Author Topic: New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated  (Read 5062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ecclesia Militans

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 984
  • Reputation: +14/-35
New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
« on: May 07, 2013, 07:26:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • May 1988 Protocol signed by Archbishop Lefebvre:

    “We declare that we recognize the validity of the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing what the Church does, and according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Rituals of the Sacraments promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.”

    April 2012 Doctrinal Declaration of Bishop Fellay:

    “We declare that we recognize the validity of the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing what the Church does, and according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Rituals of the Sacraments legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.”

    “Legitimately” is the one word that differentiates the clause in the Protocol formulated by Rome in 1988 in regards to the New Rite of Mass (i.e., Novus Ordo Missae) from the respective clause of the Doctrinal Declaration formulated by Bishop Fellay in 2012. At first glance, it may not seem like a big deal, but further analysis will show that the addition of this one word actually presents a world of difference.

    Archbishop Lefebvre admitted that the New Rite of Mass, when celebrated by a priest with the intention to do what the Church does while adhering strictly to its rubrics, was valid. In other words, the host and wine truly became the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord at the Words of Consecration. On the other hand, however, Archbishop Lefebvre rejected the idea that the Novus Ordo Missae was legitimate. After the Archbishop’s death in 1991, his acceptance of the validity and rejection of the legitimacy of the New Rite of Mass lived on within his Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). It was one of the things that clearly distinguished the SSPX from pseudo-traditional communities like the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter.

    Before we go on, however, it is important to understand what is meant by the term “legitimate”. We are not so much interested here in the term “legitimate” as meaning that the New Rite of Mass was promulgated according to all the necessary canonical procedures and formulas. This is a very legalistic meaning of the term and is not the meaning that has been at the very essence of the disagreement between the SSPX and Rome over the New Rite of Mass. Furthermore, it is safe to assume that canonists unanimously agree that the New Rite of Mass was at least permitted by Pope Paul VI in his Apostolic Constitution “Missale Romanum”, which was promulgated in 1969. Instead, the use of the term “legitimate” in this article is to be understand as meaning “morally lawful”. During a sermon on August 29, 1976 Archbishop Lefebvre called the New Rite of Mass a “bastard” rite, thus indicating that it is not a morally lawful rite of Holy Mother Church. It is in this sense that the SSPX and Rome have essentially disagreed in regards to the New Rite of Mass. Rome understood this well when in April 2011 the Instruction called “Universae Ecclesiae” on the application of Pope Benedict XVI`s “Summorum Pontificum” stated in Article 19 that:

    “The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.”

    This was clearly an affront towards the faithful who assisted at Masses of the priests of the SSPX. The New Rite had to be accepted as both valid and legitimate.

    In the second half of 2011 and the first half of 2012, Rome and the SSPX’s leadership were trying to iron out a doctrinal preamble or declaration on which both parties could agree. Inevitably, the position of the SSPX on the legitimacy of the New Rite of Mass could not be overlooked as this was a key point in almost two years of doctrinal discussions between Rome and the SSPX. So how then was Bishop Fellay, who eagerly wanted a canonical regularization for the SSPX, going to address this point? The answer is given in his Doctrinal Declaration of April 15, 2012, which is quoted above. By adding the word “legitimately” in front of the word “promulgated”, Bishop Fellay seems to have found a way to satisfy Rome and at the same time give himself wiggle room with his priests and faithful. For Rome, the impression would be given that the SSPX accepts the New Rite of Mass as legitimate (i.e., morally lawful); for the priests and faithful, he could defend himself by proclaiming that he never explicitly said that the New Rite of Mass is legitimate (again, morally lawful). One would need to read “more into it” in order to accuse him of accepting the New Rite of Mass as legitimate. Let us then indeed read “more into it” in order to see that Bishop Fellay’s formulation is actually quite dangerous.

    St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us in his Summa Theologica (First Part of the Second Part, Question 90) that a law is:

    “An ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community, and promulgated.”

    There are four essential elements in this definition:

    1) An ordinance of reason
    2) for the common good
    3) made by him who has care of the community
    4) promulgated.

