Bishop Fellay of the Society of St. Pius X to Meet Pope August 29

In this year’s May-June issue of the French bi-monthly magazine “Sous la Bannière”, on page 7, there is a most interesting quotation attributed to Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. It reads as follows:

“A source in Austria, preferring to remain anonymous, assures us that Cardinal Ratzinger recently made the following admission to an Austrian bishop who is a friend of his: ‘I have two problems on my conscience: Archbishop Lefebvre and Fatima. As to the latter, my hand was forced. As to the former, I failed’.”

Of course if the “source in Austria” prefers to remain anonymous, we have no means of verifying whether the Cardinal truly said these things about Archbishop Lefebvre and Fatima, but the quotation is at least true to life, so it is worth dwelling on for a few moments.

As for what the Cardinal says about Fatima, we suspected back in June of 2000, when the Vatican – with the Cardinal in the forefront – supposedly released the third Secret, that there was some trickery going on. Either Rome was still hiding the true Secret, the one kept in his room by Pius XII but never looked at, or Rome was revealing the true Secret but twisting its interpretation. Either way, we said to ourselves at that time, Rome was wanting to have done with Fatima, and we saw Cardinal Ratzinger playing a leading part in the manoeuvre. Now comes the quotation from Austria confirming that the Cardinal was indeed taking part in a manoeuvre. Who “forced his hand”? Was it John-Paul II? Some hidden power behind both Pope and Cardinal? God knows.

As for what the quotation says about Archbishop Lefebvre, there too, if the quotation is not true it is certainly true to life. In May of 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre was threatening to consecrate with or without Rome’s permission bishops for the Society of St. Pius X, it was Cardinal Ratzinger who represented the Holy See in the negotiations meant to head off the “break” that such consecrations would involve. We recall that the Cardinal almost “succeeded” on May 6 when Archbishop Lefebvre signed a draft agreement, but the Cardinal “failed” when the Archbishop after a sleepless night took his signature back on the following day. And now comes the quotation from Austria confirming that the Cardinal still sees the termination of those negotiations as a “failure”.

This confirmation is important as suggesting that the Cardinal will remain, now he is Pope, in the same frame of mind to deal with the Society of St. Pius X in the audience which this August 29 he is due to grant to Archbishop Lefebvre’s successor at the head of the Society, Bishop Bernard Fellay. In other words, it is highly likely both that the present Pope is sincerely convinced that the “break” between the Society and Rome must be brought to an end, and that he will give all the appearances of being of good will when he employs all possible means, including his long experience of Roman diplomacy and all the prestige of his now exalted rank, to bring the “break” to an end.

In fact, a Rome-SSPX agreement seems impossible. And of course if the Society rejoined Rome, the resistance of Catholic Tradition would carry on without it, and if the Pope “converted”, then instead of the gentle war now being waged on his right by Tradition, he would be faced with a savage war being waged on his left by the cabal of neo-modernists. Either way, the war goes on between the friends and the enemies of the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ.

But what is important here and now for Catholics who will be following with interest the up-coming meeting between Rome and the Society, is not to fall into any of the traps that the Devil will be setting for them.

Firstly, the fact that the Society is asking to be received in audience by the Holy Father does not mean that it is on the point of betraying. If there is no contact between Tradition and Rome, now will the truth of Tradition ever make itself heard in Rome?

Secondly, there being a contact does not mean that an agreement is possible. Let all the Catholics who dream of fitting together Catholic Tradition and the present neo-modernist authorities of the Church come back down to earth. Catholic Authority and Catholic Truth will one day re-unite, but nothing for the moment indicates that that day is tomorrow – or the day after!

Lastly – and this is the subtlest trap of them all – let nobody think that because the Pope is of good will, therefore he cannot be a neo-modernist, or that because he is a neo-modernist, therefore he cannot be of good will. The present crisis of the Church would be much less grave and would deceive far fewer people if the neo-modernists were obviously of ill will. It is characteristic of these last times that bad principles are so widespread that few people are aware of the fact, and many people do evil convinced that they are doing good. That is why the Cardinal’s quotation is true to life in which he says that his “failure” of 1988 weighs “on his conscience”.

