Posted on 09/20/2005 10:26:43 AM PDT by NYer
Note from Papabile
This is an extremely long post. I was told this interview with Fellay was carried on DICI, but I cannot find it. I post it here to simply air that which is public. It is not an endorsement or support for the SSPX's position.
D.I.C.I.: Your Excellency, you requested the audience with Pope Benedict XVI that took place last August 29. What was the purpose of your request?
Bishop Fellay: We wanted to meet the Holy Father because we are Catholic and, as every Catholic, we are attached to Rome. We wanted to show, in requesting this audience quite simply that we are Catholic.
Our recognition of the Pope is not limited only to mentioning his name in the Canon of the Mass, as do all the priests of the Society of Saint Pius X. It is normal that we should express our respect as being Catholic and roman. Catholic means universal, and the Mystical Body of the Church does not just consist in our chapels.
There was likewise on our part the plan to remind once more the Sovereign Pontiff of the existence of Tradition. Ours is the concern to remind him that Tradition is the Church, and that we incarnate the Church’s Tradition in a manner that is very much alive. We want to show that the Church would be much stronger in today’s world if it maintained Tradition. Thus, we want to put forward our experience: if the Church desires to escape the tragic crisis that it is presently going through, then Tradition is a response, indeed the only response, to this crisis.
D.I.C.I.: How did this audience go?
BISHOP FELLAY: The audience took place in the Popes’ summer residence at Castel Gandolfo. Foreseen for 11:30 a.m., it actually began at 12:10 p.m. in the Sovereign Pontiff’s office. He generally grants an audience of 15 minutes to a bishop. For us, it last 35 minutes. This means, so say the Vatican specialists, that Benedict XVI wanted to show his interest in these questions.
There were four of us: the Holy Father and Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, Father Schmidberger and myself. The conversation took place in French – contrary to the announcement of certain persons that it would take place in German. It was directed by the Pope in a kindly spirit. He described three difficulties, in response to the letter that we had sent to him shortly before the audience. Benedict XVI was aware of this letter, and it was not necessary to go over the points brought up in it. We there outlined a description of the Church, quoting the “silent apostasy” of John-Paul II, “the boat which is taken in water from every side” and “the dictatorship of relativism” of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, with as an appendix of photos of Masses quite as scandalous as one another.
We also gave a presentation of the Society with a list of numbers and different projects. We quoted two examples of actions led by the Society in the present world, and the unbelievable attitude of the local episcopacies in their regard: the law suit in Argentina that obtained that the sale of contraceptives is not forbidden, and which merited for us to be called terrorists by the bishop of Cordoba, and the denunciation of gay pride procession in Lucerne, that finished in the Catholic church by a Protestant ceremony with total indifference on the part of the bishop.
Finally, we expressed our requests: the changing of the attitude of hostility towards Tradition, which attitude makes the traditional Catholic life (Is there any other?) practically impossible in the conciliar church. We requested that this be done by granting full liberty to the Tridentine Mass, by silencing the accusation of schism directed against us, by burying the pretended excommunications, and by founding a structure for the family of Tradition within the Church.
D.I.C.I.: Is it possible for us to know the difficulties raised by Benedict XVI?
BISHOP FELLAY: I can only evoke them. First of all, the Holy Father insisted on effective recognition by the Pope, linking it to the situation of necessity invoked by the consecration of the bishops by Archbishop Lefebvre, and our subsequent activity.
Then Benedict XVI pointed out that there can only be one way of belong to the Catholic Church: it is that of having the spirit of Vatican II interpreted in the light of Tradition, that is in the intention of the Fathers of the Council and according to the letter of the text. It is a perspective that frightens us greatly…
Finally, we would have to have, the Sovereign Pontiff thinks, a structure that is appropriate for us for the traditional rite and certain exterior practices – without, however, protecting us from the spirit of the Council that we would have to adopt.
D.I.C.I.: The Vatican Press Release at the end of the audience speaks of a “desire to proceed in stages and within a reasonable time limit”. What ought we to understand by this expression?
BISHOP FELLAY: The Pope did not want to go into the problems in depth, but simply to highlight them. But it will be necessary first of all to respond to the requirement of the right of existence of the old Mass so as to afterwards confront the errors of the Council, for we see there the cause of the present evils, both a direct cause and in part an indirect cause.