    Two of these elements are of most interest for the purposes of this article. The first is that a law is directed to the common good. The Society of St. Pius X published a formal study called “The Problem of the Liturgical Reform” in 2001 that included a letter from Bishop Fellay to Pope John Paul II as an introduction to the study. In the chapter entitled “The Canonical Status of the Tridentine Mass”, Point #5 states that “Paul VI’s Missal does not have the character of a true law” and then goes on to state the following:

    “Even if the canonical forms abrogating or obrogating the missal revised by St. Pius V had been perfectly respected; even if it were possible to abrogate an immemorial liturgical custom, protected as well by a specific, perpetual indult, the obligatory character of Pope Paul VI’s missal would still not be established. ‘For an ordinance promulgated by a legislator to be a true law, obligatory for the community concerned, it is necessary by the nature of things that it be in itself and in relation to its object, right and just, possible to observe and truly useful to the commonweal. These qualities constitute the intrinsic reason for the existence of laws.’ And yet, Paul VI’s Missal, by reason of it serious theological defects, contributes directly to the lessening of faith, of piety, and of religious practice, as experience shows daily. For this reason, it is neither right, nor just, nor helpful to the common good. Thus it does not have the character of a true law, and cannot be obligatory.”

    We see here that the SSPX claims that grave defects in the New Rite of Mass render it against the common good, thereby making it illegitimate (morally unlawful). Therefore, it cannot compose the substance of a true law.

    The second element of the definition of most interest is that a law needs to be promulgated, that is, publicized or announced so that the subjects of the law are aware of its existence and can consequently observe it. This promulgation is the final step necessary in the establishment of a law. St. Thomas Aquinas, in the same Question 90 mentioned above, states that “promulgation is necessary for the law to obtain its force”.

    Applying what was said above to the case of the New Rite of Mass, we had Pope Paul VI promulgating the New Rite via his Apostolic Constitution “Missale Romanum” in 1969. At the very least, this Apostolic Constitution permitted priests to use the New Rite. Several years later, Archbishop Lefebvre condemned this New Rite as a “bastard” rite, thereby declaring it illegitimate (i.e., morally unlawful). In 1988, the Archbishop signed a protocol that simply said that the New Rite was promulgated (i.e., published or announced). In 2001, in the footsteps of the Archbishop, the SSPX composed a formal study in which the New Rite was declared illegitimate by reason of it not being directed towards the common good. In 2012, Bishop Fellay revives the statement of the 1988 Protocol regarding the New Rite, but adds the word “legitimately” in front of the word “promulgated”. So the question must be asked, “How can the New Rite of Mass, which was earlier condemned as illegitimate, be later declared legitimately promulgated (i.e., via the Apostolic Constitution ‘Missale Romanum’)?” Since promulgation is the last step necessary for a law to obtain its force and if that law was indeed legitimately promulgated, it would mean that the substance of the law is also legitimate. In other words, the law is truly an ordinance of reason for the common good made by the lawful authority. Consequently, its promulgation is legitimate. To make the point more clear, one cannot say that a child born out of an adulterous union was “legitimately” conceived. In an analogous manner, one cannot say that a rite of Mass born out of the union of churchmen and the modern world was “legitimately” promulgated. I hope the reader follows the line of reasoning.

    In conclusion, what we have deduced from Bishop Fellay’s statement concerning the New Rite of Mass in his April 2012 Doctrinal Declaration is that it is legitimate. Whether Bishop Fellay truly believes it is legitimate, however, is open to question. Nonetheless, his even toying with the idea is unacceptable and a scandal to Traditional Catholics. Therefore, I would most welcome a public repudiation by His Excellency of this infamous statement. And if His Excellency believes that I have in any way misunderstood him, I would most welcome any clarifications.

    http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2013/05/07/new-rite-of-mass-legitimately-promulgated/

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5065
    • Reputation: +5822/-510
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #1 on: May 07, 2013, 07:51:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Legitimate ?








    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12714
    • Reputation: +7/-12
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #2 on: May 07, 2013, 07:57:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Archbishop Lefebvre said it was a "bastard rite."


