Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic rebel snubs pope call to rejoin Rome (Catholic Caucus)
Reuters ^ | Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:25am EDT | Tom Heneghan

Posted on 06/26/2008 2:51:31 PM PDT by annalex

PARIS (Reuters) - The leader of a breakaway traditionalist Catholic group has rejected a Vatican offer to rejoin Rome, accusing Pope Benedict of trying to silence dissenting voices.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) that broke with Rome 20 years ago, said conditions set by the Vatican amounted to muzzling the traditionalists who claim to be the only true Catholics since Church reforms in the 1960s.

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: fellay; schism; sspx; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 06/26/2008 2:53:04 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NYer; Salvation; Romulus; ELS

Disappointing.


2 posted on 06/26/2008 2:55:13 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: annalex

It is sad that the SSPX leadership has chosen to do this. One can always hope (and pray!) that the rank and file will find their way back to the Church.


4 posted on 06/26/2008 2:59:30 PM PDT by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex; big'ol_freeper
Reuters: “Bp. Fellay says No” story is NOT the end of the story!
5 posted on 06/26/2008 3:00:33 PM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If the angels could be jealous of men, they would be so for one reason: Holy Communion." -M. Kolbe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: big'ol_freeper

Caucus thread... and an awful broad brush you are using.


7 posted on 06/26/2008 3:28:50 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I haven’t heard the homily, but I am a bit puzzled how he got from a request to respect the office of Peter to a threat to silence SSPX.

The SSPX site hasn’t been updated since early June. It could be another case of mass media spinning Catholic interest stories.


8 posted on 06/26/2008 3:36:23 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Can you post the entire article or is this it? Would be interested in reading the rationale behind his decision. Unfortunately, I’m on dial up on an acient computer that cannot access the Reuters news story. Thanks!


9 posted on 06/26/2008 3:41:28 PM PDT by NYer ("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) that broke with Rome 20 years ago, said conditions set by the Vatican amounted to muzzling the traditionalists who claim to be the only true Catholics since Church reforms in the 1960s.

Bad decision!

Fellay has not only snubbed the Vatican, he has shown total disregard for his priests and seminarians. As more and more Catholic parishes adopt the TLM, expect that the SSPX priests will swim towards the Barque of Peter.

10 posted on 06/26/2008 3:45:09 PM PDT by NYer ("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex
The leader of a breakaway traditionalist Catholic group has rejected a Vatican offer to rejoin Rome, accusing Pope Benedict of trying to silence dissenting voices.

Worth reprinting the terms of the offer that was turned down from an earlier thread [emphasis mine]:

1. The commitment to a response proportionate to the generosity of the Pope.
2. The commitment to avoid every public intervention which does not respect the person of the Holy Father and which may be negative to ecclesial charity.
3. The commitment to avoid the claim to a Magisterium superior to the Holy Father and to not propose the Fraternity in contraposition to the Church.
4. The commitment to display the will to act honestly in full ecclesial charity and in respect for the authority of the Vicar of Christ.
5. The commitment to respect the date - fixed for the end of the month of June [2008] - to respond positively.

11 posted on 06/26/2008 3:50:28 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" -- Galatians 4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: NYer

Bad decision, but not unexpected. They want to believe they are the only true Catholics, yet they reject the most important mark of Christ’s Church-the Pope.


13 posted on 06/26/2008 4:01:33 PM PDT by fetal heart beats by 21st day (Defending human life is not a federalist issue. It is the business of all of humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Yes — in other words, I don’t see any muzzling at all.


14 posted on 06/26/2008 4:09:28 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Catholic rebel snubs pope call to rejoin Rome
Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:25am EDT

By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor

PARIS (Reuters) - The leader of a breakaway traditionalist Catholic group has rejected a Vatican offer to rejoin Rome, accusing Pope Benedict of trying to silence dissenting voices.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) that broke with Rome 20 years ago, said conditions set by the Vatican amounted to muzzling the traditionalists who claim to be the only true Catholics since Church reforms in the 1960s.

Keen to end this schism, Benedict agreed last year to their demand to restore the old Latin Mass. But he insists they must accept the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) before he can lift excommunication decrees against them.