Of course, we will go step by step. We must show the council in a different light than that which is given to it by Rome. At the same time as we condemn the errors, it is indispensable for us to show their logical consequences and their impact on the disastrous situation of today’s Church, without, however, provoking exasperation, that could cause the discussions to be broken off. This obliges us to proceed by stages.
With respect to a reasonable time limit, it is said in Rome that documents are in preparation for communities attached to the Ecclesia Dei Commission, that are quite new, and offering things that have never previously been offered. “Let us wait and see!” It is certainly true that the Pope has the desire of rapidly arranging this situation.
In order to be quite precise, I would like to add this further detail. We must indeed consider the Pope’s difficult situation. He is stuck between the progressives on one side and us on the other. If he were to grant a general permission for the Mass on the basis on our request alone, the modernists would stand up against him, affirming that the Pope has given way to traditionalists. We learned from Bishop Ricard that in 2000 he, along with Cardinal Lustiger and the Archbishop of Lyon suddenly rushed to Rome to block a proposition made to the Society, under threat of rebellion if it did not work. We know that the German bishops acted in the same way at the time of the World Youth Conference in Cologne: “It is us or them”. By this is meant: “If they are recognized, then we will leave the Church and go into schism.”
It is for this reason that the Pope could not, during the audience, give us the verbal assurance that this Fall, for example, freedom would be given to the Mass. Any promise made by him to the Society in this sense would infallibly expose him to pressure by the progressives. We would then have received the opinions of a Pope against the majority of bishops disposed towards secession. This cannot be expected in the climate of the present debate, even with the will of a certain restoration. As for myself, I believe that it will only be a limited freedom for the Mass that will eventually be granted.
D.I.C.I.: The Press has published rumors concerning divisions within the Society of Saint Pius X? What is exactly the case?
BISHOP FELLAY: The announcement of the audience granted by the Pope provoked feverish talk in the media. They have made a lot of noise, attempting to show that divisions exist in the Society amongst its four bishops. Journalists have likewise published the threats directed against the Pope by the progressives: “To grant freedom to the Mass is to disavow Paul VI and the liturgical reform”.
However, I can affirm to you that within the Society of Saint Pius X, the four bishops are united on the question of the relationships with Rome, and that Bishop Williamson, whose name has been quoted, is not “sedevacantist”. The media has nothing to worry about. Alas, this is for them not newsworthy.
D.I.C.I.: Your Excellency, what do you now hope for?
BISHOP FELLAY: Some Cardinals in Rome hope to see Tradition recognized. We likewise hope for it. We hope, in particular, for complete freedom to be granted to the Mass, but there is little chance that this will be for tomorrow. It will then be a duty to acknowledge the place of Tradition in the Church, avoiding the bad interpretations that are often given concerning it.
We must force the Roman authorities to admit that we cannot follow without serious reservations the interpretation that they given of the Council and of Ecumenism, as it is practiced. Deep down, what we hope for is to make them understand one day the whole reason why Tradition exists.
Looks like I really hit a nerve with that one. Listen, I really don't want to exacerbate and internal disturbances you are obviously contending with, so I'll just continue to pray for you. God Bless.
What did I do?
ROTFLMAO Brother, I couldn't have made-up a more illogical post...and to think you did it to defend L & L....
Nah, It seems that you just didn't understand it. It's quite logical. It's actually points out how utterly stupid your post was.
But that's to be expected. I'm sure plenty of people understood it. They know your post was stupid. I know it was stupid. So, it seems you and those with the same level of candlepower are in the dark.
You obviously disagree with Luther and LeFebvre on matter of the quotes you provided. So, I took into account the subject matter and by negation surmised what you must believe.
Tell me, do you agree with Luther on this?
Luther: The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart.
Luther: [On Mary] ..highest woman and the noblest gem in Christianity after Christ . . . She is nobility, wisdom, and holiness personified. We can never honor her enough. Still honor and praise must be given to her in such a way as to injure neither Christ nor the Scriptures.
Luther: [On Mary-prior to the dogmatic definition of the Immaculate Conception] ..It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin.
You're not playing fair G, you're not allowed to use logic and reason.
Sorry 'bout that Murph, I keep trying to act like out opponents in discussion but logic keeps creeping into it.
I just can't think fuzzy enough. Sorry.
