Posted on 11/25/2004 10:27:28 PM PST by AskStPhilomena
Related....
http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20031208.html
http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20040119.html
http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20030915.html
Very good article, considering that it was written in 1985, the destruction of the Roman Catholic Church continues. It will be reversed by the repeal of Vatican II and a return to the Laws and Rites prior to V2. SSPX priests are now practicing the Tridentine Mass. The time has come to take back our Religion and the Church.
Archbishop Lefebvre was a traitor - and Michael Davies dumped him three years later in 1988 after Lefebvre and Company were excommunicated for the crime of schism.
Bleat all you want - those who adhere to the schism are also in schism and in the state of excommunication.
So-called "traditionalists" are the present-day "rats" who have deserted the Barque of Peter. The Church established by Christ will last until the end of time - battered, yes; deserted by rats - yes; but destroyed? NO! And, there will always be a Peter who will always be the Bishop of Rome. That is Catholic Dogma.
There is NO "good" reason for schism!
Defend Karol Jozef Wojtyla's open support of China's official 'Catholic' Church, which does not recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ. The false Chinese church is in schism, and is embraced nonetheless by Wojtyla and his Vatican lapdogs.
Who is in schism? Those who have declared themselves Latin Roman Catholics who hold great reverence for the Sacred Dogma, or a pope who rules in error publicly embracing those who have not converted to the One True Faith!!!
I did not realise Davies was such a fan of Ratzinger back then. However, this article begs the question that, if those in authority regretted the consequences of Vatican II, they have since shown great impotence in their ability (or desire) to arrest the reforms. Such bleating can of course become an industry and is in fact part and parcel of the conservative approach which is nervous of both the past and of the future. Even strong traditionalists are inclined to believe that the new order is an unstoppable force and some kind of comfortable resignation is preferable to the long harsh winters of exile.
I don't know if one can "repeal" Vatican II as nothing there particularly went to dogma. And suggestions were vague and taken to support an unholy 'reform'. It's that which will be stopped. Vatican II was a pointless council to be sure. It was purely dogmatic, unlike all that claimed to be ecumenical councils before it. It may not, therefore, even be a general council, but a lesser council instead. But the "repeal" must start with the 'new order'. Its destruction of the outward institutional body was predicted by many at the time, not the least of whom were von Hildebrand and Ottaviani, Bacci and those who composed and would have signed the Critical Study. Paul VI posted platitudes and likely lies in exhorting public acceptance of what even he referred to as his - innovation. JP II has simply promoted and maintained this unholy thing. And many Catholics are at the point where they pray that JP II simply dies - tomorrow, so that a new Pope, better, or far worse, will help draw the divisions clearly, or begin to reconcile the institutional church with The Catholic Church.
Yeah, pal, so was the LM and their dominance. So seems the ACLU, NEA and gubment schools. So seems last year's NFL division champs. All seem unstoppable - until they are stopped.
This will also be stopped, dead. The 'new order' is an abomination spoken of by Our Blessed Mother in apparitions. It's manifestly unholy. It's self-evidently self-destructive of the institutional church. It's a mockery of the Faith, and an enticement away from salvation. Believe me, its days are numbered.
Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani and the Novus Ordo after Paul VI's elucidations regarding the dogmatic presuppositions / foundations of the Roman Missal of 1970
TCR Note: Here we see how Cardinal Ottaviani ended up repudiating the so-called "Ottaviani Intervention" initiated and written by men who would later fall into schism & Sedevacantism (Lefebvre, M.L. Guerard des Lauriers, et al) after Paul VI's declarations and elucidations. Integrists have been vainly trying to explain away Ottaviani's action ever since. For more see Pope Paul VI's Credo of the People of God, Encyclical Mysterium Fidei, etc., at TCR
"I have rejoiced profoundly to read the discourse by the holy father on the question of the new ordo missae, and especially the doctrinal precisions contained in his discourses at the public audiences of november 19 and 26, after which I believe, no one can any longer be genuinely scandalized. As for the rest, a prudent and intelligent catechesis must be undertaken to solve some legitimate perplexities which the text is capable of arousing. In this sense I wish your ‘doctrinal note' [on the novus ordo] and the activity of the militia sanctae mariae wide diffusion and success." -- Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani
----from James Likoudis and Kenneth Whitehead, The Pope, The Council and The Mass, The Christopher publishing house, w. Hanover, Massachusetts, 1981, p. 74.
And later: "The beauty of the church is equally resplendent in the variety of the liturgical rites which enrich her divine cult when they are legitimate and conform to the faith. Precisely the legitimacy of their origin protects and guards them against infiltration of errors. . . the purity and unity of the faith is in this manner also upheld by the supreme magisterium of the pope through the liturgical laws." ---ibid, ibid., p. 129, ‘letter from his eminence alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani to Dom Gerard Lafond, o.s.b., in Documentation Catholique, ‘#67, 1970, pp. 215-216 and 343
Davies wrote a lot for schismatic rags encouraging schismatics to remain in schism thereby putting their souls on the road to eternal perdition.
Davies wrote a lot for schismatic rags encouraging schismatics to remain in schism thereby putting their souls on the road to eternal perdition.
"Anyone who thinks an excomminicated man is a Saint is a nut and Davies was a nut." Bornacatholic, at his computer" Nov. 26, 2004
Whatever happened to Bugnini...how is his case for canonization progressing?
That said, the situation in the West has certainly not been positive.
I am certainly a critic of some of what has come about since Vatican II, but I'm not sure it's a "cause/effect" relationship. Pope St. Pius X wrote of the modernism that was threatening the Church from within nearly a hundred years ago.
I am more inclined to think that some of the nonsense we've seen in the years since Vatican II is really just a reflection of the sickness of modernism that predated it. At worst, Vatican II acted as a conduit, and was misused by people that would have used anything available to them to further their ends.
In other words, I'm not sure that even without Vatican II, we wouldn't be facing the same sorts of problems. I'm afraid that sometimes, by focusing too much energy on the perceived faults of Vatican II, we miss the real source of the problem.
Right on.
In Rome and throughout the world there is a whole hive of ceaseless activity on the part of termites toiling away feverishly in the shadows. This compels us to intuit the active presence of a complete plan of trickery bent on disintegrating those doctrines which form and nourish the Catholic faith. An ever-increasing number of 'straws in the wind' coming from various quarters bears witness to the gradual unfolding of a broad and progressive plan of manipulation, under the extremely capable leadership of seemingly devout men, calculated to uproot Christianity as it has been known and lived for 19 centuries, in order to replace it by a Christianity of the "new age." (Msgr. Antonino Romeo, Divinitas 4 (1960), p. 454)
*LOL
Of course, I could point out that one's particular judgement has nothing to do with my noting Davies was a nut, but, that would be a bit touchy :)
*LOL
Of course, I could point out that one's particular judgement has nothing to do with my noting Davies was a nut, but, that would be a bit touchy :)
No unrepentant excommunicant has yet been declared a saint. No sainthood has been declared by the Church on the basis of one layman's say-so. Lefebvre was NO Athanasius! Even though Davies dumped lefebvre - he (Davies) still had a business to operate - selling his books to the "trads". "Business is business"! May God have mercy on the souls of Marcel Lefebvre and Michael Davies.
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.