistère" or "Magisterium".
I translated like this (keeping the upper case)
magistère --> magisterium
Magisterium  --> Magisterium.

Now I am having a well deserved break, this was tiring to try translate this very accurately in so little time as possible...
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Pius IX on March 09, 2013, 03:45:06 PM
"7 Nous déclarons reconnaître la validité du sacrifice de la Messe et des Sacrements célébrés avec l’intention de faire ce que fait l’Eglise selon les rites indiqués dans les éditions typiques du Missel romain et des Rituels des Sacrements légitimement promulgués par les papes Paul VI et Jean-Paul II."

That's pretty troubling.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: PAT317 on March 09, 2013, 03:55:17 PM
Quote from: Seraphim
Will wait for a more precise translation, but at cursory review, I think there are some major problems with #4, 7, and 8.

#4 opens a floodgate for every novelty;



Quote
4. The entire tradition of catholic faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the second Vatican council, which, in turn, enlightens - in other words deepens and subsequently makes explicit -  certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated.


So, Vatican II can enlighten certain aspects of the doctrine of the Church?!   :facepalm:
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Matto on March 09, 2013, 03:57:45 PM
I wonder if my SSPX priest will say anything about this. I don't think he will.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Cristera on March 09, 2013, 04:00:51 PM
Number CCLXIX (269)  8 September 2012

APRIL AMBIGUITY


In mid-April there was submitted to Rome on behalf of the Society of St Pius X a confidential docuмent, doctrinal in nature, of which it was said that it laid out Catholic principles that all the SSPX authorities could subscribe to. In mid-June Rome rejected the docuмent as basis for a Rome-SSPX agreement. Thank goodness, because it contained a supremely dangerous ambiguity: in brief, does an expression like “The Magisterium of all time” mean up until 1962, or up until 2012 ? It is all the difference between the religion of God, and the religion of God as changed by modern man, i.e. the religion of man. Here are some of the principles, as summarized for SSPX authorities:--

“1/ ...Tradition must be the criterion and guide for understanding the teachings of Vatican II. 2/ So the statements of Vatican II and of the post-conciliar papal teaching with regard to ecuмenism and interreligious dialogue or religious liberty can only be understood in the light of Tradition complete and uninterrupted, 3/ in a manner that does not clash with the truths previously taught by the Church’s Magisterium, 4/ without accepting any interpretation opposed to, or breaking with, Tradition and that Magisterium...”.

The 1962 or 2012 ambiguity lurks here in the words “Tradition” and “Magisterium”. Are these two words being taken to exclude doctrines of the Council (1962-1965) and its aftermath, or are they including them? Any follower of Tradition will read the passage so as to exclude them, because he knows that there is a huge difference between the Church and the Newchurch. But any believer in Vatican II can so read the passage as to be able to pretend that there is a seamless continuity between the Church before and after the Council. Let us take a closer look at how the Traditionalist and the Conciliarist can each read the passage in his own way.

Firstly, the Traditional reading:-- “1/ Pre-conciliar Tradition has got to be the measure and judge of Council teachings (and not the other way round). 2/ So Conciliar and post-conciliar teaching must all be sifted according to the whole of Traditional teaching prior to the Council, 3/ so as not to clash with anything that the Magisterium taught prior to the Council, 4/ accepting no interpretation or text that breaks with the pre-conciliar Tradition or Magisterium.”

Secondly, the Conciliar reading (certainly that of the Romans in charge of today’s Church) :-- “1/ Tradition from before and after the Council (because there is no difference) must be judge of the Council. 2/ So Conciliar teaching on controversial subjects must be sifted according to the Church’s one complete pre- and post-conciliar Tradition (because that alone is the “completeness” of Tradition), 3/ so as not to clash with the Church’s pre- or post-conciliar Magisterium (because they teach the same), 4/ accepting no interpretation that breaks with pre- or post-conciliar Tradition or Magisterium (because there is no break between all four of them).”

This Conciliar reading means that the Council will be judged by the Council, which means of course that it will be acquitted. On the contrary by the Traditional reading the Council is utterly condemned. Ambiguity is deadly for the Faith. Somebody here is meaning to play games with our Catholic minds. Let whoever it is be anathema !

