Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bishop Fellay Responds to Hoyos Interview
DICI News Website ^ | 20 July 2004 | SSPX - DICI news website

Posted on 07/21/2004 7:23:09 AM PDT by Mershon

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last
To: Blessed Charlemagne

I stand corrected. The FSSP still performs the tonsure, and may ordain subdeacons, since it utilizes the 1962 Missal.


41 posted on 07/21/2004 8:13:31 PM PDT by sinkspur (There's no problem on the inside of a kid that the outside of a dog can't cure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
What happened to that guy? He posted something to me, which I can still see in "My Comments," with which I had certain points of disagreement, but there was nothing outrageous in it.

He seems to have been nuked. Did I miss something?

42 posted on 07/21/2004 8:44:07 PM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
He seems to have been nuked. Did I miss something?

Not that I'm aware of.

He may be a previous bannee, and the admins identified his previous moniker. If you're banned, you're banned in all future incarnations as well.

43 posted on 07/21/2004 8:47:40 PM PDT by sinkspur (There's no problem on the inside of a kid that the outside of a dog can't cure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mershonathome

"They actually had lots of priests back then--prior to the GREAT RENEWAL in the wake of that magnanimous council"

Thank God that vocations in traditionalist orders continue to flourish....
http://www.sspx.org/RCRpdfs/2004_rcrs/july_2004_rcr.pdf


44 posted on 07/22/2004 11:28:15 AM PDT by AskStPhilomena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AskStPhilomena

And as a matter of fact, vocations to traditional orders in union with Peter continue to fluorish even more abundantly, with the FSSP having more than 120 applicants last year alone.

Due to limited space, however, they could accept only 18. The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest is also experiencing tremendous.


45 posted on 07/22/2004 12:12:13 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: AskStPhilomena

The Institute of Christ the King is also experiencing tremendous growth as well.


46 posted on 07/22/2004 12:25:33 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mershon

Clearly traditionalist seminaries need to expand to meet the growing demand. Hopefully some of those 120 FSSP applicants won't feel forced to find a spot in one of the empty novus ordo seminaries in the meantime.
Thankfully growing numbers of Catholics are finally realizing that supporting any novus ordo operation is a waste of money.
Let's pray it's not a case of too-little, too-late.


47 posted on 07/22/2004 12:34:21 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: AskStPhilomena

Actually, the Pontifical Josephinum in Ohio is orthodox, and I was told by someone who knows, that more than half of their seminarians are wanting to say the Traditional Latin Mass. Yes, they must be selective, but there are a few Novus Ordo seminaries that aren't bad.


48 posted on 07/22/2004 1:05:13 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

The "doctrinal issues" are basic to the faith and do not refer specifically to Vatican II. In fact, Vatican II defined nothing. He was referring, in particular, to the Catholic concept of Sacrifice as a true immolation and re-presentation of Calvary--that which had been affirmed at Trent--and not that of praise or thanksgiving, the Protestant concept. The Church in the past thirty-plus years has tried to ignore Trent and its doctrines. But to do so is to ignore the Catholic faith itself, so there can be no compromise on this whatsoever. Until Rome relents, it is in conflict with its own history and its own past and its own faith. The modernists may try to suppress this truth--but it will fail.


49 posted on 07/22/2004 10:15:35 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mershon

Your talk of "re-entering" the Church is misguided. The SSPX is a part of the Church. The excommunications, while legal, are moral nullities and had no true effect. Bishop Fellay understands this, so he is in no hurry. He realizes God is in charge and has been protecting the Society up to now free from corruption--precisely by setting it apart. When the time is ripe the regularization will happen--but it makes no sense as long as Rome has gone off on its own revolutionary tangents.


50 posted on 07/22/2004 10:22:50 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

The suppression of the Novus Ordo is necessary because it is a protestantizing Mass in direct opposition to Trent. That is to say, it is not a Catholic Mass. The two Masses are simply irreconcileable, each belonging to a different religion. Do you think the modernist bishops don't realize this? This is why they despise the traditional Mass and have always sought to suppress it. It was why Roman modernists persecuted Lefebvre in the first place. The old Mass represents the doctrines and theology of a Church they opposed and still oppose.


51 posted on 07/22/2004 10:34:54 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; Dominick

You were right the first time.


52 posted on 07/22/2004 10:36:38 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj; wurdesmythe

"The NO Mass does not manifest faith in the Real Presence"

It "does not manifest faith". He is right. It hides the faith as though it were an embarrassment. Any expression of adoration is deliberately suppressed.


53 posted on 07/22/2004 10:48:55 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
Any expression of adoration is deliberately suppressed.

