Author Topic: Letter of Three SSPX Bishops to Bishop Fellay - PDF (Read 116149 times)

LordPhan · « **Reply #80 on:** May 11, 2012, 11:02:37 AM »

Quote from: VinnyF

Querite

Letter of the Three Bishops

When I first heard about them, I found it really hard to believe they were authentic. It did not seem like something the three bishops would do .. that is, write a joint letter as opposed to individual private letters that would be much less prone to a leak. However, after speaking to some folks who would know, I now believe they are authentic.

It has caused a lot of anxiety among the clergy, not so much in the content, but in the fact that it has become public and has made a spectacle of something so delicate and important. And, absent any information to the contrary, Bp Williamson will probably get the credit for the leak, assuming the same sort of thing happened as with his “leaked” communication with Bp Fellay last year.

That said, I was moved by Bp Fellay’s justification of moving forward.

To read your letter, one seriously wonders if you still believe that the visible Church whose seat is at Rome is indeed the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, a Church horribly disfigured, to be sure, a planta pedis usque ad verticem capitis, but a Church that in spite of all still has as its head Our Lord Jesus Christ. One gets the impression that you have been so scandalized that you no longer accept that it can still be the true Church. For you, it would seem to be a question whether Benedict XVI is still the legitimate pope. And if he is, there is a question as to whether Jesus Christ can still speak through him. If the pope expresses a legitimate will concerning us which is good and which does not order anything contrary to the commandments of God, have we the right to neglect or to dismiss this will? Otherwise, on what principle do you base your actions? Do you not believe that if Our Lord commands us, He will also give us the means to carry on our work?

In essence, if you don’t believe that Benedict is the pope, you have no horse in this race. If you do, then you must believe that Christ may still speak through him and that he is the Vicar of Christ’s church. So if the SSPX wants to be successful in its mission to restore the faith, it may best do that using some of the tools that church may provide a canonically recognized Society, while holding firm to the weapons it has always used to combat modernism. If the “deal” leads to a compromise of the faith, then we need to go where the true faith is, wherever that may be.

If you and Bishop Fellay are saying that Jesus Christ comes down and physically possesses the Pope to speak something new that has never been heard before then the two of you would be in heresy.

If you are saying that in his duty as Apostolic Successor of Peter he 'speaks for' figureatively by faithfully upholding tradition(When he actually does this, the current Pope has not) then that would be accurate.

This sounds quite like Popalatry.

Schism means you say "The Pope is not my leader" or "I am not in communion with THOSE(Another group of Catholics) Catholics!"

Obedience is a totally seperate issue. You cannot be in Schism for disobeying any order. The Pope cannot change this, it's origins are theological not Canonical. Though this is the way it is in Canon Law aswell.

If you never commit a mortal sin, you cannot be excommunicated, nor schismatic.

So long as you are in the right, you cannot be a schismatic or excommunicated. Any canonical punishment becomes null and void ipso facto. Archbishop Lefebre knew this.

It is a danger to my faith to have anything to do with the modernist heretics or to be influenced by them in any way whatsoever.

When you and Bishop Fellay, with all due respect if he should as it looks like he will, make a deal, I will pity you when the Cardinals come to visit, and they will because they CAN!

Cardinals have Jurisdiction EVERYWHERE. Any Chapel at any time they may enter and say mass. For now they would not dare enter our chapels.

Also I should note that under Canon Law the Pope can change at his whim any Canonical Structure.

VinnyF · « **Reply #81 on:** May 11, 2012, 11:16:15 AM »

Quote from: LordPhan

If you and Bishop Fellay are saying that Jesus Christ comes down and physically possesses the Pope to speak something new that has never been heard before then the two of you would be in heresy.

If you are saying that in his duty as Apostolic Successor of Peter he 'speaks for' figureatively by faithfully upholding tradition(When he actually does this, the current Pope has not) then that would be accurate.

This sounds quite like Popalatry.

Dear Lord,

While I certainly cannot speak for Bp Fellay, I'm not insinuating that Christ "comes down" from anywhere. The reference here is to the simple and basic belief that we all as Catholics share that the Pope possesses the charism of infallibility when exercised according to the norms as declared in the First Vatican Council. That is how Christ MAY speak through the Pope. Nothing heretic or popalatric was intended.

John Grace · « **Reply #82 on:** May 11, 2012, 12:01:57 PM »

http://www.dici.org/en/news/communique-from-the-general-house-of-the-society-of-saint-pius-x-may-11-2012/

Quote

Communiqué from the General House of the Society of Saint Pius X (May 11, 2012)
11-05-2012
Filed under From Tradition, News
An exchange of private letters between the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X and the three other bishops was circulated on the Internet on May 9, 2012. This behavior is reprehensible. The person who breached the confidentiality of this internal correspondence committed a serious sin.
Its publication will encourage those who are fomenting division; the Society of Saint Pius X asks its priests and lay faithful not to respond except by redoubling their prayers, so that only the will of God may be done, for the good of the Church and the salvation of souls.
Menzingen, May 11, 2012

A fight back from the Lord Superior General, Prime Wizard and Mr. Second Assistant.

Three of the four Bishops have remained faithful to Archbishop Lefebvre so where is this division? There is unity against a sell out.

LordPhan · « **Reply #83 on:** May 11, 2012, 12:40:28 PM »

My Friend Nicholas has made a very good post on the blog Durendal and given me permission to post it on CathInfo.

Quote

S.S.P.X Regularization?