    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5065
    • Reputation: +5822/-510
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #3 on: May 07, 2013, 08:05:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A legal bastard ?   :thinking:


    The New York Times photo of the pope shows him making the Freemasonic sign of the brotherhood.






    SIGN OF A FELLOW CRAFT
    Secret Masonic handshakes, passwords, grips and signs of Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft Fellow Craft and Mason Degrees of Blue Lodge Freemasonry
     
    The sign of the Fellow Craft alludes to the penalty of the Fellow Craft obligation. The sign is made by cupping the right hand over the left breast, drawing it quickly across the body, then dropping the hand to the side. The penalty that the sign alludes to is "having my left breast torn open, my heart plucked out, and given to the wild beasts of the field and the fowls of the air."

    Explanation of the Fellow Craft sign: The action of cupping one hand over the left breast and drawing it quickly across
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8257/-638
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #4 on: May 07, 2013, 09:36:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That's a nice read, E-M.  

    It seems to me that applying the message explained by Fr. Pfeiffer in his
    Streaky Bay conference (1hr. 56min.) sheds more light on this topic.  

    Quote from: Ecclesia Militans

    ...
    In conclusion, what we have deduced from Bishop Fellay’s statement concerning the New Rite of Mass in his April 2012 Doctrinal Declaration is, that it is legitimate.

    Whether Bishop Fellay truly believes it is legitimate, however, is open to question.

    Nonetheless, his even toying with the idea is unacceptable and a scandal to Traditional Catholics. Therefore, I would most welcome a public repudiation by His Excellency of this infamous statement. And if His Excellency believes that I have in any way misunderstood him, I would most welcome any clarifications.



    It is reasonable to ask for a clarification, but I can assure you, you're not
    going to get one.  That's not how B.F. works.  He ignores the opposition,
    and he has a LONG track record of ignoring the opposition.  That's why we
    say he's a "tyrant."  

    It is reasonable to suppose that perhaps B.F. truly believes the "bastard rite"
    is legitimate, however, one must not be so simplistic as to think that is all there
    is to it.  For we have here a creature who has accepted the duplicity of B16
    and the Modernists in Rome, such that he has truck with their denial of the
    principle of non-contradiction.  (BTW in sound philosophy that means insane.)
    So, as Fr. Pfeiffer so aptly explains in Streaky Bay recently, he holds in his
    mind two mutually exclusive principles, and he pronounces the one while
    thinking the other and he pronounces the other while thinking the one.  But
    you won't find him pronouncing both at the same time, because then his
    duplicity would become obvious for all to see, and it would make him look
    stupid, or, crazy.  Take your pick.  

    So he says that the Newmass is legitimately promulgated while he thinks that
    saying so is a scandal to Traditional Catholics, but he's saying this in the light
    of tradition, and then he says that the Society is opposed to the Newmass
    while he thinks this is okay to say in the light of the teachings of Vat.II, which
    is that subjective reality allows you to SAY you're opposed to the Newmass
    even though you act otherwise as though you're in favor of it.

    In saner days this is fraud, lying, cheating, embezzling, perjury and/or duplicity.

    This is the same thing, you see, that was going on when the Oath Against
    Modernism failed to keep Modernism out of the Church, even before it was
    abandoned in 1967.  For those who took the Oath often times had a
    'mental reservation', whereby they believed the meaning of the words they
    spoke when they took the Oath were different from the meaning one might
    expect them to have, such as the meaning you get by using a dictionary, for
    example.  

    This is why DEFINITION and the CONDEMNATION OF ERROR are so important.  

    NewChurch has abandoned the condemnation of error, and the practice of
    being definitive has been set aside.  The Keys of Peter are hanging on a
    belt-hook in the hall closet, and they've been there ever since J23's M.R.S.
    of October 11th, 1962.  This will be the 51st anniversary coming up, during
    the "Year of Faith" -- (B16's telling us you need a lot of faith to keep the faith
    while he abdicates).



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5065
    • Reputation: +5822/-510
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #5 on: May 08, 2013, 01:54:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0


  • According to the Catholic stigmatist amd mystic, Marie-Julie Jahenny (1850 ~ 1941) Msgr. Fellay's overtures to newRome are a made a big mistake.


    More on Marie-Julie Jahenny





    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline SeanGovan

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 162
    • Reputation: +229/-7
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #6 on: May 08, 2013, 02:27:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Notice how Bishop Fellay's language is exactly the opposite of Archbishop Lefebvre's! "Bastard" vs. "legitimate"!
    Adversus hostem Fidei aeterna auctoritas esto! To the enemies of the Faith no quarter!

    If they refuse to be converted by the Heart of the Immaculate, then in the end they shall be

    Offline Ecclesia Militans

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 984
    • Reputation: +14/-35
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #7 on: May 08, 2013, 06:41:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Incredulous,

    Will you please point to the exact reference?


    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2239/-21
    • Gender: Female
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #8 on: May 08, 2013, 08:27:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Vat. II is pastoral, not doctrinal.  No Catholic is obliged to believe or accept it in any manner.  If it is "officially" declared as a requirement to receive the Sacraments or hear Mass at SSPX chapels, or if the "reforms" of Vat. II  objectively  show themselves in the SSPX chapel where I attend, I will have to leave.  If that means no Mass, no Sacraments, so be it. To whose account will the sin be charged?  I will not have left the Church; She wil once again have left me.  The Faith stands above the Mass and the Sacraments.
     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 Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8257/-638
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #9 on: May 08, 2013, 10:30:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: SeanGovan
    Notice how Bishop Fellay's language is exactly the opposite of Archbishop Lefebvre's! "Bastard" vs. "legitimate"!




    Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No, and anything else is of the devil.


    How about when your Yes is No and your No is Yes?  



    Guess who is of the devil?  



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8257/-638
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #10 on: May 08, 2013, 10:34:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Incredulous


    According to the Catholic stigmatist amd mystic, Marie-Julie Jahenny (1850 ~ 1941) Msgr. Fellay's overtures to newRome are a made a big mistake.




    Correction, please:  

    "...Msgr. Fellay's overtures... are a made a big mistake" is nonsense.  



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5065
    • Reputation: +5822/-510
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #11 on: May 08, 2013, 06:44:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    Incredulous,

    Will you please point to the exact reference?



    EM,

      Holy Jahenny's writings are 80 years prior to Vatican II, but she describes the outcome accurately.  

    After reading this, I'm becoming very leery of the Motu chapels as Msgr. Fellay has always warned us.

    Here's just an extract:



    Marie-Julie Jahenny (June 1881).

    "In their [priests] aberration, they will break their oaths. The Book of Life contains a list of names that ‘rends the heart.’

    "Because of the little respect it has for the apostles of God, the flock grows careless and ceases to observe the laws. The priest himself is responsible for the lack of respect because he does not respect enough his holy ministry, and the place which he occupies in his sacred functions. The flock follows in the footsteps of its pastors; this is a great tragedy.

    "The clergy will be severely punished on account of their inconceivable fickleness and great cowardice which is incompatible with their functions.

    "A terrible chastisement has been provided for those who ascend every morning the steps of the Holy Sacrifice. I have not come on your altars to be tortured. I suffer a hundredfold more from such hearts than any of the others. I absolve you from your great sins, My children, but I cannot grant any pardon to these priests."

    She [Marie-Julie Jahenny] says that "those who govern the Flock", will be responsible for the coming crisis. Apparently, Communism would not have triumphed if the Church had remained faithful. She mentions the growing freedom enjoyed by priests and bishops and how badly they will use it.

    She mentions a pope who, at the last moment, will reverse his policies and make a solemn appeal to the Clergy.

    But he will not be obeyed; on the contrary, an Assembly of bishops will demand even greater freedom, declaring that they will no longer obey the Pope.

    Marie-Julie then goes on to say that the Red Revolution will then break out. She speaks of a "horrible religion" which is to replace the Catholic Faith, and she sees "many, many bishops" embracing this "sacrilegious, infamous religion."

