Author Topic: Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout  (Read 7338 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online 1st Mansion Tenant

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1736
  • Reputation: +1413/-123
  • Gender: Female
Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
« Reply #30 on: March 10, 2013, 12:06:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

    Online Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3609
    • Reputation: +4206/-328
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #31 on: March 10, 2013, 06:33:07 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.  
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com


    Offline stgobnait

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1346
    • Reputation: +941/-56
    • Gender: Female
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #32 on: March 10, 2013, 06:38:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • same here  :scratchchin:

    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5020
    • Reputation: +3827/-28
    • Gender: Male
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #33 on: March 10, 2013, 10:36:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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...

    Offline drivocek

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 172
    • Reputation: +130/-0
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #34 on: March 10, 2013, 12:20:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.


    Online 1st Mansion Tenant

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1736
    • Reputation: +1413/-123
    • Gender: Female
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #35 on: March 12, 2013, 02:27:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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:

    Offline PAT317

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 353
    • Reputation: +412/-72
    • Gender: Male
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #36 on: March 12, 2013, 02:56:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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 (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 to see what he said about the sequence of events.



    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 document 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 document 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.

    Offline PAT317

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 353
    • Reputation: +412/-72
    • Gender: Male
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #37 on: March 12, 2013, 03:12:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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?  


    Offline Machabees

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 826
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #38 on: March 12, 2013, 03:39:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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:

    Offline PAT317

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 353
    • Reputation: +412/-72
    • Gender: Male
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #39 on: March 12, 2013, 03:57:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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,' said Fellay."

    Why would anybody be confused?   :thinking:

    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2239/-21
    • Gender: Female
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #40 on: March 12, 2013, 04:46:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If this document 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,
    Ecumenism, 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.  
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12714
    • Reputation: +7/-12
    • Gender: Male
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #41 on: March 12, 2013, 05:43:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.


    Online 1st Mansion Tenant

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1736
    • Reputation: +1413/-123
    • Gender: Female
    Fellays doctrinal declaration leaked document for the sellout
    « Reply #42 on: March 12, 2013, 10:23:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Wow, a person can learn so much here. Thanks you guys for explaining.


     

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