Quote from: Cristian

Have you seen this?

http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10166

Fr. Ceriani seems to have a different translation!

Quote

And so we come to a point raised by Bishop de Galarreta:

QUOTE
«In this sense, the real question to be answered is: what are the other conditions required, ad intra and ad extra, in the hypothetical case of a "good" proposal, totally acceptable in itself, to try to make a deal?»

And the bishop answers:

QUOTE
«The quoted texts of Archbishop Lefebvre enable us to respond with clarity and firmness.»

However, these texts have been available for thirty and forty years, and in the last twelve, particularly in the last three, they have been completely ignored, distorted and even used in the opposite direction intended by the author, that is, oriented towards a practical agreement...

What will provide the reopening of Pandora's box, if it is that it has been closed?

Father Juan Carlos Ceriani

Quoted texts? Our copy has "authorities cited." That's a whole 'nuther bag o' apples.

I was wondering why +de Galarreta doesn't come out with more material like
+Williamson and +de Mallerais. Maybe this is the reason: when he puts out one
page, it gets mistranslated by several separate people, and then the world erupts
with dissension on what was meant by what he said. That ought to discourage him
from making any more statements!

Well let me read all this before answering... the translation into English is not Fr Ceriani´s. Let me check the translation. I`ll be back as soon as I can.

Quoted texts? Our copy has "authorities cited." That's a whole 'nuther bag o' apples.

The docuмent in French reads:

Les textes cités de Monseigneur Lefebvre nous permettent d’y répandre avec clarté et fermeté.

Fr. Ceriani's text, in Spanish, reads:

Los textos de Monseñor Lefebvre citados nos permiten responder con claridad y firmeza.

Well, then, tell me if I'm barking up the wrong tree, here.

The "quoted texts of the Archbishop" seems to mean the things that he said or the
recorded writings that were his words or his letters. No?

And, "The authorities cited by Archbishop Lefebvre allow us to spread it with clarity
and firmness," seems to mean that ABL quoted other authorities, and that we can
use those quotes to spread ABL's teachings with clarity and firmness. No?

Ignis Ardens English translation

I'd like to know what +de Galarreta was trying to say here.

... in English.

I'd like to know -- in English. I don't trust the translator bots.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

I'd like to know what +de Galarreta was trying to say here.

... in English.

I'd like to know -- in English. I don't trust the translator bots.

Well, it has to be translated, since the docuмent is not in English.

I trust Fr. Ceriani's translation, since he studied in Econe and spent many years in France.  So, he understands French.

Quote from: IgnisArdens

And so we come to a point raised by Bishop de Galarreta:

QUOTE
«In this sense, the real question to be answered is: what are the other conditions required, ad intra and ad extra, in the hypothetical case of a "good" proposal, totally acceptable in itself, to try to make a deal?»

And the bishop answers:

QUOTE
«The quoted texts of Archbishop Lefebvre enable us to respond with clarity and firmness.»

However, these texts have been available for thirty and forty years, and in the last twelve, particularly in the last three, they have been completely ignored, distorted and even used in the opposite direction intended by the author, that is, oriented towards a practical agreement...

What will provide the reopening of Pandora's box, if it is that it has been closed?

Father Juan Carlos Ceriani

To me, it is obvious that Bishop de Galarreta is referring to ABL's texts.  That's the literal meaning of the sentence and then, Fr. Ceriani's comment goes in the same sense: "these text have been available for thirty and forty years".  Which texts?  Archbishop Lefebvre's, of course.

In other writings, Fr. Ceriani has accused the SSPX to have distorted ABL's writings, so there is not doubt he is referring to them and he understands Bishop de Galarreta is referring to them as well.

Thanks. That helps. You are bringing into the message something I couldn't know
by the words alone: the fact that Fr. Ceriani has so accused the SSPX "in other
writings," which also goes a long way to explaining why he was on +Fellay's hit
list! I know that Fr. Ceriani was expelled (an ecclesiastical crime in itself -- I knew
Fr. Frederick Schell, who was "expelled" by the local bishop because Fr. said he
could not distribute Holy Communion in the hand, and the lousy bishop made that
a "dealbreaker") as a priest in Argentina, if I'm not mistaken, which is where
+Williamson was posted for a few years.

