Posted on 11/25/2004 10:27:28 PM PST by AskStPhilomena
Typical side-issue tactic! I do not have to defend the Pope in his attempts to reconcile schismatics - either old schismatics OR the "new" schismatics. It is his "job" to do both! The fact is that the greater blame rests on the "new" schismatics - for the blame always is greater on the initiators - not on their children or their children's children. Look to your own condition, Robert, before you judge the Pope.
Which particular apparition did the BVM speak of "the abomination of desolations" sevry?
One is entitled to hope that he is on his way to being a saint? How are YOU progressing?
"The 'new order' is an abomination ....Believe me, its days are numbered."
To be sure but it is coming up to a half century since the Council and the plundering, reforms and revisions go on. It could be another half century before we see signs of a general turning back to the Church we know. Quite how that will happen is hard to know unless one believes in the maxim that things will get much worse before they get better.
Why don't you slanderers at least get your story in order? Perhaps because lying and slandering are much more complicated than telling the truth. It's hard to remember which lie you told last.
Here is what your fellow anti-Traditionalist Stephen Hand said about Michael Davies in his article "The Fall of Michael Davies - The Lefebvrist Worm in Una Voce":
[O]ne looks to the overall and longstanding theology of Davies, Una Voce International president, who wrote recently regarding Protocol 1411, opposing the Holy Father:"Archbishop Lefebvre withdrew from the 1988 agreement with the Holy See because he felt that the Vatican could not be relied upon to keep its promises. It would appear that there are now powerful forces in the Curia determined to prove that he was right"
Davies remains heavily indebted to and rooted in Lefebvre's errors of disposition, suspicion, and fact. Indeed, Davies' entire theological outlook (as we will see in part below) is thoroughly colored by his long and lasting debt to his mentor. More recently he has taken to bed with the Mattities, speaking at their conferences with the signers of schismatic screeds against the Pope, with Feeneyites also. Much of the Integrist bacteria has been spawned in Davies' old glass. For years---up to and after Lefebvre's death----Davies was and remains the microphone and press agent / apologist for the errors of Lefebvre, which is why he has never repudiated the SSPX (even if Una Voce is inclusive of others), why he allows that organization to continue to sell his books to this day.
I have read a lot of Davies' articles from the seventies and eighties, and in every case Davies took the most optimistic possible viewpoint. For several years after 1978 he was positive that JPII was going to solve all the problems in the Church. He was always a "glass half full" kind of guy, In fact, his articles only become heated and vehement when discussing those more pessimistic than himself, sedevacantists and such. But overall, one has to give him credit for always making the best of the situation, and whenever his optimism strayed too far into fantasy, he would eventually correct himself.
He was never excommunicated. The pope, incorrectly, declared that he had excommunicated himself.
Read the Balamand Statement. The Vatican says that 'schism' is a path to salvation. That would make schism a good thing. Therefore JPII thinks schism is a good thing.
I am also glad to have documentation supporting my assessment of what went on and when it went on.
I can't help but believe that if all Catholics knew the truth about the state of the Church by 1960,there would be far less bickering between those who see the Tridentine Mass as a cure-all and those who kknow it is far more complex than that. Every minute we spend arguing each other gives respite to the real enemies within,and they laugh.
Get serious.
There are a lot of people pointing to 2010 - the masons, the 'stock pickers', and others. It's generally for something that supposedly marks the end of the "US-era", in some way or other. The masons will be happy with that. But the 'euros' won't necessarily be the beneficiaries. Anyway - have to see what happens.
He clearly saw all the problems. His Cranmer's Godly Order basically lays out the steps in 'Vatican II reform'. But he never ultimately wanted to make that connection. Maybe he had a change of heart, at the last. But his writings essentially catalogue many of the fundamental errors since the mid-60s.
This isn't someone you want to quote on much of anything. I have Hand's original book. And he went on essentially to repudiate most EVERYTHING he wrote. He's a flake. He can bitch all he likes about Davies. It means nothing. You'd learn more from Carville telling the Republican how to run the GOP.
Thanks for the link to Father Harrison's article. I wish every Freeper who calls himself C/catholic could read it and understand the Golden Legend and how the enemy worked,then and now.
He was never excommunicated. The pope, incorrectly, declared that he had excommunicated himself.This is a case of denial of facts which are self-evident.