Paul VI was Pope and the articles referenced by Hermann show how wrong you are about the claimed contradiction between DH and QC.
Please consider that you may be wrong and the Catholic Church right.
I don't really have much interest in searching history looking for examples of papal mistakes which were resisted. What's the point? We know that it's only legitimate to resist "were the Pope to command anything against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or divine law", for then "he ought not to be obeyed, but in such commands is to be passed over." (Cardinal Turrecremata).
Since Msgr. Lefebvre wasn't resisting papal commands that were against Holy Writ, etc., his "resistance" could hardly have been correct. Nor were all his objectionable actions in the character of "resistance": for instance, consecrating bishops against the papal will, which was an act contrary to Divine Law, or the schismatic refusal to be in communion with members of the Catholic Church, which was manifested in the complete rejection of her normative rites of worship.
Can you explain what you mean by the term "manifested"?
I really can't get enough of this. Please don't stop.
Keepdefending Luther and Lefebvre contra the Papacy,Ecumenical Councils and Authority.
It shows lurkers what a schism does to one.
MurphE...LOL PLEASE continue imagining any Christianm thinks angelqueen of any value. It shows where you heart is really at.
I get stuff freepmailed to me every week or so and the stuff in there is absolutely disgusting what with all the holocaust denial, antisemitism ect and all the references to links shared by Storm Front, Neo-Nazi's, how the real Church is the sspx... etc..
MurphE real Christians laugh at angelqueen. You just dont'g et it, do you?
LOL yeah, sister you really touched a nerve. I am jealous of you and your posse at angelqueen
It has always been my goal to fraternize with schismatics. One only need read my posts to can see how much I value them :)
Marcel Lefebvre, "In the Church there is no law or jurisdiction which can impose on a Christian a diminution of his faith. All the faithful can and should resist whatever interferes with their faith.... If they are forced with an order putting their faith in danger of corruption, there is an overriding duty to disobey."
Martin Luther, "The Church of Rome, formerly the most holy of all churches, has become . . . the very kingdom of sin, death and hell; so that not even the Antichrist, if he were to come, could desire any addition to its wickedness."
Marcel Lefebvre "The See of Peter and posts of authority in Rome being occupied by Antichrists, the destruction of the Kingdom of Our Lord is being rapidly carried out even within His Mystical Body here below."
*Come on, Gerard. Try this once more...
Tell us how Luther and Lefebvre were "right" to hold such beliefs
Please, gerard, inquiring minds want to know :)
Oh, you are at liberty to accuse me of believing anything you desire. I couldn't care less. That is an obvious diversionary tactic.
But FEW know the REAL Lefebvre. Few know how insane he was. Few have read the insane and hateful words he spoke and wrote against the Pope, Council, and Mass.
What is at issue is just how much lefebvre followed Luther in words and actions...
So, gerard, please try again..Please try and defend Luther and Lefebvre :)
Tell us how they are right...
Cardinal Ratizinger (Benedict XVI) was the one who said Dignitatis Humanae contradicted Quntra Cura.
You sound obsessed with AQ, you keep bringing it up. You should see someone about that.
Quote, please?
Now, maybe you and gerard like all the antisemitism, antiBush, antiIsrael, antidemocracy, proschism, hate the pope propaganda in there but that ain't my cup of meat.
I rather like Bush and Democracy and the Pope and the Catholic Church Jesus established and I think Israel has a right to exist; but, that's just me. What do I know?
Now it is your turn to ping me and claim I am obsessed with angelqueen or you have touched a nerve or you are praying for me or whatever it is you do when you aint hanging out with the angelqueen hate team.
What do I know?
Answer: Nothing.
* I just had a second thought, sister. You may be on to something here. I might see someone about it. I might see a whole threadful of folks about it :)
I get freepmail from some who lurk there for kicks and just to see how sick that joint really is so maybe I ought to post in here some of the stuff I get in freepmail so the lurkers here can understand what it is you and gerard p. like about angelqueen and what it is that motivates and obsesses the schism. As silence is agreement some of the sick angelquen stuff ought be intructive about the real ideas motivating you and gerard p. no?
Thanks for the idea, sister.
Your obsession in the tactics of diversion has borne fruit after all :)
It will be interesting to read your "take" on important "studies" issued by the Institue for Historical Review and to read your opinions about Bishop Williamson and his Holocaust Denial and how the Jews are Cursed as a Race etc etc etc..
