Posted on 09/17/2005 6:24:38 AM PDT by NYer
Sep. 15 (CWNews.com) - A bishop of the schismatic Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has warned traditionalist Catholics the "heresy of neo-modernism" which, he says, now controls the Vatican.
In an email message to his supporters, Bishop Richard Williamson, an English-born prelate who now serves the SSPX in Argentina, said that there are enormous differences "between Catholic Tradition and the position's of today's Rome." He continued: "Between these positions, any reconciliation is impossible."
Bishop Williamson conceded that some traditionalists might accept an offer of reconciliation with the Vatican, but "the conciliar positions of today's Rome would still be as false as 2 and 2 are 5, while the Traditional positions would still be as true as 2 and 2 are 4."
The Lefebvrist bishop wrote his email message to explain why he had said-- prior to the September 1 meeting between Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) and Bishop Bernard Fellay, the head of the SSPX-- that traditionalists would not be reconciled with the Vatican. He explained that if some traditionalists were to reach an agreement with the Vatican, others would resist-- "that if the Society [of St. Pius X] were to rejoin Rome, the resistance of Catholic Tradition would carry on without it."
Bishop Williamson, the most outspoken figure in the SSPX, is one of the four bishops consecrated by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in June 1988, in defiance of an order from the Vatican, prompting Pope John Paul II (bio - news) to announce the excommunication of the traditionalist leaders.
I consider that an insane request for a sspx supporter to ask publicly as that gives me the opportuntiy to publicly list them for all to see.
But, what do I know,accrd. to you, I am insane :)
In January, Cardinal Castrillon had incorrectly written that with some conditions I would accept Vatican II. Since I wanted him to know exactly what I think about the Council, I handed him Catholicism and Modernity, a booklet in French by Fr. Jean-Marc Rulleau in which he studies the Council and shows how the spirit of the Council is radically opposed to Catholicism. It is, we may say, a total demolition of the Council.
*SSPX specifically and repeatedly engages in the heresy of rejecting an Ecumenical Council.
I hope you're these bookmarking, sister. I am rolling them out for ya :)
"During a discussion, the head of the Congregation for the Clergy told me:
'The pope and I like the New Mass. We think it is more apostolic. It is true that it lacks something, and it must be compensated for by an adequate catechesis.'
Then I recalled the definition of evil given by St. Thomas Aquinas:
'Evil is the privation of a due good. It is something which must be there which is lacking. Now, you yourself, Eminence, acknowledge that there is something missing from this New Mass. So you acknowledge that it is evil.'
I received no answer from the cardinal.
-Bishop Fellay
Through the intercession of St. Dymphna, may Our Lord grant you abundant graces. God Bless.
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."
* Heresies of the SSPX "saint." Never yet repudiated by his society.
Luther lite with a thurible...
Basing itself on scripture and tradition, [this holy Council] teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk. 16:16; Jn. 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it.
* SSPX specifically and repeatedly teaches the heresy one must remain apart from the Church which is modernist, novel, blah, blah, blah....
Sister, let me know when a sufficient number of heresies have been listed :)
Oh, really?
And you call me insane :)
Msgr. Klaus Gamber, whom Cardinal Ratzinger called "the one scholar who... truly represents the liturgical thinking of the center of the Church," termed the New Mass "the Destruction of the Roman Rite." Cardinal Ratzinger himself admitted, "I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part on the collapse of the liturgy." (La Mia Vita).
"Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world." (Session 4, Chapter 3, n 2)
*sspx specifially and repeatedly teaches the heresy one can act contrary to the Dogmas taught at Vatican I.
So, that ought to hold you for awhile, sister MurphE :)
Of course, I know you will dismiss all these citations out of hand. It is what a schismatic does. I really posted them for those lurking who might be susceptible to the antisemitism, the lies, the hatred, the heresies, and the insanity of the sspx, the pompous buffonery of its propagandists and its "hierarchy" in the attempt to rationalize its multiform and multifaceted hereies and to have its followers and supporters, who laughingly label themselves traditionalists, try and infect the Body of Christ with this deadly virus.
Sorry, mere common sense inoculates a real Christian against claiming a schism is good.
Some other day I will post even more heresies they engage in but were I to list them all now, my fingers would be worn to the knuckles typing them all out.