But there is one point that remains, for me:

When Fr. Ceriani says this:

What will provide the reopening of Pandora's box, if it is that it has been closed?

-- is he using some kind of Spanish idiom in the phrase, "if it is that it has been
closed," such that the literal words do not convey the true meaning? Because I
do not see that as an effective ending to his message if it were to be given in
English as a first language. If I heard a priest give this speech, ending like that,
I would be going, "Huh?"

I highly doubt his Spanish language audience was going, "Que?"

I want to know what they were thinking when they understood him, that's all.

I checked the source:

radiochristiandad.wordpress.com

-- and found this:

Ahora bien, esos textos están a disposición desde hace treinta y cuarenta años; y en los últimos doce, particularmente en los últimos tres, han sido completamente ignorados, tergiversados y hasta utilizados en sentido contrario al del autor, es decir, en orden a obtener un acuerdo práctico…

¿Qué proporcionará la reapertura de la caja de Pandora, si es que ella ha sido cerrada?

Padre Juan Carlos Ceriani

-- caja de Pandora is obviously Pandora's box, and we all know what that is --
"...si es que ella ha sido cerrada" looks to me more like, if it is that she has been
closed, and I suppose "she" can mean the box, if the box is feminine (I'm not
sure how Spanish works in this instance), or maybe it's Pandora who closed the
box? Or what? Because "...if it is that it has been closed" leaves a sense of
something missing in English. We don't talk like that, in other words. We would not
use those words to say what that says.

We would say, "Why would we provide for Pandora's box to be reopened, when
we've already managed to keep it closed?" Or something like that. Unless that isn't
what Fr. Ceriani is intending to communicate.

These are the last words of his talk, and the final few words usually carry some
kind of "punch," or summary, of everything that has come before, if the speaker is
effective, and I know Fr. Ceriani is effective. He wouldn't be in trouble if he were
ineffective!!  

Quote

si es que ella ha sido cerrada

meaning "if it even has been closed".  As if he was in doubt that the box had ever been closed.

Indeed that`s the idea. I`d have translated it "if it has ever been closed" but not 100% sure :)

Quote from: Cristian

Indeed that`s the idea. I`d have translated it "if it has ever been closed" but not 100% sure :)

Yes, absolutely.  You're right.  Thanks, Cristian.

De nada! :)

Quote from: Cristian

Quote from: Adolphus

Quote

si es que ella ha sido cerrada

meaning "if it even has been closed".  As if he was in doubt that the box had ever been closed.

Indeed that`s the idea. I`d have translated it "if it has ever been closed" but not 100% sure :)

Very good. Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks!

If I were to say that in closing, I would use: "And these misapplications of the
good Archbishop's teachings would provide for the re-opening of Pandora's box;
if, that is, it's ever been indeed closed!"

Now that's a horse of a different color!

(Translate THAT into Spanish! "Pues, esto tener una caballo de color differente?")

If we carry that ending back and look at the rest of the warning from
+de Galarreta, what happens now?

As the principal role in the 3-year negotiation process, +de Galarreta was privy to
a most unobstructed view of what is really going on, doctrinally, in Rome. In
reporting back to +Fellay and the Society at large, his message is to shut down
all contacts with the B16 megolith, for it is nothing but a "Pandora's box" of
misery, pestilence and death! The Preliminary Note and the Doctrinal Preamble
from B16 are confusing, misleading, false, and bad in essence!

The ostensible willingness to criticize the Council is an enigmatic, cunning, and
well-set trap!

The Preliminary Note and Doctrinal Preamble is worse than the 1988 Protocol that
+ABL rejected as unacceptable!

...And pretending otherwise is providing for the re-opening of Pandora's box; if,
that is, Pandora's box was ever closed in the first place!



.............. some may need to catch their breath at this point: I did! .................



Meanwhile, back at the Menzingen Ranch, +Fellay maintains that the Doctrinal
Preamble of 2012 is better than the 1988 Protocol.

Does anyone sense a little tension here? The "horse of a different color" is "back at
the ranch."

Well really, the path is clear.  To engage in anything other that a withdrawal from this process would be folly. And he who does so in the clear light of the facts, is himself foolish and unfaithful to the oaths and creed which he professes.

Who will follow the manure trail to Rome?