But because they're nuts they can't be held fully responsible for their actions. What a world!
With these kind of statements, one wonders whether Bishop Williamson could subscribe to the solemn profession of faith issued by Pope St. Hormisdas and confirmed by the Fathers of Constantinople IV and Vatican I.
So the fathers of the fourth Council of Constantinople, following the footsteps of their predecessors, published this solemn profession of faith: "The first condition of salvation is to maintain the rule of the true faith. And since that saying of our lord Jesus Christ, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, cannot fail of its effect, the words spoken are confirmed by their consequences. For in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved unblemished, and sacred doctrine been held in honor. Since it is our earnest desire to be in no way separated from this faith and doctrine, we hope that we may deserve to remain in that one communion which the Apostolic See preaches, for in it is the whole and true strength of the christian religion." (Pastor Aeternus, 4.2)
One recalls the words of Cardinal Hoyos to Bishop Fellay: "today I am convinced that there are those in your ranks who no longer have the true faith in the authentic Tradition of the Church".
I pray that the reconcilliation does take place, but only if the Vatican restores tradition and abides by all past church teachings and throws out this modernistic agenda and restores the TLM as the so called "Norm" and makes those who want to attend the NO mass the "indult" and because they want to stay "in communion" make them drive the 20 miles every Sunday and make them beg like dogs for a church here or there for an indult
In my opinion it is the church and Ratzinger who have lost all credibility. How can an astute scholar of history as he actually warm up to the Protestant Mass that was drafted by Protestants and a Mason?
Williamson has it backwards, of course. HE and the SSPX bishops are the excommunicated schismatics, NOT Pope Benedict XVI.
His attitude is fully in keeping with that expressed by the SSPX's "Secretary General" in "Circular Letters" which were NOT supposed to be seen "outside the Society" (like their monkeying around with annulments a few years back).
Read these and ask yourself if this is the attitude one needs to have when one is seeking reconciliation with the successor of the Supreme Pontiff who was personally and specifially disobeyed and with the Church from whom one went into schism by bestowing and receiving illicit episcopal consecration.
The Circular Letters:
Circular Letter No. 2005-04 (excerpt):
After the death of Pope John Paul II and the election of Cardinal Ratzinger, who took the name of Benedict XVI, we are in expectation of what this pontificate will be. Obviously, Cardinal Ratzinger's past is scarcely encouraging and one might indeed well be fearful. Nevertheless, one might equally entertain some hope, however faint, for the liturgy should the Pope have the courage of the convictions he expressed as a private author in his different publications over the last few years. One of the first, keenly awaited gestures which should give us a fairly significant indication will be his nomination for the prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.
It seems that, after a moment of panic, the hard-liners have begun to recuperate their position and to encircle the new pope so as to keep a free hand to continue to spread in the Church deleterious seeds. As the Anglo-Saxons say: "Wait and see . . . "
Fr. Arnaud Selegny
Circular Letter 2005-05EX
Dear Confreres,
The election of Pope Benedict XVI after the death of John Paul II is an event that must hold the attention of the Society and its superiors, even though significant changes from the course described by the preceding pontificate probably cannot be expected. The Pope's recent authorization to open the cause of beatification of his predecessor, waiving the five-year period that is supposed to elapse first, can scarcely inspire confidence.
Nevertheless, as our beloved and venerated founder Archbishop Lefebvre did upon the election of Pope John Paul II, it seems useful and necessary to contact the new pope to request an audience. This is Bishop Fellay's intention, determined in consultation with his council, and which he desires to make known to you by this letter.
Yet, so that this intention may be rightly understood, I have been charged with explaining to you his reasoning as regards this request for an audience. What is its purpose? Above all, it is a matter of making the presence of Tradition felt at Rome, of bearing witness to what we are so that the voice of Tradition may be heard at the heart of Christendom, even if we must not have any illusions about the kind of echo it will encounter. It is an episode in the combat of the faith that we are waging, and which must necessarily also be waged in Rome.
This audience will equally be the occasion to solemnly reiterate in a personal, direct manner, the call for the restoration of the Tridentine Rite of Mass in all its rights, so that the ostracism of which it is the object may cease. It will be the occasion to remind the Pope that Cardinal Ratzinger belonged to the Commission of nine Cardinals that unanimously judged in 1986 that no one could prevent a priest from celebrating this Mass. If there was unanimity, then necessarily he must have voted thus.
Will he be responsive to this argument? It is hard to say, but it is our duty to remind him of it, and to go and proclaim the inalienable right of this rite before the distant successor of St. Pius V.
Bishop Fellay considers it very important to inform you at the outset of this initiative so that it can proceed in the light of day, and so that al the members of the Society can understand its scope and meaning. Please note well that there is no intention at this time of resuming "negotiations" of any kind.
You are asked to please inform the members of the Society entrusted to your solicitude, so that all may know the reasons for this request of an audience and its goal. On the other hand, this letter is not supposed to be disclosed outside the Society, even if experience has taught us that this type of news rarely remains "intra muros" . . .
Confiding this step to Popes St. Pius V and St. Pius X, I assure you, dear Confreres, of my prayers to the united Hearts of Jesus and Mary.
+Fr. Arnaud Selegny
Secretary General.
Source: PRIESTS' BULLETIN, June 2005, #174, pp 5-7
If Rome can allow China to appoint "Bishops" and hopes to reconcile these Communist Chinese "Bishops" of the Communist Patriotic Church, what would impede Rome with SSPX?
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.
would you like a little poison with your cupcake?
I fear you are wasting your time posting this on FreeRepublic. Most of the Catholic here unfortunately, are party players, thus they see nothing wrong with Bush or the Republicans, and the see nothing wrong with Vatican II and the New Mass.