“Rome is telling us, okay, we are ready to lift the excommunications, but you cannot continue this way,” Fellay said in a sermon last Friday now posted as an audio file on the U.S.-based Voice of Catholic Radio website.

“So we have no choice... we are continuing what we’ve done,” the Swiss-born Fellay said in English at an SSPX seminary in Winona, Minnesota. “They just say ‘shut up’ ... we are not going ... to shut up.”

The Milan daily Il Giornale reported on Monday the Vatican had told the SSPX it must pledge to respect the pope and accept him as the Church’s final doctrinal authority.

Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi told the Paris Catholic daily La Croix: “The pope wants to extend his hand so they can return, but for that to happen, this offer must be received in an attitude and spirit of charity and communion.”

Lombardi did not spell out the consequences of rejecting the offer, but Il Giornale’s well-informed Vatican expert Andrea Tornielli wrote: “Such favorable conditions for a return to full communion will in all probability not come again.”

TIP OF THE ICEBERG

The SSPX claims about a million followers worldwide, many of them in France. It split off when its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, consecrated four traditionalist bishops — including Fellay — in 1988 against orders from Pope John Paul.

Since then, it has regularly appealed to the Vatican to withdraw the excommunications and allow it to return to the 1.1-billion strong Church. But its leaders often publicly denounce the pope.

Fellay said the pope must restore other Church traditions besides the old Latin Mass before the SSPX could return. It is particularly critical of the Vatican Council’s reconciliation with Judaism and call to cooperation with other Christians.

“The new Mass is the tip of the iceberg of Vatican II and of these modern ideas.” Adding the old Mass to the “iceberg of Vatican II” did not change the reforms hidden below, he said.

Vatican watchers say the ultimatum could split SSPX into a hard core of rebels and a larger group ready to return to Rome now that it has allowed wider use of the old Latin Mass.

“Most people want a reverent Mass and sound preaching. They care little for the loftier theological arguments,” Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a prominent conservative Catholic blogger, wrote in an analysis. “The identity of the SSPX is at stake now.”

The ultimatum’s deadline of June 30 is the 20th anniversary of the bishops’ ordinations that sealed the schism.

(Editing by Keith Weir)


15 posted on 06/26/2008 4:10:56 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: annalex

I’m not sure this is true. This story came out last Friday (almost a week past) and he has until June 30th to make his decision. So far as I know, he hasn’t said anything yet.


16 posted on 06/26/2008 4:18:16 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter is there for them.


17 posted on 06/26/2008 4:21:00 PM PDT by stop_fascism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: annalex

I thought to Catholics that the Pope is Christ’s representative on Earth. If that is true, this guy and all the rest are in the Church for pure feel goodism.


18 posted on 06/26/2008 4:33:04 PM PDT by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked. Prov. 25:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

I think, the quotes from the homily are true quotes, but the idea that the offer has been thereby rejected ahead of time is spin.


19 posted on 06/26/2008 4:37:08 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator

To: annalex; livius
Thank you, Annalex, for posting the entire article.

Keen to end this schism, Benedict agreed last year to their demand to restore the old Latin Mass. But he insists they must accept the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) before he can lift excommunication decrees against them.

He has put forth a very generous offer.

Fellay said the pope must restore other Church traditions besides the old Latin Mass before the SSPX could return. It is particularly critical of the Vatican Council’s reconciliation with Judaism and call to cooperation with other Christians.

This is quite telling. He is neglecting John 17:21-3 - "that all may be one".

Vatican watchers say the ultimatum could split SSPX into a hard core of rebels and a larger group ready to return to Rome now that it has allowed wider use of the old Latin Mass.

A painful decision, I'm sure, for those who migrated to the SSPX Chapels in order to worship God in what they considered a proper manner. Many of them have looked forward to the day when either Rome would concede to the demands of the SSPX or vv. That day is now at hand. Over the course of these past 40 years, entire families have worshiped, been educated and raised in the SSPX Chapels. What a painful burden to place on their shoulders - CHOOSE. We need to remember Fellay, the priests and those Catholics who have chosen to follow this route, in our prayers.

21 posted on 06/26/2008 4:43:28 PM PDT by NYer ("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer

You wrote:

“As more and more Catholic parishes adopt the TLM, expect that the SSPX priests will swim towards the Barque of Peter.”

I think you’re right. The pope has done everything the SSPX DEMANDED. They are simply schismatics.


22 posted on 06/26/2008 4:43:46 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak

It doesn’t follow. The Pope is the vicar of Christ, but so is every priest. It does not make the pope identical to Christ; popes throughout history erred. The traditionalists would say that the form of ecumenism promulgated after Vatican II is at odds with the authentic Catholic teaching, and therefore the Pope lacks authority to enforce it.

Their presumption is questionable, but the logic is correct: if — theoretically speaking — a pope would teach something that would negate the Holy Tradition, — for example, allow for woman “priests” — then the pope would not have authority to teach that.


23 posted on 06/26/2008 4:44:19 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: NYer
We need to remember Fellay, the priests and those Catholics who have chosen to follow this route, in our prayers.

Very much so; and no matter what happens now, we should be grateful for their resistance to modernizers in the Church.

24 posted on 06/26/2008 4:47:44 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: annalex
...I don’t see any muzzling at all.

It's a matter of perspective. I would expect points #3 ("avoid the claim to a Magisterium superior to the Holy Father") and #4 ("respect for the authority of the Vicar of Christ") are tantamount to muzzling from the POV of an SSPXer.

They'd consider #3 "muzzling" because AFAIK the SSPX believe in some standard outside of/beyond the current/unbroken Magisterium held by Rome. #4 is "muzzling" because the SSPX believe the current Pope lacks authority, due to their fundamental disagreements over the issue of an unbroken chain of authority from earlier popes.

25 posted on 06/26/2008 4:48:16 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" -- Galatians 4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
#4 is "muzzling" because the SSPX believe the current Pope lacks authority, due to their fundamental disagreements over the issue of an unbroken chain of authority from earlier popes.

SSPX is NOT sedevacantist; what on earth (or in heaven) are you talking about?

26 posted on 06/26/2008 4:55:57 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Okey dokey.
27 posted on 06/26/2008 4:56:31 PM PDT by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked. Prov. 25:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
3 and 4 are traditional Catholicism; the papal superiority over the Magisteruium is the point of papal infallibility, the doctrine that SSPX does not reject (it was formally pronounced at Vatican I, not II). Respect in 4 is something they themselves iterate. Case in point:

A MESSAGE FROM BISHOP FELLAY
Superior General of the SSPX

July 2006

At the end of October, the Month of the Rosary, the Society intends to present the Holy Father with a spiritual bouquet of a million Rosaries.

The Rosaries will be offered for the following intentions:

  1. To obtain from Heaven for Pope Benedict XVI the strength necessary for him to completely liberate the Mass of all Time, called the Mass of St. Pius V.

  2. The restoration of the Social Kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ.

  3. The triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

We are calling you to a veritable Rosary Crusade. This prayer, so often recommended by the most Blessed Virgin Mary herself, has been presented as the great means of support, protection, and salvation for Christians in this time of crisis. For centuries, ever since the antagonism between the world and the Church began to grow more intense, this prayer has appeared as the weapon given us by Heaven by which we may defend and sanctify ourselves, and conquer.

We thus earnestly recommend that you begin without delay to bring spiritual roses to our bouquet.

We also desire to manifest to both the Roman authorities and Heaven, by this obviously symbolic quantity, our will and determination "to pay the price."

Link.

You may be thinking of sedevacantists, a different stratum altogether.

28 posted on 06/26/2008 4:57:58 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: annalex; steve86
You may be thinking of sedevacantists, a different stratum altogether.

I stand corrected - I had confused the two groups.

29 posted on 06/26/2008 4:59:33 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" -- Galatians 4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter; big'ol_freeper; annalex; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

News media spin. The actual response is not due until Monday. This has nothing new in it.

30 posted on 06/26/2008 5:04:57 PM PDT by narses (...the spirit of Trent is abroad once more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi told the Paris Catholic daily La Croix: “The pope wants to extend his hand so they can return, but for that to happen, this offer must be received in an attitude and spirit of charity and communion.”