Let us pray to the Mother of God for Benedict XVI to see, above all the need to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, and if we ourselves can see, let us pray to her that we too not go blind – “He who thinks he stands, let him take care not to fall”, says St. Paul (I Cor X, 12). The times are bad!

I will pray for the return of all heretics, schismatics and infidels to the one true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which, neither holiness nor salvation can be found.

Christian unity exists as one of the four marks of the Church, as "one" as the Baltimore Catechism states clearly. Therefore, we must pray for the "return to the fold" to full, ecclesial and canonical communion for all those who, while being perhaps in the body of the Church, are not yet, in the heart of the Church.

We must pray for converion to full membership in the one, true Church of Jesus Christ, as Pope Pius XII said, "outside of which, neither holiness nor salvation can be found."

Please note well that there is no intention at this time of resuming "negotiations" of any kind.

So what would Bishop Fellay's reaction be if the Pope simply handed him some papers "here are your and the others episcopal and priestly faculties for a Personal Apostolic Administration - go and do the work of the Lord" with no strings attached?

Re 35: I don't believe anyone has accused SSPX of being heretical. As critical of them as I have been I see them as plainly schismatic not heretical. I know of no one who has ever made a credible charge of heresy against SSPX. With regards your litany of charges against the late pontiff, that vast majority of those do not constitute anything more serious that poor taste. Admittedly, a few are cause for concern. But the only one that could really come close to a formal statement of heresy would be your # 6. And that may have been the result of an excess of enthusiasm. If we are all to be burned at the stake every time we state something regarding the faith that is false either through ignorance or an ill advised enthusiasm then there will be a lot of human torches. This does not however excuse his comments. I think JP II was often scandalously casual in his obligation to defend the truth of the Catholic Faith in relation to other confessions. But I simply do not see that as rising to formal heresy. Most of your litany of alleged sins do not even come close to heresy, and in my opinion none actually meet the definition. "Any baptized person who, while retaining the name of Christian, obstinately denies or doubts any of the truths proposed for belief by the Divine and Catholic Faith".

Finally I would also point out that the Pontiff is according to canon law the supreme authority in the Church. He is as such not subject to the judgments of others.

Stealing without attribution again? Ever hear that stealing some else's work without attribution is a mortal sin?

I mentioned this before in order to warn you about good posting manners, here and at other reputable places. Looks like you didn't heed the warning.

The second half of your post was lifted from:
http://www.traditio.com/comment/com0202.htm

This was posted without any form of attribution.

Most of these were debunked before. Some were amazing exaggerations.

Now comes the quotation from Austria confirming that the Cardinal was indeed taking part in a manoeuvre. Who “forced his hand”? Was it John-Paul II? Some hidden power behind both Pope and Cardinal? God knows.

* I heard from a friend the forcing was done by a current Bishop who initially was a Nun. The Nun had a sex change operation in 1964, paid for by a Mason who lives in Transylvania. His name is Vlad the impecunious. I know, I know. That is what makes this whole things so sinister. How could He have paid for the operation? I suspect Roger Mahoney is behind the whole thing. (He sold Fatima Tours short early in 1999) In any event, the nun/woman now Bishop/Man was befriended by Fr. Moderator of Traditio fame and "Fr." put him in touch with a Thucite..and the rest is history.

What I just said is just as reasonable this psychosis is based upon.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Ratzinger lied his butt off on Fatima. Oh, what? You say Sr. Lucy confirmed everything putout by the CDF? Well, who can trust her? She went to the N.O. Liturgy.

And yes, they are nuts. Schism leads to madness. I was laughing when I read the stuff about Rome and Tradition, Tradition is represented by a schism don't you know :)

One can only laugh at such arrogant presumption even as one is saddened by the realization of what might happen to the delusional folks when they die EENS.