And we must not waver for one moment either in not being with those who are in the process of betraying us. Some people are always admiring the grass in the neighbor's field. Instead of looking to their friends, to the Church's defenders, to those fighting on the battlefield, they look to our enemies on the other side. "After all, we must be charitable, we must be kind, we must not be divisive, after all, they are celebrating the Tridentine Mass, they are not as bad as everyone says" —but THEY ARE BETRAYING US —betraying us! They are shaking hands with the Church's destroyers. They are shaking hands with people holding modernist and liberal ideas condemned by the Church. So they are doing the devil's work.

Archbishop Lefebvre's address to his priests given in Econe, Switzerland on September 6, 1990

Little by little one gives up the fight and ends by accepting the situation. Everything in Campos still looks traditional, no doubt, so that the people see nothing different. The shrewder ones among them, however, note the tendency of the priests to speak more often and respectfully about news from Rome, omitting their past warnings and ignoring the present day deviations. To become accustomed to this situation and to cease to correct it is a great danger.

Bp. Fellay - Superior General's Letter to Friends & Benefactors #63. January 6, 2003
I started writing this post in September 2010, but decided to set it aside, deciding that it was all rumour and innuendo. Yet it seems to me that all the speculation and rumour having currency in traditionalist circles this time is different, and therefore does warrant some commentary for the precise reason that Bp. Fellay elucidated in 2003: "to become accustomed to this situation and cease to correct it is a great danger."

And indeed, setting aside the speculation for a moment, can anyone honestly say that even absent a deal, the S.S.P.X has had a tendency to "speak more often and respectfully about news from Rome" in recent years? Can anyone honestly say that the leaders of the Society have not "prudently" softened their rhetoric when it came to speaking against "present day deviations"? So even if there is not a "deal" before the end of May, as is the latest rumour, in my view it is appropriate to partake of sounding the alarm bells in this re-enactment of the 1960s and 70s (as it seems to me things are playing out)?

I've not had time to read a tenth of what is out there on the impending "deal" with Rome, but what I have read makes it clear beyond any reasonable doubt in my mind that the sellout is finally here. All the recent communiqués and conferences given by those in power certainly lead to this conclusion. Certainly the weak "denial" from Menzingen that this is "a process" gives one little hope that a purely practical agreement is NOT in the offing. Fr. Rostand's recent letter stating "Let us remember that it is to our Superior General, and only to him, that has been entrusted by the law of the Church and the will of Archbishop Lefebvre the delicate task of our relations with Rome" perhaps does not indicate in itself that there will be a regularization -- but it certainly indicates that such a thing can happen suddenly and without input or objection from anyone.

Reasders may or may not have seen the translation of Fr. Pfluger's recent conference: http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=9296&st=0 the summary at Rorate Caeli seems to be accurate, and the salient points would be that:

(1) Events of the past year have prompted Bishop Fellay to place aside the principle of “No practical solution without doctrinal agreement”;

(2) Recent weeks have revealed that the Pope is so much interested in a canonical solution for the Society that he is ready to seal a deal, even if the Society does not recognize the disputed texts of Vatican II and the New Mass ... Under these circuмstances the Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, does not consider it possible to reject the Pope’s proposal. It would be tantamount to a lapse into Sedevacantism (i.e. anyone who disagrees is a sedevacantist);

(3) The crisis is over ... the wish of young priests to say the Old Mass – has become unstoppable, despite intimidation and oppression. In fact, this movement is now so strong that the Fraternity will be able to resist attacks on Tradition from modernist Bishops.

It seems inescapable that Bp. Fellay is intent on raising the white flag. We have seen this play out in Le Barroux, F.S.S.P., Campos, Institut du Bon Pasteur, etc. etc. ad nauseum. We know what will happen. Again, I would point out how the S.S.P.X has already softened its position before even being "accepted" ... are we to believe that the S.S.P.X will become MORE hardline and more openly so after being given its gilded cage? It will be a huge disaster for the Faith and tradition precisely because ALMOST EVERYONE WILL GO ALONG WITH IT. This truly is a replay in miniature of the 1950s/60s/70s. Catholics will again have their faith taken away bit by bit and who will stand against it?

Many have been arguing that to raise such concerns and "indulge" in speculation is wrong, and only leads to divisions. No doubt, those who were uncomfortable with changes in the 1960s were accused of the same. Is it better to sit and do nothing? Maybe sounding the alarms will do no good, but I would rather know that I did SOMETHING no matter how insignificant. What else can we do other than complain? I am open to suggestions ...

Posted by Nicholas D.C. Wansbutter

http://rencesvals.blogspot.ca/

John Grace · « **Reply #84 on:** May 11, 2012, 01:28:17 PM »

'Pius XII' A Google translation from the original in German. Evidence suggests 'Pius XII' is the Menzingen lawyer, Maximilian Krah.

http://www.kreuz.net/article.15174.html

Quote

# 5 Pius XII 18:09:57 | Friday, 11 May 2012
Murx, that you can benefit. Based on your Sedisvakantismus you must be against the agreement. But - Hare, you are wrong! - The SSPX has always claimed to be Pope and Pope recognized the ordinations of the rest of the church forever. Now it's about the internal coherence of the argument: If Pope is the Pope and the Church, the Church, then you can reject an offer for regularization, provided that no deviation from the faith demands? No, can not you. Unless it is also the Sedisvakantisten. Bishop Fellay is not exactly the wants and the other three do not seem to understand. Bishop Fellay is so coherent and consistent, the other three do not. Therefore, he will prevail in the end.

http://www.kreuz.net/reader.2954.html

Quote

The SSPX has never been sedisvakantistisch. Therefore they can not refuse regularization, if it is not associated with a call for an abandonment of the faith. An argument that the "orthodoxy" of the Holy See, but the condition is one of subordination makes the SSPX to the Super Holy See, which is addressed to the Pope. This is schismatic or sedisvakantistisch, but not Catholic. The General of the SSPX sees the very precise, while the three bishops argue, unfortunately as Protestants.