Author Topic: Mgr Mller: No more talks with SSPX (Read 3840 times)

Santo Subito · « **Reply #15 on:** October 04, 2012, 07:24:44 PM »

From Fr. Z introducing the story...

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/10/prefect-of-cdf-no-more-talks-with-sspx/

Quote

Do you remember when I suggested that, if the SSPX continued to dictate terms to the Holy Father, one day his patience would end and they would wake up on the wrong side of the fence?

And at the end:

Quote

Sad.

From the combox:

Quote

Sad, but if the SSPX demands a retraction of VII, in whole or part, unsurprising. That would never have been on offer. It all boils down to authority: did the council, and more specifically the pope(s) who gave their assent to the docuмents that came out of the council, have the authority to do so? If so, we may not like it (and the SSPX would hardly have been alone in that, nor would the Holy father object to that assesment, I daresay), but we have to acknowledge these docuмents as belonging to the Catholic Faith. Denying that is denying papal authority, and no pope will ever negotiate based on that. The SSPX may dislike VII, they may offer their own interpretation of the docuмents, they may say it was chokeful of bad calls, but the one thing they will have to admit for regularization is that VII was a valid expression of the faith.

And sadly, they seem to have said as much that they refuse to admit that. And by the sound of things Abp Muller, presumably in agreement with BXVI, is making the same point.

Quote

Newman wrote that we often have to wait–a long time–for the Church to digest a Council. Perhaps in 50 years, the gaps will narrow, and the breach healed.

50 years are a blink of an eye for the Lord.

Quote

They had it coming. All the “leaks” inside the SSPX, all the “hard talk” (again “Eternal Rome ” vs “Modern Rome”), the posturing, the innuendo, the psy-ops against Bp. Fellay when he appeared to be “soft”, etc. etc. …
They have shown that the SSPX has a schismatic mentality and, I am afraid, they are heretics also regarding the infallibility of the Church. To all the sane and pious people in the SSPX: jump ship! Now!

Quote

I have never understood how one can claim to be in unity with the pope, but then not respect his authority?

I am an adult convert to the church. When I prepared to enter, there were areas of the church’s teaching that I didn’t feel comfortable with – namely the Marian dogmas. But I believed, as I still believe, that the Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ and that the Bishop of Rome is Christ’s Vicar on Earth. As such, I pushed down my pride and ego and opened myself up by faith to be taught and to learn to believe what the Magisteriam of the Church instructs.

I believe that this is what the SSPX should do. If you claim to be united with the See of Peter, submit yourself to his authority and teaching. To do less is not unity, it is protestantism.

Yes, I know this is overly simplified – but it is my opinion.

Roland Deschain · « **Reply #16 on:** October 04, 2012, 07:58:40 PM »

Quote from: Santo Subito

From Fr. Z introducing the story...

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/10/prefect-of-cdf-no-more-talks-with-sspx/

Quote
Do you remember when I suggested that, if the SSPX continued to dictate terms to the Holy Father, one day his patience would end and they would wake up on the wrong side of the fence?

And at the end:

Quote
Sad.

From the combox:

Quote
Sad, but if the SSPX demands a retraction of VII, in whole or part, unsurprising. That would never have been on offer. It all boils down to authority: did the council, and more specifically the pope(s) who gave their assent to the docuмents that came out of the council, have the authority to do so? If so, we may not like it (and the SSPX would hardly have been alone in that, nor would the Holy father object to that assesment, I daresay), but we have to acknowledge these docuмents as belonging to the Catholic Faith. Denying that is denying papal authority, and no pope will ever negotiate based on that. The SSPX may dislike VII, they may offer their own interpretation of the docuмents, they may say it was chokeful of bad calls, but the one thing they will have to admit for regularization is that VII was a valid expression of the faith.

And sadly, they seem to have said as much that they refuse to admit that. And by the sound of things Abp Muller, presumably in agreement with BXVI, is making the same point.

Quote
Newman wrote that we often have to wait–a long time–for the Church to digest a Council. Perhaps in 50 years, the gaps will narrow, and the breach healed.

50 years are a blink of an eye for the Lord.

Quote
They had it coming. All the “leaks” inside the SSPX, all the “hard talk” (again “Eternal Rome ” vs “Modern Rome”), the posturing, the innuendo, the psy-ops against Bp. Fellay when he appeared to be “soft”, etc. etc. …
They have shown that the SSPX has a schismatic mentality and, I am afraid, they are heretics also regarding the infallibility of the Church. To all the sane and pious people in the SSPX: jump ship! Now!

Quote
I have never understood how one can claim to be in unity with the pope, but then not respect his authority?

I am an adult convert to the church. When I prepared to enter, there were areas of the church’s teaching that I didn’t feel comfortable with – namely the Marian dogmas. But I believed, as I still believe, that the Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ and that the Bishop of Rome is Christ’s Vicar on Earth. As such, I pushed down my pride and ego and opened myself up by faith to be taught and to learn to believe what the Magisteriam of the Church instructs.

I believe that this is what the SSPX should do. If you claim to be united with the See of Peter, submit yourself to his authority and teaching. To do less is not unity, it is protestantism.

Yes, I know this is overly simplified – but it is my opinion.

Who cares what Vatican Agent Fr.Z has to say about anything? He should stick to gourmet cooking.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #17 on:** October 04, 2012, 08:58:42 PM »

Radio Cristiandad reports on a conference in Nova Friburgo, Brazil where + Williamson speculates on BXVI's intentions in reaching an agreement with the SSPX. His Excellency states: "I think that there is danger of an agreement before the end of the year, I'm not saying that there will be. But I'm saying there is danger (risk) that there will be".

I found this statement particularly interesting because the Vatican just announced that the pope has already completed his new encyclical on Faith but it will not be made public until January 2013 because he wants to release first his 3rd volume on the life of Christ that is also ready. It doesn't make sense to me to begin the "Year of Faith" in October and wait until January to publish it.

I think the Vatican is waiting to get the SSPX in the bag before they publish it. I also think the new 1962 Missal was delayed for the same reason. It is possible, that the encyclical on Faith, for the "Year of Faith" may be the end of a "reintegrated" SSPX.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #18 on:** October 04, 2012, 08:59:53 PM »

Not sure about you guys, but things sure are pretty darn depressing these days.

Muller is pompously lecturing Trads in the seat of Torquemada.

BXVI is pushing on the revolution.

The Society is in the midst of cινιℓ ωαr.

Humanly speaking there is less than zero hope.

I can see how some Trads can be prone to despair and tempted to lose the Faith. Humanly speaking the Gates of Hell have pretty much prevailed.

magdalena · « **Reply #19 on:** October 04, 2012, 09:17:57 PM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

Humanly speaking there is less than zero hope.

I can see how some Trads can be prone to despair and tempted to lose the Faith. Humanly speaking the Gates of Hell have pretty much prevailed.

But wasn't this foretold by Our Lady at Fatima? Does anyone have the exact words, and when and where?