Author Topic: Interview with Bishop Bernard Fellay (Read 1794 times)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **on:** December 04, 2013, 12:41:00 PM »

http://www.dici.org/en/docuмents/interview-with-bishop-bernard-fellay-menzingen-november-2013/

Part of the interview:

A modernist pope?

I used the word “modernist;” I think that it was not understood by everybody. Perhaps I should have said a modernist in his actions. Once again, he is not a modernist in the absolute, theoretical sense: a man who develops a whole coherent system; that coherence does not exist. There are lines, for example, the evolutionary line, which is precisely connected with action. When the pope says that he wants a haziness in doctrine, when doubt is introduced, and not just haziness, but doubt, going so far as to say that even the great leaders of the faith, like Moses, allowed room for doubt…. I know of only one doubt of Moses: the time when he doubted and struck the rock! Because of that the Good Lord punished him and he was not able to enter the Promised Land. Well then! I do not think that this doubt is to Moses’s credit; the rest of the time he was rather forceful in his assertions… without a doubt.

It is really surprising, this idea that there must be doubts about everything; it is very peculiar! I will not say that this is reminiscent of Descartes, but… it creates an atmosphere. And what is really dangerous is that they leave it at that in the newspapers and the media… He is to some extent the darling of the media, he is well regarded, they praise him, they showcase him, but that does not get to the bottom of the matter.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #1 on:** December 04, 2013, 01:18:33 PM »

As the saying goes: "Even the fish would not get in trouble if he kept his mouth shut".

Incredulous · « **Reply #2 on:** December 04, 2013, 01:31:20 PM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

As the saying goes: "Even the fish would not get in trouble if he kept his mouth shut".

The critical point is... what type of bait is used on the hook.

stgobnait · « **Reply #3 on:** December 04, 2013, 01:42:20 PM »

surely someone else PUT those words in his mouth...

Frances · « **Reply #4 on:** December 04, 2013, 01:45:16 PM »

:surprised:
Here again is the practical vs. prudent (non)argument. Action and words reflect the heart and mind. Faith, or lack of it, doctrine or error, reside in the mind and heart. How then, can only the actions and words of the pope be called modernist and the man himself be given the benefit of not being wholly modernist? I do not say he is not pope, but rather, that he is a thoroughly modernist pope whose actions and words must be regarded as representative of his doctrine. The doctrine Francis espouses is not in accord with Catholic Tradition. There can be no doubt that Rome has not returned to the Faith. She remains unconverted, hence dangerous to the souls entrusted to Her care. It is high time Bishop Fellay faces reality and refuses to dialogue, excuse, explain, or join in any capacity, the SSPX to the " synthesis of all heresies," modernism. It is high time Bp. Fellay admit he was duped, apologise, make restitution by reinstating those unjustly expelled, formally retract his ambiguous and heretical docuмents, and step down as Superior General. If he continues on his present course, the SSPX will become just another face in the conservative crowd. The salvation of H.E.'s soul and that of the souls in his care depend upon it.

Machabees · « **Reply #5 on:** December 04, 2013, 11:09:50 PM »

Quote

Bishop Fellay said: "I used the word “modernist;” I think that it was not understood by everybody."

Quote

Bishop Fellay said: "They are not in my head."

Enough said...please.

Geremia · « **Reply #6 on:** December 05, 2013, 12:06:08 AM »

über-mentevacantism

Geremia · « **Reply #7 on:** December 05, 2013, 12:13:06 AM »

Doesn't Bp. Fellay know that the philosophical root of Modernism is agnosticism (i.e., doubt)? This is at the beginning of Pascendi, ¶6!

JPaul · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 2013, 07:37:54 AM »

Quote

I used the word “modernist;” I think that it was not understood by everybody. Perhaps I should have said a modernist in his actions. Once again, he is not a modernist in the absolute, theoretical sense: a man who develops a whole coherent system; that coherence does not exist.

Of course no one understands the thinking and speech of the Bishop and what he says, that is the usual boilerplate Menzingen by which all responsibility is avoided..
What does this fellow mean that there is no coherence in the Pope's modernism???
He is a classic and firmly formed modernist who acts according to his system of belief. He is very consistent.
Bishop Fellay needs to read Pacendi a few more times and stop confusing and misleading the faithful with his own modernized parsing.

Perhaps he needs to be banned from Cathinfo.

B from A · « **Reply #9 on:** December 05, 2013, 07:51:35 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Perhaps he needs to be banned from Cathinfo.

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote
I used the word “modernist;” I think that it was not understood by everybody. Perhaps I should have said a modernist in his actions. Once again, he is not a modernist in the absolute, theoretical sense: a man who develops a whole coherent system; that coherence does not exist.

Of course no one understands the thinking and speech of the Bishop and what he says, that is the usual boilerplate Menzingen by which all responsibility is avoided..
What does this fellow mean that there is no coherence in the Pope's modernism???
He is a classic and firmly formed modernist who acts according to his system of belief. He is very consistent.
Bishop Fellay needs to read Pacendi a few more times and stop confusing and misleading the faithful with his own modernized parsing.

Quote

Q: What do you think would be Archbishop Lefebvre’s assessment of the crisis as things stand in 2008?

Tissier de Mallerais: He would denounce not only liberalism — that was the case with Paul VI — but modernism, which is the case of Benedict XVI: a true modernist with the whole theory of up-to-date modernism! It is so serious that I cannot express my horror.

I wonder if Bp. Tissier meant a "whole coherent system"?

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #10 on:** December 05, 2013, 09:33:49 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote
I used the word “modernist;” I think that it was not understood by everybody. Perhaps I should have said a modernist in his actions. Once again, he is not a modernist in the absolute, theoretical sense: a man who develops a whole coherent system; that coherence does not exist.

Of course no one understands the thinking and speech of the Bishop and what he says, that is the usual boilerplate Menzingen by which all responsibility is avoided..
What does this fellow mean that there is no coherence in the Pope's modernism???
He is a classic and firmly formed modernist who acts according to his system of belief. He is very consistent.
Bishop Fellay needs to read Pacendi a few more times and stop confusing and misleading the faithful with his own modernized parsing.

Perhaps he needs to be banned from Cathinfo.

Both, Francis and +Fellay are masters of ambiguity.

Francis is “a modernist in his actions...”
+Fellay is a traditionalist “in his actions…”

Charlemagne · « **Reply #11 on:** December 05, 2013, 09:42:28 AM »

This might be a stretch for some, but Bp. Fellay reminds me of Fulton Sheen. He was probably once staunch in his defense of the Faith, but now he finds himself desperately trying to defend the indefensible, and many consequently lose respect for him rapidly. I know that I did - for both of them.

Incredulous · « **Reply #12 on:** December 05, 2013, 05:34:38 PM »

Quote from: Charlemagne

This might be a stretch for some, but Bp. Fellay reminds me of Fulton Sheen. He was probably once staunch in his defense of the Faith, but now he finds himself desperately trying to defend the indefensible, and many consequently lose respect for him rapidly. I know that I did - for both of them.

If you go to the website: The Point

You'll find a treasure trove of good Catholic articles, which include Father Feeney's review of the US Catholic Church in the 1950s.

He does an analysis on Bishop Sheen's worldly compromises which cut to the bone. I fear Father Feeney was correct in his assessment of how our clergy assisted the protestant disease of Americanism.