The first half of the stipulated quotation, the half about Fatima, by itself renders the quotation attributed to Cardinal Ratzinger highly doubtful--it dovetails just too nicely and neatly with the fringe Fatima crowd to be credible. Thus I wouldn't take anything the article says seriously--it has all the earmarks of urban legend created to further polemics.

I did not choose to make those letters public. They were posted elsewhere on the Internet for all to see. I simply posted them here. (A little venial sin of rash judgment for your next Confession!) Anyhow, isn't secrecy the surest sign of a cult?

I love the way you Lefebvrians twist and turn things. Fellay did not "instigate a meeting" which the Pope "accepted".

Please, remember who is the excommunicated schismatic here - it's Fellay.

Fellay humbly (well, insofar as any Lefebvrian is capable of humility!) requested an audience, which the Holy Father graciously (after the insulting Circular Letters, that's being VERY gracious indeed) granted to him.

And we'll pray.

But read everything to come out of the SSPX - and that's a lot of reading, since it's coming out of both sides of their mouths! - and it's pretty clear: like their arrogant and disobedient master, Marcel, having been their own Popes for this long, it is very unlikely that they are about to go back to being obedient bishops of Christ's one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church!

The sspx thinks of itself as the one with authority. They probably think the Pope should publicly apologize and do penance and then they might let Rome reunite with the real Church - the sspx.

This has gone on too long and I see no desire on the part of the sspx to quit its schism. If they do recant and renounce their schism, their followers will go ape. As a consequence of their crazy claims, the sspx has led its followers too far from Rome for any reunion in our lifetimes. Why "unite" with evil? will be the reaction of their followers

Their spiritual father said the Holy See and the Hierarchy was occupied by antiChrists. In the mind of their followers nothing much has changed

si si, no no, has a long and well documented examination of the schism. Lefebvre clearly was establishing a petit ecclesia. But, we are supposed to pretend it is all about Tradition. They ain't coming back. This is all a sham intended to keep the sspx fellow travelers excited about Rome's perfidy - "we tried to bring Rome back to Tradition. They refused but we will keep alive the spark of Tradition until such time as the Holy Spirit breathes upon our spark and we have a Pope.".

Who knows..Maybe they will "elect" their own Pope. I am sure they could draft an "explanation" of the necessity of doing such a thing along with reasons why theh Holy Spirit supplied univeral Jurisdiction during this time of unprecedented emergency blah, blah, blah

"I did not choose to make those letters public. They were posted elsewhere on the Internet for all to see."

But you chose to post them publicly hear to spread them, right?

"I simply posted them here. (A little venial sin of rash judgment for your next Confession!) Anyhow, isn't secrecy the surest sign of a cult?"

I am sure that there are many internal memos the Vatican writes and that businesses write to each other every day that are not public. Does that make them cults?

"I love the way you Lefebvrians twist and turn things. Fellay did not "instigate a meeting" which the Pope "accepted"."

I am not a Lefebrian. I am a Catholic. I attend an indult Mass thee times a month (driving 3 hours RT once each month) and a Novus Ordo (because I have no choice in the matter, the other time per month. I attend the Novus Ordo daily.

"Fellay humbly (well, insofar as any Lefebvrian is capable of humility!) requested an audience, which the Holy Father graciously (after the insulting Circular Letters, that's being VERY gracious indeed) granted to him."

These letters were posted by YOU. And it is YOUR opinion they are "insulting." Your own private interpretation, as you like to say.

"And we'll pray."

You'll pray for what?

"But read everything to come out of the SSPX - and that's a lot of reading, since it's coming out of both sides of their mouths! - and it's pretty clear: like their arrogant and disobedient master, Marcel, having been their own Popes for this long, it is very unlikely that they are about to go back to being obedient bishops of Christ's one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church!"

And you have obviously never read the decree on ecumenism from the Second Vatican Council nor Ut Unum Sint on how to maintain relations with those whom you deem to be "schismatics." Try reading them and heeding them. You are doing NOTHING to foster unity by your posts here.

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.