    Marie-Julies's prophecies concerning the new liturgy: On November 27, 1902 (Ed. note: The seventy-second anniversary of the Miraculous Medal Apparition [November 27, 1830]) and on May 10, 1904, Our Lord warned of the new liturgy which would one day be instituted: "I give you a warning. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to remake according to their ideas, and under the influence of the enemy of souls, a Mass that contains words which are odious in My Sight. When the fatal hour arrives where the faith of my priest is put to the test, it will be these texts that will be celebrated, in this second period."

    "The first period is the one of My Priesthood, existing since Me. The second is the one of the persecution, when the enemies of the Faith and of Holy Religion will impose their formulas in the book of the second celebration. Many of My holy priests will refuse this book, sealed with the words of the abyss. Unfortunately, amongst them are those who will accept it."

    On May 10, 1904, Our Lady describes the new clergy and its liturgy: "They will not stop on this hateful and sacrilegious road. They will go further to compromise all at once, and in one blow, the Holy Church, the clergy, and the Faith of my children."

    She announces the "dispersion of the pastors" by the Church herself; true pastors, who will be replaced by others formed by Hell: "...new preachers of new sacraments, new temples, new baptisms, new confraternities."

    July 7 1880 Jesus tell Mary - Julie: «the church will be deprived of his supreme chief that now the guidance (...) The Chief of the Church will be offended outrageously».
    «In the ecstasy of November 4, 1880 Mary - Julie describes us the martyrdom of the pope: «The voice of the Church, under a veiled sigh, comes to make doors broken of my soul the echo of his dying voice sound. The supreme Pontiff launches an agonizing speech toward his people, toward children of which he is the Father. It is a sword for my soul... I see of white birds to carry away in their beak his blood and of shreds of his flesh. I see the hand of Peter breakthrough by the nail as the one of GOD. I see his clothes of ceremony pulled in shreds, clothes of which he dresses his dignity to make take down GOD on the altar. I see all it in my sun. Oh ! that I suffer ! »
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5065
    • Reputation: +5822/-510
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #12 on: May 08, 2013, 06:56:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Neil Obstat
    Quote from: Incredulous


    According to the Catholic stigmatist amd mystic, Marie-Julie Jahenny (1850 ~ 1941) Msgr. Fellay's overtures to newRome are a made a big mistake.




    Correction, please:  

    "...Msgr. Fellay's overtures... are a made a big mistake" is nonsense.  





    Oh no... what did I say wrong now?
    I'm just a misunderstood fat baby.    :facepalm:

    My meaning was that after you read Marie-Julie Jahenny tracts on the new liturgy, a religious leader of the One True Faith, would not dare dialogue with the Consiliar church.

    Therefore, Msgr. Fellay's premise, that he was obligated to dialogue with newRome is a big mistake.
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8257/-638
    • Gender: Male
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #13 on: May 09, 2013, 02:09:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Incredulous (sorta)

    According to the Catholic stigmatist amd mystic, Marie-Julie Jahenny (1850 ~ 1941) Msgr. Fellay's overtures to newRome are  a made  a big mistake.

    ...after [he reads] Marie-Julie Jahenny tracts on the new liturgy, a religious leader of the One True Faith would not dare dialogue with the Consiliar church.

    Therefore, Msgr. Fellay's premise, that he was obligated to dialogue with newRome is a big mistake.



    Could it be ---------- maybe +Fellay is......

    Quote
    Many of My holy priests will refuse this book, sealed with the words of the abyss.
    Unfortunately, amongst them are those who will accept it.



    For if he is amongst the priests who will accept the book sealed with the words of
    the abyss, then he's making the biggest mistake anyone could ever make.  



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Ecclesia Militans

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 984
    • Reputation: +14/-35
    New Rite of Mass "Legitimately" Promulgated
    « Reply #14 on: June 14, 2013, 07:01:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Fellay Endorsed “Fraud, Schism, and Heresy” according to Fr. Paul Kramer:

    http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2013/06/14/bishop-fellay-endorsed-fraud-schism-and-heresy-according-to-fr-paul-kramer/

     

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