This sums it up in a nutshell. The pope acted in a spirit of charity and communion towards the SSPX and they have angrily rejected his offer with their usual lack of charity and grace. How much more evidence is needed to show that this group really is not Catholic in any sense of the word?

31 posted on 06/26/2008 5:50:11 PM PDT by steadfastconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: steadfastconservative
The pope acted in a spirit of charity and communion towards the SSPX and they have angrily rejected his offer with their usual lack of charity and grace.

So, in your view, as long as a proposal is offered in a polite way, by any group in any circumstance on any issue, it should be accepted with "charity and grace" (and lack of discernment)? Myself, I have this bias toward content over packaging when evaluating an offer.

How much more evidence is needed to show that this group really is not Catholic in any sense of the word?

The SSPX preserves the tradition of the Catholic Church. So, in your view, during the hundreds of years prior to Vatican II the Catholic Church was not Catholic?

33 posted on 06/26/2008 6:34:57 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: steadfastconservative
angrily rejected his offer

I don't think you can say that. This is a homily out of which we have excerpts, done by a mainstream media outlet not known for accuracy or sympathy toward things Catholic. As a sign, it is a troubling one, but that is all that it is.

34 posted on 06/26/2008 6:43:11 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

Comment #36 Removed by Moderator

To: annalex

I wish Fellay would have talked more with Pope Benedict and changed his mind.


37 posted on 06/26/2008 6:52:58 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Entirely beside the point, but I just noticed that Thinkin’ Gal was banned last year. She was one of my favorites. What one earth could that have been about?


38 posted on 06/26/2008 7:01:34 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; annalex
Sermon by Bishop Fellay (audio)
39 posted on 06/26/2008 7:44:58 PM PDT by murphE (I refuse to choose evil, even if it is the lesser of two)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: annalex
“Rome is telling us, okay, we are ready to lift the excommunications, but you cannot continue this way,”

So, finally the SSPX admits that the excommunications were not imaginary after all.

41 posted on 06/26/2008 7:58:55 PM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Darwinism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: annalex

I wonder if the extreme ultramontanists of SSPX see the irony of their rejection of the pope


43 posted on 06/27/2008 7:29:33 AM PDT by ChurtleDawg (voting only encourages them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murphE

Thanks. My notes of what he said are below. Please do not take it as transcript. I condensed the parts not directly related to the issue with SSPX and Rome. The parts about the relationship with Rome take up about 1/3 of the Sermon. Nothing here is verbatim.

___

Ordination forms the special indwelling of the Holy Ghost in the deacon.

That enables him to give witness to the point of martyrdom for the faith.

The faith is the fundament of our salvation. There is but one faith the Catholic faith. Protecting, defending and spreading the faith is the main concern of the Church.

The devil will falsify the good news by all means. The devil will force you to compromise. Proclamation of the faith therefore is always a fight about life and death and involves suffering.

What happened at the council? The light of the truth was shadowed. The mission work of the Church is almost extinct. The missionaries no longer preach. The sendign of the Sword of God into the world — the contradictory preaching — is gone.

The Congregation for the doctrine of the faith is no longer the Holy Office. It is a political institution.

The world is now happy with the Church. The other religions are happy with the Church. This is not what God wants. God said, “the world hates you because it hated me first”. No way we’ll have peace with the devil and the world. If you pretend you are in peace with the devil, you’re done. The Holy Ghost obliges you to fight. Do not fear. If you want peaceful life, don’t be ordained.