There are relevant documents on the case:
Some Documents on the Case
1. 1988, May 5 - PROTOCOL OF AGREEMENT between Cardinal Ratzinger and Archbishop Lefebvre
2. 1988, July 1 - DECREE OF EXCOMMUNICATION
3. 1988, July 2 - "ECCLESIA DEI" - Apostolic Letter of John Paul II
4. 1993, June 28 - USA APOSTOLIC NUNCIATURE to Mrs. PATRICIA MORLEY
5. 1995, Sept. 27 - "ECCLESIA DEI" Pontifical Commission's Msgr Camille Perl Reply to Scott Windsor
6. 1996, Aug. 24 - THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF LEGISLATIVE TEXTS On The Excommunication of Followers of Archbishop Lefebvre
7. 1996, Oct. 31 - Responses from THE PONTIFICAL CONGREGATION OF BISHOPS, and THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF LEGISLATIVE TEXTS
8. 1998, Oct. 27 - "ECCLESIA DEI" Pontifical Commission's Msgr Camille Perl Reply to F. John Loughnan
9. 2002, Aug. 14 - "ECCLESIA DEI" Pontifical Commission's Msgr Camille Perl Reply to unknown person [1]
10. 2002, Apr. 15 - "ECCLESIA DEI" Pontifical Commission's Msgr Camille Perl Reply to unknown person [2]
11. 2002, Sept. 27 - "ECCLESIA DEI" Pontifical Commission's Msgr Camille Perl Second Reply to unknown person [1]
12. 2003, Jan. 18 - "ECCLESIA DEI" Pontifical Commission's Msgr Camille Perl Communicated to Una Voce America - being a follow up to that of Sept. 27, 2002
The actual Decree of Excomunication is as follows:
Quote:
DECREE OF EXCOMMUNICATION
From the Office of the Congregation for Bishops, 1 July 1988
Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of Tulle, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning of 17 June last and the repeated appeals to desist from his intention, has performed a scismatical act by the episcopal consecration of four priests, without pontifical mandate and contrary to the will of the Supreme Pontiff, and has therefore incurred the penalty envisaged by Canon 1364, paragraph 1, and Canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law.
Having taken account of all the juridical effects, I declare that the above-mentioned Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred ipso facto excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.
Moreover, I declare that Monsignor Antonio de Castro Mayer, Bishop emeritus of Campos, since he took part directly in the liturgical celebration as co-consecrator and adhered publicly to the schismatical act, has incurred excommunication latae sentientae as envisaged by Canon 1364, paragraph 1.
The priests and faithful are warned not to support the schism of Archbishop Lefebvre, otherwise they shall incur ipso facto the very grave penalty of excommunication.
From the Office of the Congregation for Bishops, 1 July 1988.
BERNARDINUS Card. GANTIN
Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops
("ipso facto" - by the fact or the act itself)
Source: http://www.latin-mass.org/excommunication.html
End Quote:
The Excommunication for the crime of schism was authorized by the Supreme Pontiff, who is the Supreme Legislator, and the Supreme Interpreter of the Law.
YOU say "He was never excommunicated. The pope, incorrectly, declared that he had excommunicated himself."
Hmmmmmmmm! So, Habemus Papem, eh? Papa Grey Ghost11 !
Then you agree with me that giving the remains of the great Church fathers to the schismatic Greek Orthodox is just wrong - and for so many reasons.
As someone else pointed out, the Vatican also has supported the official Commie church in Red China, as the Chicoms simultaneously persecute real Catholics, as they persecute various other 'unsanctioned' organizations.
But this Gantin letter was answered, above, and by others. You don't convince anyone by ignoring replies. You have to address them, and consider them. Playing politically correct may suit you - so you think. But look at the LM. They have played PC. And they're waning. The anchors are moving on. The expectations are lowered. PC will do that to you. Reply, instead. Read the objections to YOUR objections. Consider them fairly.
The Vatican says that 'schism' is a path to salvation.Judging from your first post - I cannot accept that your statement is accurate.
Then you agree with me that giving the remains of the great Church fathers to the schismatic Greek Orthodox is just wrong - and for so many reasons.Not necessarily so! If you remember, there were MUTUAL excommunications between the East and West - "for so many reasons" - one of which was the theft of relics and holy things by the West - and, of course, the desecration of Santa Sophia. But, you are aware of these things, aren't you?As someone else pointed out, the Vatican also has supported the official Commie church in Red China, as the Chicoms simultaneously persecute real Catholics, as they persecute various other 'unsanctioned' organizations.
I think you are "putting words into the mouth" of that poster re the Chinese! Shame on you. The Church has had to "live with" the State from her inception. Sometimes, She has fared very badly; sometimes She has become dominant. Whatever the circumstances - She HAS survived, and will survive until the end of time. That doesn't mean that She will survive in the United States of America, or in Canada, etc.; but She will still survive the attacks of Communists, Anarchists, Protestants and Integrists!
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.