GIRM:

3. Moreover, the wondrous mystery of the Lord's real presence under the eucharistic species, reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council[6] and other documents of the Church's Magisterium[7] in the same sense and with the same words that the Council of Trent had proposed as a matter of faith,[8] is proclaimed in the celebration of Mass not only by means of the very words of consecration, by which Christ becomes present through transubstantiation, but also by that interior disposition and outward expression of supreme reverence and adoration in which the Eucharistic Liturgy is carried out. For the same reason the Christian people is drawn on Holy Thursday of the Lord's Supper, and on the solemnity of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ, to venerate this wonderful Sacrament by a special form of adoration.

6. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, nos. 7, 47; Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests, Presbyterorum ordinis, nos. 5, 18.

7. Cf. Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani generis, 12 August 1950: Acta Apostolicae Sedis, Commentarium Officiale (Vatican City; hereafter, AAS), 42 (1950), pp. 570-571; Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Mysterium fidei, On the doctrine and worship of the Eucharist, 3 September 1965 : AAS 57(1965), pp. 762-769; Paul VI, Solemn Profession of Faith, 30 June 1968 , nos. 24-26: AAS 60 (1968), pp. 442-443; Sacred Congregation of Rites, Instruction Eucharisticum mysterium, On the worship of the Eucharist, 25 May 1967 , nos. 3f, 9: AAS 59 (1967), pp. 543, 547.

8. Cf. Council of Trent, session 13, Decretum de ss. Eucharistia, 11 October 1551: Denz-Schön, 1635-1661.

And in the Missal:

He shows the consecrated host to the people, places it on the paten, and genuflects in adoration. Then he continues:

... He shows the consecrated chalice to the people, places it on the corporal, and genuflects in adoration.

There is also added:

Supplices ergo te, Domine, deprecamur, ut haec munera, quae tibi sacranda detulimus, eodem Spiritu sanctificare digneris, ut Corpus et + Sanguis fiant Filii tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi, cuius mandato haec mysteria celebramus. (EP III)

Which lacks the Cranmerian "for us" in the Roman Canon.

54 posted on 07/23/2004 4:06:53 AM PDT by gbcdoj (Why do you ... seek to examine that which has already been decided by the Apostolic See? - Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
The suppression of the Novus Ordo is necessary because it is a protestantizing Mass in direct opposition to Trent

It is authentically Catholic instituted by thew Pope. Trent is not violated, because the accidentals of the Mass can be changed. In any case the Order of Mass is not a dogma, so it was changed>

That is to say, it is not a Catholic Mass.

Preposterous baiting. The Novus Ordo and Tridentine are indeed Cathloic Liturgies.

The two Masses are simply irreconcileable, each belonging to a different religion.

Editorializing aside they both belong to Catholicism. This division is exactly the stumbling block. I wonder how stupid it will look when Fellay returns to the Church and discusses this point.

The old Mass represents the doctrines and theology of a Church they opposed and still oppose.

The dogma and doctrines are the same. The Theology is Catholic> They innovation in dogma (actually it is a old position) is the SSPX goes against the will of God. The Pope can bind on earth and loose on earth. He loosed the SSPX, and bound everyone to obedience to him, not by lip service as the liberal Bishops or the SSPX does, but in action as Bishop Vasa or Bishop Galeone has shown.

Every schismatic will declare a valid excommunication a nullity, but it has the weight of the Church behind it. I hope you wise up before it is too late, and that by holding this position you oppose Christ's Church by holding this schismatic position. Moral nullity indeed, thats what I heard about Humane Vitae from a parishioner. Every person subject to justice has an excuse, moral nullity that same as a prisoner saying, "I ain't guilty, now gimme a cigarette before I cut you".

Like I said before it is like the parable of the two sons. One said he would go to the fields and didn't and the second said he wasn't going, and then thought better of it and went. What you say is different from what you do.
55 posted on 07/23/2004 4:21:54 AM PDT by Dominick ("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio

"Your talk of "re-entering" the Church is misguided."

Yawn...

"The SSPX is a part of the Church. The excommunications, while legal, are moral nullities and had no true effect."

In your own personal opinion.

Let us all continue to pray for the regularization of the SSPX with the one true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which, there is no salvation. One can be connected to the body without being in the heart of the Church. The new code of canon law diffentiates between varying degrees of "communion" with the Church. In fact, one need not be heretical nor schismatic, but still might be "imperfectly connected" or in "imperfect communion" with the Church.

Only the Pope decides who is, and who is not in perfect communion. Why have a continuing dialogue if there is no need for it?

Let us all reignite our prayers for this, that God's will may be done, and that the modernists within the Church, may all be sent scurrying under bushel baskets.


56 posted on 07/23/2004 5:49:43 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio

"That is to say, it is not a Catholic Mass. The two Masses are simply irreconcileable, each belonging to a different religion."

