.

That's a pretty interesting quote, SeanJohn:



"It is now a racing certainty that the SSPX will continue

to sink further into the mire of compromise, whereas

the open Resistance to this process will continue to advance and grow."





.........but do I detect a little of this?.................








......Word 'on the street' is, there is an antidote available, from the Fire Department........







.

.


One short paragraph for CI members who don't have much time
to read (I made it into three seven paragraphs):  

We have before us a Genuine Modernist!

The actual discourse of Bishop Fellay makes for interesting reading and reflection, if you have the constitution for it. Elsewhere in this issue, the reader will find an analysis and commentary on some of the things he said. Somewhat hastily put together and written more with an internet audience in mind, we nonetheless feel confident that it will stand the test of time.

The lesson to learn is not that Bishop Fellay is pro- or anti- modernist Rome, rather that he is capable of being both or either, of changing his position without hesitation and with never so much as a blush, according to whatever his own short-sighted goals require. Take heed. Once again, as if it were needed, he has provided us with startling evidence of how his own words are as good as useless in indicating what he will do or say next. When he talks, he does so in order to create an impression in the mind of the listener, not to communicate something objective from one mind to another, much less to lay out or establish anything for which he will feel bound to give an account in the future should someone remind him of his own words. His dictum that nobody can criticise the April 2012 Doctrinal Declaration because they don’t necessarily understand what he himself meant by it, and his complaint that we “are not in [his] head!” ought to be truly frightening to anyone with a basic understanding of philosophy.

It amounts in practice to a denial that words have any objective meaning or that statements or sentences can be understood by a third party without reference to their author. If that is not the very last word in modernist thinking, then I don’t know what is.

Consider the implications for one moment: if that were true, then nobody could ever know the teaching of the Church. There could be no Catholic teaching, since any writing from the more recent Popes down to the Church Fathers and even Scripture itself would depend upon “being inside the head” of the author.

If, on the other hand, words do have objective meaning, a meaning which stands alone and is not dependent on any intellectual caprice of their author, then what Bishop Fellay wrote and offered to bind himself to, last year, cannot be defended by any Traditional Catholic worthy of the name.




............and there's a lot more where that came from..............