Replies

Here's an interesting commentary from WITL blogspot ...

Tears of a Schismatic

As if he wasn't before, Papabile proves himself again to be our resident SSPX go-to guy.

Apparently, the excommunicated SSPX head Bernard Fellay had to open his mouth in a lengthy interview with DICI -- Econe's in-house news agency....

Some snips:

There was likewise on our part the plan to remind once more the Sovereign Pontiff of the existence of Tradition. Ours is the concern to remind him that Tradition is the Church, and that we incarnate the Church’s Tradition in a manner that is very much alive. We want to show that the Church would be much stronger in today’s world if it maintained Tradition. Thus, we want to put forward our experience: if the Church desires to escape the tragic crisis that it is presently going through, then Tradition is a response, indeed the only response, to this crisis.

Um, Bernie, Vatican II is part of that Tradition. Accept it or else.

[In the papal audience] We there outlined a description of the Church, quoting the “silent apostasy” of John-Paul II, “the boat which is taken in water from every side” and “the dictatorship of relativism” of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, with as an appendix of photos of Masses quite as scandalous as one another....

Finally, we expressed our requests: the changing of the attitude of hostility towards Tradition, which attitude makes the traditional Catholic life (Is there any other?) practically impossible in the conciliar church. We requested that this be done by granting full liberty to the Tridentine Mass, by silencing the accusation of schism directed against us, by burying the pretended excommunications, and by founding a structure for the family of Tradition within the Church.

Oh, Jesus. He blew it. He really blew it.... "Accusation of schism"? "Pretended excommunications"?

Yeah, it's safe to say now that Williamson basically speaks the mind of the group. Don't expect a reconciliation anytime soon. And there goes the universal indult right along with it.

The only way to separate the issue of Tradition from the issue of Authority is to grant the universal indult. As long as the Mass of the Ages goes in catacombs, the SSPX will be forgiven by many for its insubordination. And those are the many who the Vatican should listen to the most, unless they want the cafeteria to reopen. On the other hand, if the indult is granted, SSPX remains with the marginal issues of ecumenical policy and maybe the extent of Papal authority.

If the Tridentine Mass is restored, the schism has the wind taken out of its sails. If not, we have another orthodox church spinoff in a generation or two, because the schismatics have a legitimate complaint.

This is a real question. Vatican II, although only a "pastoral" council according to Pope Paul VI (right?), is not to be questioned, according to most clerics and the hierarchy, etc.
But what is being defended? In other words, what achievements based on Vatican II are any good?

"Um, Bernie, Vatican II is part of that Tradition. Accept it or else."

What about the issue of VatII being a pastoral rather than a dogmatic council?

"Oh, Jesus. He blew it. He really blew it.... "Accusation of schism"? "Pretended excommunications"?

Why is that blowing it? Does not schism require intent? And if the reasons cited for the latae sentiae excommunications were not valid, then are they not "pretend" excommunications?

One thing I've learned over the years is that liberalism is of and from Satan, and it carries his particular stench in whatever guise is presents itself.

Therefore, when I'm trying to make sense of something like this, I ask myself, "Is one side acting like liberals? Is one side arguing like liberals, using the ploys and intellectual gymnastics typical of liberals?"

I was outraged to hear of bishops rushing to Rome to threaten the Pope. "If you rule in favor of our enemies, we will go into schism. Either we win, or we'll tear the whole thing down." IMO, that reeks of liberalism, and therefore of Satan.

I'm not an expert on the contents of VatII, and cannot readily distinguish between what it actually says and where the Modernists are abusing it through misinterpretation.

However, I find that there are among its defenders many who act like liberals, and among its detractors none. That alone tells me that, even if it contains no evil in and of itself, it lends itself to use as a tool of evil. You don't find liberals fighting for things that are good.

Yeah. The rest is projection that the Pope has to keep the libs in camp in the Catholic Church so he can't accept Tradition ect when the fact is Williamson is causing Fellay to move to ever more extreme positions - not that he doesn't hold to those ideas but he normally doesn't show his true thoughts to the public.

And don't expect Fellay to dress Williamson down for his hateful antisemitism. The society will conctinue to become eeven more insane having gulped the hate-the-Jews kool aid