Update about lifting the excommunication — is it coming or not? I don’t know. We can still wait for a while, even a good while. Why? Because the approach we have is not the same as the Vatican’s. The Archbishop said Rome reconciliation but that means we go back with the new. It is not what we want. We don’t want to integrate with the new. In 75, 76 it was already the same problem. Bakck them they asked “say one Mass with me and everythign be fine”. Now they don’t say “one Mass”, they say shut up. They gave me an ultimatum. We are not going to shut down or shut up. We are precisely in the same fight. Appearances may differ, still the same fight. What about the Motu Proprio? It is something very good, we are very very happy with it. Still the Mass is the visible part of this fight, like a tip of the Iceberg of Tradition, and the New Mass is the tip of the iceberg of the new Vatican II spirit. There is somethign good with them. But in every evil you have some good. In the worst evil you have the most good. Those who refuse only one truth they may keep all the rest, the denial of only one truth means they have lost the faith. That belief is not going to save, like a plane without the pilot is not going to fly, no matter how good the parts are. They refuse the pope. Their plain is not going to fly.

The Motu Proprio is as if the tip of the iceberg is taken and planted on the tip of the new iceberg, but not what is below. Under the water, we have only the new thing, but they call it tradition.

20 years ago Archbshp Lefebvre explained “for Card. Ratzinger the Vatican II is tradition”. This is the reality now. The iceberg has two tips, not one. The maker of the Mass, Bugnini took everythign out of the Mass that could hurt the Protestant, so now we are Protestants with the new Mass. How is it the same [faith]?

We are at crossroads vis a vis Rome. We are nto going this way. We are continuing to keep the faith alive not for ourselves but for the Holy Church, happens what happens. It is in God’s hands. If God wants the trial to continue, God will give us grace to persevere.

At Lourdes and at Fatima Our Lady warned us that something very hard is coming to the Church. Rome shall lose the faith. It will become the see of AntiChrist. There will be an eclipse of the Church. So it is now, and it can turn worse. Our Lady said it. Her call to prayer, to stick with the Old, is urgent. The call to penance — the call of John the Baptist, Our Lady, St. Peter — has not been heeded by Rome, and the grace is withdrawn from it.

The gate to Heaven is narrow, few will find it.


44 posted on 06/27/2008 11:58:51 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator; All

I paraphrased an important sermon on the subject of the thread in the post above. The sermon contained references to the Protestants, and I reproduced them. I ask for your indulgence to keep the thread caucus despite that, and I ask the participants not to turn in into anythign other than a discussion of a matter internal to Catholicism.

If that won’t work, make it Ecumenical but in essence it is an internal Catholic matter.


45 posted on 06/27/2008 12:07:41 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; sandyeggo; murphE; steve86; Ethan Clive Osgoode; ChurtleDawg
But in every evil you have some good. In the worst evil you have the most good. Those who refuse only one truth they may keep all the rest, the denial of only one truth means they have lost the faith.

Somewhere in here there is a problem. I don't think Vatican II refused anything; it may very well have veered in the directions that alarm us, -- they alarm me -- but in order to anathemize a belief there has to be a rejection of the truth made.

My other comment is that the sermon could have been given at any time of SSPX existence. The terms of the offer are not discussed at all, merely the ecclesiological disagreement is repeated. This convinces me that SSPX as a group will not reconcile (individual members, probably, will in great numbers), unless Vatican II is rescinded in full. They don' tsee a single "iceberg" in need of a better shape; they see two icebergs and wait for the wrong one to melt away.

46 posted on 06/27/2008 1:04:52 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: steadfastconservative
Bravo! Benedict XVI is pope. Neither Fellay nor Marcel Lefebvre before him were ever pope or ever will be. The schismatic excommunicati have two choices: submit with appropriate humility or depart from the Church. The fact is that the pope-bashing and Church-bashing by the minions of Marcel will continue because Benedict XVI is not about to surrender to these pipsqueaks. SSPX leaders are about as “Catholic” as was their predecessor in defiance of papal authority Luther and just as excommunicated.
47 posted on 06/27/2008 1:41:46 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Comment #48 Removed by Moderator

To: sandyeggo

I can only comment from the sermon under discussion. It describes a view on the Church that makes reconciliation fundamentally impossible,— I am referring to the two iceberg theory,— so long as Vatican II remains a valid council in the eye of the Church.


49 posted on 06/27/2008 4:06:39 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Sad, if true. They are marking themselves as goats instead of sheep. Obedience was important to Christ. Rebellion belongs to the other guys.


50 posted on 06/27/2008 4:10:23 PM PDT by TradicalRC ("...just not yet.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 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