Kyrie eleison.

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: John Grace on March 09, 2013, 04:02:34 PM
Quote from: Matto
I wonder if my SSPX priest will say anything about this.


They might dismiss it as an internet rumour. On a serious note I doubt priests will mention it.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Matto on March 09, 2013, 04:05:42 PM
I have a question. Did Rome reject this? If so, why?

It seems to be a surrender to modernism.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Nishant on March 09, 2013, 04:09:59 PM
This preamble seems to be very much along the lines of the protocol of May 5, 1988, with a few additional provisions on the relationship between Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church.

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: John Grace on March 09, 2013, 04:10:04 PM
I recall the YouTube channel owner 'Oblationem' stating if only we questioned Bishop Fellay more. How many were put under the "holy obedience" like the women on this forum was. She didn't dare question. See where not questioning gets ye.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Mithrandylan on March 09, 2013, 04:13:08 PM
What will +Fellay say about this?

If it is real, why has no deal been done?

I mean, per this docuмent Fellay seems to have done nothing less than completely forsake everything ABL did and stood for, and forsake everything being a traditionalist stands for.

If that's his position, what's taking so long?  Sign the bottom line already.

If that's not his position, why hasn't he done anything to make anyone think otherwise?

A damn mess.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Telesphorus on March 09, 2013, 04:16:18 PM
They have to wait until there's no risk of a large Exodus of priests and faithful.

Also, it seems likely Bishop Fellay was being asked to make some humiliating public concessions that would have made the "sell" of the deal that much harder to sell.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: TheRecusant on March 09, 2013, 04:39:42 PM
Quote from: Mithrandylan
What will +Fellay say about this?

If it is real, why has no deal been done?

I mean, per this docuмent Fellay seems to have done nothing less than completely forsake everything ABL did and stood for, and forsake everything being a traditionalist stands for.

If that's his position, what's taking so long?


Because Rome did not accept it. Irony of ironies, Rome - apparently in the person of B.XVI himself - replied that the docuмent was too ambiguous, that he needed to make his acceptance of Vatican II clearer and more explicit, and they gave him something to sign which even he couldn't, which didn't even leave him a fig leaf of respectability.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: ancien regime on March 09, 2013, 04:50:13 PM
Thought I would post the translation of the notes on both threads:

Quote

Notes--
(1) Cf. the new formula for the Profession of the faith and the oath of fidelity for assuming a charge exercised in the name of the Church, 1989; cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 749,750, §2; 752; CCEO canon 597; 598, 1 & 2; 599.

(2) Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis encyclical.

(3) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor aeternus, Dz. 3070.

(4) Council of Trent, Dz. 1501: “All saving truth and rules of conduct (Matt. 16:15) are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves,[3] the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand.”

(5) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 8 & 9, Denz. 4209-4210.

(6) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3020: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding "Therefore […] let the understanding, the knowledge, and wisdom of individuals as of all, of one man as of the whole Church, grow and progress strongly with the passage of the ages and the centuries; but let it be solely in its own genus, namely in the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.'' [Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, 23, 3].”

(7) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3011; Anti-modernist Oath, no. 4; Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Dz 3886; Vatican Council II, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.

(8) For example, like the teaching on the sacraments and the episcopacy in Lumen Gentium, no. 21.

(9) There is a parallel in history in the Decree for the Armenians of the Council of Florence, where the correction of the instruments was indicated as the matter of the sacrament of the Order. Nevertheless theologians legitimately discussed, even after this decree, the accuracy of such an assertion. Pope Pius XII finally resolved the issue in another way.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: sspxbvm on March 09, 2013, 05:18:54 PM
Quote
7 We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and of the Sacraments celebrated with the intent of doing what the Church does with the rites referred in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramental Ritual legitimately promulgated by popes Paul VI and Jean-Paul II.


So, they accept the "Abomination of desolation standing in the Holy place" ?  And every priest got one of these Cor Unums? Are they all standing with Bishop Fellay on this?
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: St Gertrude on March 09, 2013, 06:03:22 PM
Quote from: Telesphorus
They have to wait until there's no risk of a large Exodus of priests and faithful.

Also, it seems likely Bishop Fellay was being asked to make some humiliating public concessions that would have made the "sell" of the deal that much harder to sell.


Maybe I am dense, but wait for what, exactly? :scared2:
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: B from A on March 09, 2013, 07:52:24 PM
Quote from: Cristera
Number CCLXIX (269)  8 September 2012

APRIL AMBIGUITY


In mid-April there was submitted to Rome on behalf of the Society of St Pius X a confidential docuмent, doctrinal in nature, of which it was said that it laid out Catholic principles that all the SSPX authorities could subscribe to. In mid-June Rome rejected the docuмent as basis for a Rome-SSPX agreement. Thank goodness, because it contained a supremely dangerous ambiguity: in brief, does an expression like “The Magisterium of all time” mean up until 1962, or up until 2012 ? It is all the difference between the religion of God, and the religion of God as changed by modern man, i.e. the religion of man. Here are some of the principles, as summarized for SSPX authorities:--

“1/ ...Tradition must be the criterion and guide for understanding the teachings of Vatican II. 2/ So the statements of Vatican II and of the post-conciliar papal teaching with regard to ecuмenism and interreligious dialogue or religious liberty can only be understood in the light of Tradition complete and uninterrupted, 3/ in a manner that does not clash with the truths previously taught by the Church’s Magisterium, 4/ without accepting any interpretation opposed to, or breaking with, Tradition and that Magisterium...”.

The 1962 or 2012 ambiguity lurks here in the words “Tradition” and “Magisterium”. Are these two words being taken to exclude doctrines of the Council (1962-1965) and its aftermath, or are they including them? Any follower of Tradition will read the passage so as to exclude them, because he knows that there is a huge difference between the Church and the Newchurch. But any believer in Vatican II can so read the passage as to be able to pretend that there is a seamless continuity between the Church before and after the Council. Let us take a closer look at how the Traditionalist and the Conciliarist can each read the passage in his own way.

Firstly, the Traditional reading:-- “1/ Pre-conciliar Tradition has got to be the measure and judge of Council teachings (and not the other way round). 2/ So Conciliar and post-conciliar teaching must all be sifted according to the whole of Traditional teaching prior to the Council, 3/ so as not to clash with anything that the Magisterium taught prior to the Council, 4/ accepting no interpretation or text that breaks with the pre-conciliar Tradition or Magisterium.”

Secondly, the Conciliar reading (certainly that of the Romans in charge of today’s Church) :-- “1/ Tradition from before and after the Council (because there is no difference) must be judge of the Council. 2/ So Conciliar teaching on controversial subjects must be sifted according to the Church’s one complete pre- and post-conciliar Tradition (because that alone is the “completeness” of Tradition), 3/ so as not to clash with the Church’s pre- or post-conciliar Magisterium (because they teach the same), 4/ accepting no interpretation that breaks with pre- or post-conciliar Tradition or Magisterium (because there is no break between all four of them).”

This Conciliar reading means that the Council will be judged by the Council, which means of course that it will be acquitted. On the contrary by the Traditional reading the Council is utterly condemned. Ambiguity is deadly for the Faith. Somebody here is meaning to play games with our Catholic minds. Let whoever it is be anathema !

Kyrie eleison.



(emphasis added)
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Francisco on March 09, 2013, 11:23:25 PM
Quote from: Nishant
This preamble seems to be very much along the lines of the protocol of May 5, 1988, with a few additional provisions on the relationship between Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church.


For years the long time Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, Mgr. Camille Perl, kept saying that the May 5th, 1988 Protocol was still on offer to the SSPX. I think I once read somewhere that he even said so to G.R.E.C.

The whole problem is that Bp Felliar was making out that he was obtaining some sort of sweetheart deal with Rome, when in fact it was no more than an amended version of the 1988 Protocol that Abp Lefebvre accepted on 5th May, 1988 but repudiated the very next day.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: 1st Mansion Tenant on March 10, 2013, 12:06:35 AM
Quote from: John Grace
Quote from: Matto
I wonder if my SSPX priest will say anything about this.


They might dismiss it as an internet rumour. On a serious note I doubt priests will mention it.


The ones I have heard in the past year have said nothing. Not even mentioned in passing +W ejection, or anything else. Those without access to the internet are kept in the dark and told nothing at all.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Mithrandylan on March 10, 2013, 06:33:07 AM
Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant
Quote from: John Grace
Quote from: Matto
I wonder if my SSPX priest will say anything about this.


They might dismiss it as an internet rumour. On a serious note I doubt priests will mention it.


The ones I have heard in the past year have said nothing. Not even mentioned in passing +W ejection, or anything else. Those without access to the internet are kept in the dark and told nothing at all.


This has been my experience as well.  
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: stgobnait on March 10, 2013, 06:38:47 AM
same here  :scratchchin:
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: s2srea on March 10, 2013, 10:36:41 AM
So, to confirm- can it be confirmed that this was something Bishop Fellay & Co. came up with? Not something they were presented with and asked to amend? I know its hard to 'confirm' anything like this...
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: drivocek on March 10, 2013, 12:20:05 PM
Appears that Fellay et alia were attempting a sell out but fortunately Rome rejected as "too ambiguous."  The resistance is becoming more informed.

                   Miserere nobis.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: 1st Mansion Tenant on March 12, 2013, 02:27:29 PM
Could someone please clarify for me: Did +F actually agree to and sign this original preamble, and then they pulled a switch and asked him to agree to something more, and he refused? But he did actually  sign this first preamble? Sorry, but I am a bit confused and want to make sure I understand correctly.  :confused1:
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: PAT317 on March 12, 2013, 02:56:32 PM
Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant
Could someone please clarify for me: Did +F actually agree to and sign this original preamble, and then they pulled a switch and asked him to agree to something more, and he refused? But he did actually  sign this first preamble? Sorry, but I am a bit confused and want to make sure I understand correctly.  :confused1:


How could you be confused?   :fryingpan:  Everything from Menzingen is so crystal clear!

My understanding, which may not be right, is that, after the priests/bishops at the Albano meeting overwhelmingly rejected the original Doctrinal Preamble (http://sedevacantist.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1038&view=next) (DP) given by Card. Levada (see GB newsletter below), +F did not sign that one.  The DP that came out recently (the subject of this thread) is a modified version that he sent in.  [e.g. the original had something about the New Catechism, which this one doesn't, right? (I can't keep track of all these details.)]   At least, that is my understanding.... FWIW.   :confused1:

You could listen to +F's long conference in Canada, Dec. 2012, or read the transcript (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=22232&min=45&num=5) to see what he said about the sequence of events.

(http://radiocristiandad.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/district2bsuperior2527s2bletter2bnovember2b20112bscreen2bcapture.png)

Quote from: Fr. Morgan
The meeting of the Society’s superiors took place at Albano on 7-8th October as announced in last month’s newsletter, and Bishop Fellay did indeed use this opportunity to discuss the ‘Doctrinal Preamble’ text as received from Cardinal Levada on 14th September.

The first day of the meeting covered three issues: an overview of the contacts with Rome since 1987; a summary of the doctrinal discussions; and an oral exposition of the Doctrinal Preamble docuмent itself.

With regard to the doctrinal talks it was disappointing to note that the Roman commission failed to acknowledge the break between traditional and conciliar teachings. Instead it insisted upon the ‘hermeneutic (interpretation) of continuity,’ stating that the new teachings included and improved the old!

It was interesting to learn that the 14th September meeting had not touched upon the doctrinal talks at all, but rather was dedicated to expounding possible practical solutions for the Society.

So it was perhaps not surprising to learn that the proposed doctrinal basis for any canonical agreement in fact contained all those elements which the Society has consistently rejected, including acceptance of the New Mass and of Vatican II as expressed in the New Catechism. Indeed, the docuмent itself conveys the impression that there is no crisis in the Church...

Hence the stated consensus of those in attendance was that the Doctrinal Preamble was clearly unacceptable and that the time has certainly not come to pursue any practical agreement as long as the doctrinal issues remain outstanding. It also agreed that the Society should continue its work of insisting upon the doctrinal questions in any contacts with the Roman authorities.
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: PAT317 on March 12, 2013, 03:12:55 PM
Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant
Could someone please clarify for me: Did +F actually agree to and sign this original preamble, and then they pulled a switch and asked him to agree to something more, and he refused? But he did actually  sign this first preamble? Sorry, but I am a bit confused and want to make sure I understand correctly.  :confused1:


I read again, and realized I might not have addressed another point of confusion.  

I think the sequence was this:

1. +Levada gives +F DP1 (original "Doctrinal Preamble") - Sep 2011
2. SSPX superiors at Albano reject DP1 - Oct 2011
3. +F sends DP2 (in this thread) to Rome - April 2012
4. Rome rejects DP2 (says it wants more explicit acceptance of VII & New Mass)  - June 2012

At least, that's my understanding of the official story.  Does this sound right to those who have been following it?  Again, if some brave soul wants to wade through +F's Dec 2012 Canada conference, maybe that would help?  
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Machabees on March 12, 2013, 03:39:31 PM
Fr. Morgan said,
Quote
"...Hence the stated consensus of those in attendance [SSPX Bishops and Superiors] was that the Doctrinal Preamble was clearly unacceptable and that the time has certainly not come to pursue any practical agreement as long as the doctrinal issues remain outstanding. It also agreed that the Society should continue its work of insisting upon the doctrinal  questions in any contacts with the Roman authorities."[/b]


And yet Bishop Fellay, as we have discovered, went on his own to make a purely practical agreement anyway against the advise of all of those superiors !

 :facepalm:
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: PAT317 on March 12, 2013, 03:57:56 PM
Quote from: Machabees
Fr. Morgan said,
Quote
"...Hence the stated consensus of those in attendance [SSPX Bishops and Superiors] was that the Doctrinal Preamble was clearly unacceptable and that the time has certainly not come to pursue any practical agreement as long as the doctrinal issues remain outstanding. It also agreed that the Society should continue its work of insisting upon the doctrinal  questions in any contacts with the Roman authorities."


And yet Bishop Fellay, as we have discovered, went on his own to make a purely practical agreement anyway against the advise of all of those superiors !

 :facepalm:


Yes, and yet some of those same superiors still defend him anyway.

And also there was the quote from +F after Fr. Morgan's letter came out (for a day), "'We have not rejected the text which was presented to us by the Holy See (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=16097&min=40&num=10),' said Fellay."

Why would anybody be confused?   :thinking:
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Frances on March 12, 2013, 04:46:03 PM
If this docuмent has not been rescinded, as I assume it has not, what then is the difference between the SSPX and the FSSP or the "extraordinary" rite?  No difference exists at the level of doctrine.  Bishop Fellay and the SSPX behind him accept the novus ordo , the new catechism,
Ecuмenism, Assisi, etc. as merely choices from whîch Catholics are free to choose.  I like the Latin Mass, you lile the clown mass.  Let's be nice and agree to disagree agreeably...

My question is  the same as Our Lord's.  "Were there not ten traditional priests ordained?  Only one remains true to the Faith.  Where are the nine?" (Paraphrase concerning the 10 lepers)

Where are the faithful?  God knows, but it appears the Faith has not been transmitted despite the enormous sacrifices of rhe parents and grandparents in the 60s and 70s.  
Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: Telesphorus on March 12, 2013, 05:43:20 PM
Quote
Where are the faithful?


I think there are many people who know something is wrong who don't openly support the resistance.

To answer the question though, I think the problem is the priests are acting as pied pipers.  

In any group there's always going to be a percentage of sheep trying to escape into more liberal pastures.

The serious problems come when the priests start to encourage them in that direction while discouraging tradition.

Such people are effectively anti-Catholics, and even create an anti-Catholic atmosphere in church.  As Pope Pius IX said, liberal Catholics are the worst enemies of the Church.

Title: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked docuмent for the sellout
Post by: 1st Mansion Tenant on March 12, 2013, 10:23:42 PM
Wow, a person can learn so much here. Thanks you guys for explaining.