BTW, as you appear to be conversant with "obsessions," would you share with us angelqueens obsession with the Jews, their involvement in various conspiracies, how they control all the money/media/ Ecumenical Councils/ the Papacy ect
I get sent stuff in freepmail about angelqueen.
Care to share; dare to share? :)
So is John F. McCarthy pope?
Fr. McCarthy is not Pope. Rather, Fr. McCarthy attempts to show how Dignitatis Humane and Quanta Cura are not contradictory, that being one of the bedrock principles of the Catholic Magisterium - non-contradiction of papal teaching. In this sense, he is acting as a faithful theologian attempt to resolve the perplexing question you raise.
Remember, if we have two documents from the Popes A and B which appear to be contradictory, the misunderstanding is ALWAYS on our part in not comprehending the Papal teaching, not on the part of the Pope and his supposed misunderstanding of the intention and thoughts of his predeessors.
In canon law, "manifested" means something that is widespread public knowledge not requiring significant effort to discern, something that is known or could be easily known by the majority of people.
I.e. a Pope who would leave the Catholic Church to accept nomination as the next Presiding Bishop of the ECUSA would be a manifest heretic and schismatic. John Kerry openly living with another woman not his wife without benefit of annulment of Church marriage is manifestly living in grave sin. Archbishop Lefebvre taking to the public airwaves to denounce the New Mass and Vatican II as abominations and publicly ordaining Bishops and Priests without jurisdiction is manifestly placing himself in a schismatic position vis-a-vis the Pope and heirarchy.
OTOH, Archbishop Ngo-Dinh Thuc secretly consecrating men to the Episcopate and ordaining Priests without publicity, witnesses, or formal records is engaging in acts that are not manifest but are rather secretive.
LMAO I really can't get enough of this. Please don't stop.
Don't worry, son. I've read of Exorcisms that were like this. Christ's truth will stop the mad cackling eventually.
Keep defending Luther and Lefebvre contra the Papacy, Ecumenical Councils and Authority.
Now THAT's funny! You just read what you want to read into anything. As you copy and paste someone else's bad job of quoting anything they can find that links Luther to LeFebvre. (as if you couldn't match it up with similar statement's from Popes. Hey! Now there's an idea! ) But non-thinkers just believe the name "Luther" or "Hitler" or "Schism" is somehow what passes for a rational argument.
It shows lurkers what a schism does to one.
What schism?
MurphE...LOL PLEASE continue imagining any Christianm thinks angelqueen of any value.
Murph, Don't you realize that BC is the sole arbiter of what "Christians" think? My God! He mentioned the name "Luther" and "LeFebvre" can't you put it together? The man is a genius Murph, don't play with fire.
It shows where you heart is really at.
Naturally. Can't you see the logical flow of that statement? "Keep thinking that blah blah blah,, snort, rant, schism...toot! ..snort!....it shows you where your heart is." Brilliant, inductive thinking with a delightful splash of the Socratic method. I'm in awe.
I get stuff freepmailed to me every week or so
Because he's SUCH an important guy. Likes to keep tab though...stay in touch with the common folk.
and the stuff in there is absolutely disgusting what with all the holocaust denial, antisemitism ect
Murph, You know differently. I know differently. So who's the lurker on BC's payroll not doing his job? He obviously doesn't know what he's talking about. Oh well...nothing new.
and all the references to links shared by Storm Front, Neo-Nazi's, how the real Church is the sspx... etc..
Oops. More of that guilt by association stuff. I just googled the site with JPII. You should see all of the praise the moderator of their forums heaped on JPII over there. I guess the late Pope was a white supremacist too.
MurphE real Christians laugh at angelqueen.
"real Christians" yeah. Like McDonald's is "100% pure" beef.
You just dont'g et it, do you?
Don't get it Murph, but if you do, a little traditional Catholicism will cure it.
LOL yeah, sister you really touched a nerve. I am jealous of you and your posse at angelqueen
Yep. Murph. You've definitely touched a nerve.
It has always been my goal to fraternize with schismatics.
Orthodox? Murph, do you have any pics of bornacatholic kissing the Koran?
One only need read my posts to can see how much I value them :)
Yep. We've seen some dazzling (or dizzying?) displays. I can't wait till they're gathered in one volume. Good bedtime reading...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
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.