In your personal opinion. This is a heretical point of view that is not reconcilable with Church teaching. A Pope cannot promulgate a new liturgy that is not Catholic. This goes against the indefectability of the Church. The logical conclusion from this is sedevacantism--whether you recognize or acknowledge it or not.


57 posted on 07/23/2004 5:52:34 AM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Mershon; ultima ratio
In your personal opinion. This is a heretical point of view that is not reconcilable with Church teaching. A Pope cannot promulgate a new liturgy that is not Catholic. This goes against the indefectability of the Church.

Exactly.

In grave matters, of high importance to the formation of Christian morals, the Church, when enacting laws that concern all, can ordain nothing contrary to the Gospel or to natural reason.... Just as she can define nothing as vicious which in fact is virtuous, nor as virtuous which is vicious, so neither, in promulgating her laws, can she approve anything contrary to the Gospel or to reason. If, by any express judgment, or in enacting a law, she approved what is wrong or reproved what is right, the error would not merely be a disaster for the faithful, it would also be, in a way, opposed to the faith which approves every virtue and condemns all vices. Further, Christ has commanded us to obey the laws of the Church, saying: Do all that they say unto you.... and: Whoso heareth you heareth me...; so that if the Church should err herein Christ would be the author of our errors. (Melchior Cano, De Locis Theologicis, lib. V, cap. v, concl. 2)
The Sovereign Pontiff will never be deceived into commanding a vice such as usury, or forbidding a virtue such as restitution, since these things are good or bad in themselves; similarly, he will never be deceived into commanding anything contrary to salvation, such as the necessity of circumcision, or the observance of the Sabbath, or into forbidding anything necessary for salvation, such as Baptism or the Eucharist. (St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, lib. IV, cap. v)
... as for the laws proposed to the whole Church, such as those drawn up by a General Council or incorporated in the Corpus Juris, granting the general approbation they enjoy, it is difficult to admit that they contain even prudential error, so that they are not to be waived without some special permission. (John of St. Thomas, Cursus Theologicus, II-II, qq. 1-7; disp. 3, a. 3, no. 5; vol. VII, p. 311)
After Suarez and Banez, John of St. Thomas adds that the Church can err as regards the circumstances, application and execution of the law, for example by issuing too many precepts and censures, and applying them too strictly. For, he says, all that seems rather to pertain to the prudence and surrounding modalities of the law than to its substance and morality. Cano thinks likewise.... However, when we are concerned with laws laid down for all Christians, it is only out of regard for these very learned men that their reservations are to be entertained: I should not dare to make them mine. (Billuart, De Regulis Fidei, dissert. 3, a. 5)
The great prudential precepts, ordained for the general good of the Church, are closely and immediately connected with the absolute precepts of revelation, whence they stem as from their proper root; so that they participate in a direct and privileged way in their infallibility. It can be said that the infallibility that guarantees them is absolute—not, doubtless, directly and formally, but radically and fundamentally. It follows that they can never prescribe anything immoral or pernicious, anything that sins against the evangelical law or the natural law. Since the Church is assisted in the task of leading men to eternal life, she will not mislead them by erring either about what has to be believed or about what has to be done: if, for example, the Gospel had contained a commandment to communicate always under two kinds, she would never have been able to ordain communion under one; and similarly, she cannot enjoin on her children any acts that clash with the natural law, anything that partakes for example of idolatry, lying, or injustice. Theologians are here unanimous...

I have mentioned several of these measures of general interest. It must be insisted that they always arise as consequences or determinations of the great ordinances of Scripture. The laws of fasting and abstinence for example are bound up with the Gospel precept to do penance (Matt. xi. 21). The laws prescribing Sunday attendance at Mass, or again, the mode of celebrating Mass, the use of unleavened bread in the Western Church, are bound up with the commandment to commemorate the sacrifice of Holy Thursday (1 Cor. xi. 24). (Cardinal Journet, Church of the Word Incarnate, vol. 1, VIII, II, 2, B, 1)


58 posted on 07/23/2004 6:23:42 AM PDT by gbcdoj (Why do you ... seek to examine that which has already been decided by the Apostolic See? - Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

1. You consistently recite the fraudulent GIRM to prove your point. But this is a second version, designed to deceive. The first version shocked traditional theologians and forced a re-write using all the right terminology.

2. Citing Vatican II or Humani has no relevance.

3. You conveniently leave out that genuflections have everywhere been ELIMINATED deliberately from the Mass--except at the Consecration--and has become optional. You prove my point.


59 posted on 07/23/2004 11:02:18 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

Humani=Humani Generis


60 posted on 07/23/2004 11:03:46 AM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson