CathInfo.com

.


Okay, so I had an ulterior motive.  You caught me.  I think I have
found the reason that Rome rejected this offer from the Society, or,
rather, from +Fellay under the auspices of the Society.

Here I will provide my revised edition, in which you can hunt down all
the changes I made here, that would have IMHO made this AFD acceptable
to Rome.  

Please do not hesitate to tell me how wrong I am!!











 
Compare with the May 1988 Protocol of Agreement proposed to Abp. Lefebvre by Rome

What could have been -- Bishop Fellay's (acceptable) Doctrinal Declaration


Presented to Rome
15th April, 2012

(Begin here:)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++





I
We promise to be always faithful to the Catholic Church and to the Bishop of Rome.


II
We declare that we accept the teachings of the living Magisterium of the Church in the substance of Faith and Morals, adhering to each doctrinal affirmation in the required degree, according to the doctrine contained in No.25 of the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council.(1)


III

     1. We declare that we accept the doctrine regarding the Bishop of Rome and regarding the college of bishops including the Bishop of Rome, which is taught by the dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus of Vatican I and by the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican II, chapter 3 (de constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiae et in specie de episcopatu), explained and interpreted by the nota explicativa praevia in this same chapter.

     2. We recognise the authority of the living Magisterium to which alone is given the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, in written form or handed down (2) in fidelity to Tradition, recalling that "the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter in order for them to make known, through revelation, a new doctrine, but so that with His assistance they may keep in a holy and expressly faithful manner the revelation transmitted by the Apostles, that is to say, the Faith."(3)

     3. Tradition is the living transmission of revelation "usque as nos"(4) and the Church in its doctrine, in its life and in its liturgy perpetuates and transmits to all generations what this is and what She believes. Tradition progresses in the Church with the assistance of the Holy Ghost(5), not as a contrary novelty(6), but through a better understanding of the Deposit of the Faith(7).

     4. The entire tradition of Catholic Faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which, in turn, enlightens - in other words deepens and subsequently makes explicit -  certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated(8).

     5. The affirmations of the Second Vatican Council and of the later Pontifical Magisterium relating to the relationship between the Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, as well as the social duty of religion and the right to religious liberty, whose formulation is with difficulty reconcilable with prior doctrinal affirmations from the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the whole, uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner coherent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these affirmations whatsoever that would expose Catholic doctrine to opposition or rupture with Tradition and with this Magisterium.

     6. That is why it is legitimate to promote through legitimate discussion the study and theological explanations of the expressions and formulations of Vatican II and of the Magisterium which followed it, in the case where they don't appear reconcilable with the previous Magisterium of the Church(9).

     7. We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II.

     8. In following the guidelines laid out above (III,5), as well as Canon 21 of the Code of Canon Law, we promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those which are contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by John-Paul II (1983) and in the Code of Canon Law of the Oriental Churches promulgated by the same pontiff (1990), without prejudice to the discipline of the Society of Saint Pius X, by a special law.


Notes--
(1) Cf. the new formula for the Profession of Faith and the Oath of Fidelity for assuming a charge exercised in the name of the Church, 1989; cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 749,750, §2; 752; CCEO canon 597; 598, 1 & 2; 599.

(2) Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis encyclical.

(3) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor Aeternus, Dz. 3070.

(4) Council of Trent, Dz. 1501: “All saving truth and rules of conduct (Matt. 16:15) are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves,[3] the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand.”

(5) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 8 & 9, Denz. 4209-4210.

(6) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3020: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding "Therefore […] let the understanding, the knowledge, and wisdom of individuals as of all, of one man as of the whole Church, grow and progress strongly with the passage of the ages and the centuries; but let it be solely in its own genus, namely in the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.'' [Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, 23, 3].”

(7) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3011; Anti-modernist Oath, no. 4; Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Dz 3886; Vatican Council II, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.

(8) For example, like the teaching on the sacraments and the episcopacy in Lumen Gentium, no. 21.

(9) There is a parallel in history in the Decree for the Armenians of the Council of Florence, where the porrection of the instruments was indicated as the matter of the sacrament of Order. Nevertheless theologians legitimately discussed, even after this decree, the accuracy of such an assertion. Pope Pius XII finally resolved the issue in another way.








+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not to be included in the submission above:

Support Our Apostolate!   Help us to expose the subversion within the SSPX! Please consider making a small paypal donation to The Recusant.


                                                  "Viva Cristo Rey!"

With this new leaked Docuмent of Bishop Fellay -the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration- it shows us that the present leaders of the SSPX have a whole new belief and a whole new orientation of religion that had creped in.

Within the contents of the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration, that to state, accept, and believe that Pope Paul VI’s new mass is now “legitimate” in their eyes, when also in the time of Vatican II the “experts” also had 6-protestant ministers to be “advisers” in creating it; to state also, accept, and now believe in the New Code of Canon Law, the expression of Vatican II, and in giving the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, our Divine Lord himself, to non-Catholics, as with other bad things within it; along with stating, accepting, and believing the heresies contained in Vatican II is now viable, authentic in its teaching, moral, and a path of salvation in its new ecuмenical doctrines that can be “interpreted” in the deposits of Holy Tradition is all BLASPHEMOUS!

In the CNS news interview, Bishop Fellay said that he "accepts 95%" of Vatican II council as good.  Then, in his Official 2012 Doctrinal Declaration he sent to Rome for a signature, he now says that Vatican II can be "interpreted in the light of Tradition" and therefore ALL of Vatican II is good.

So the next time Bishop Fellay (Menzingen), or other accordist priests, wants to tell us in a conference, or other, that they “uphold” the priesthood, that they “uphold” the Doctrine, and that they “uphold” the Tradition of the Catholic Church as the Council of Trent has taught, as it is taught in the pre-Vatican II Catechism of the Catholic Church, and as Archbishop Lefebvre had taught it to us -is a farce!

Simply, one cannot have a platform to support, state, and accept a belief of two radically different religions at the same time.

For Bishop Fellay to now make “official” this 2012 Doctrinal Declaration as the new SSPX policy, and to punish and expel anyone who does not agree with it, and at the same time, to say that they “uphold” the opposite of values and beliefs of pre-Vatican II Tradition- is incompatible!  Like oil is to water.  It is a Fantasy.  

Over the last year especially, the present leadership of the SSPX shows us that they now choose to “coexist” and harbor with the errors of Vatican II in order just to be “recognized” by a conciliar church (or, is it to be “recognized” just as an excuse to stop fighting the good fight?  God knows.).   All the while, claiming to be pure and innocent in their newly branded sspx.org facelift website ( http://sspx.org/en/hom-slide-identity ), to another group of people who have supported them all of these years,  and who have given to them their sons and daughters in trust and protection in the True Faith for vocations to the service of the Altar of the True God has come to naught in their stewardship.

As Vatican II “opened the door” to the modern world; look what happened.  The SSPX has also “opened the door” to the modern world; and look what happened.  There is a huge breakdown of trust, a huge breakdown of unity, and a huge breakdown of authority.  No one knows what the doctrinal position of their priest is, or of their neighbor next to them in the pew is anymore.  What an identity crisis.  What chaos!
   
So at first, the present leaders of the SSPX change the inside with a new worldly doctrine; then, they change the outside with a new worldly branding.

With observation, as far as the other 9-traditional groups who went into the [beast] of conciliar Rome, they were actually much more honest than the N-SSPX.  The 9-other groups may have had a “good” intention to convert Rome from the “inside”, while trying to be adamant, they said that they will not change one Iota.  The N-SSPX on the other hand is not being honest with us at all.

The others had “waited” for a deal; then once “inside” the [beast] they had changed.  The N-SSPX had desired to change first; then asked for a deal to go “inside” the [beast].

What an eye raising shake of the head.

Our Lord has said, “You know them by their fruits…”.