Have a bright, warm, wonderful day defending a schism, sister.
Ain't nothing more "traditional" than that :)
So, that ought to hold you for awhile, sister MurphE :)
Murph, Have you noticed how often these guys shoot themselves in the foot? Everytime they bring up Vatican I, someone will point out that simple phrase "true obedience" and mention that there is a difference between "true" and "false" obedience. Usually there is no effort to reply, just the usual two-year old reaction of "You're just a .....blah, blah, blah.." Actually, by willfully ignoring the wording of Vatican I they are engaging in the old heresy of ultramontanism. They truly are pitiful, no different than Luther, Calvin, Donatus and their actions are representative of Judas Iscariot.
Like a wise person once told me, "Modernists don't have to make sense," G.
Contact ninenot who is in charge of membership. God bless you and yours.
It is hard to find examples of a pope exceeding even the near infinite authority of the papacy, but Pope St. Pius V managed when he tried to bind his successors as to rubrics which is a prudential and not a doctrinal matter. If that makes no sense to you, perhaps it will explain the state of confusion that leads you to defend the schismatic SSPX enemies of the Roman Catholic Church. Taste is not doctrine.
My church is the Roman Catholic Church, the one founded by Jesus Christ upon Peter as the Rock, who, together with his successors, has served as Jesus Christ's Vicar on Earth and had and have the power of the Keys. JP II exercised that power, quite within its extensive scope, in excommunicating Marcel the Upstart and the Econe 5 (including poor elderly and previously saintly Castro de Mayer), excommunicating adherents of SSPX and declaring SSPX the schism that it is. Your "church" is SSPX, a schismatic group justly expelled from the Roman Catholic Church by JP the Great in which his primary assistants were Josef Cardinal Ratzinger of the Holy Office and Cardinal Gantin of the Congregation on Bishops.
Bornacatholic has an extensive post elsewhere which eloquently demonstrates by direct quotation from Pope St. Pius X among others that SSPX is poisonously dishonest in invoking Pope St. Pius X of happy memory as though he would support their little rebellion instead of nuking it.
No doubt you believe that the Roman Catholic Church has "lost its direction." That is simply another way for you to say that you call Jesus Christ a Liar in His promises to His Church, that you disbelieve Jesus Christ Himself and that you urge others to join you in rebelling not only against the papacy established by Jesus Christ but against Jesus Christ. Yet you dare to call your venomous rebellion against Jesus Christ Catholicism?????
We may recall that Luther was in the bad habit of dishonestly calling himself a Catholic long after he was excommunicated, as well.
You may disagree with the foregoing analysis of SSPX in which case: Will you plead insanity or invincible ignorance when you are individually judged by Him Whom you reject?
CCC 85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.”
CCC 86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication, and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”
CCC 890 “The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism has several forms.”
CCC 891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful -- who confirms his brethren in the faith -- he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals ... The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s sucessor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium, above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine for belief as being divinely revealed, and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions must be adhered to with the obedience of faith. This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.
CCC 892 “Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a definitive manner, they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful are to adhere to it with religious assent which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
CCC 2033 “The Magisterium of the Pastors of the Church in moral matters is ordinarily exercised in catechesis and preaching, with the help of the works of theologians and spiritual authors. Thus from generation to generation, under the aegis and vigilance of the pastors, the deposit of Christian moral teaching has been handed on, a deposit composed of a characteristic body of rules, commandments, and virtues proceeding from faith in Christ and animated by charity.Alongside the Creed and the Our Father, the basis for this catechesis has traditionally been the Decalogue which sets out the principles of moral life valid for all men.”
* Charles Curran, Martin Luther, and others cite the "true" and "false" obedience "criteria", as if obeying the Church established by Jesus meant being opposed to God.
And who gets to define what is "true" and "false" obedience? Why, shazam... It is the one opposed to the Church who has the authority to decide when obedience to God means one must disobey the Church
But, that is the heretical flea bite one rhetorically must itch when one lies with schismatic dogs.
Church wrong. Schism right. Says who? The Schismatic natch...Well, the same goes for the Sedes...they say the same thing
I just can't understand why those who believe as you do lack the courage of sayiung it as clearly as a Martin Luther
Luther at the Diet of Worms "Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason - I do not accept the authority of the popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other - my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen."
That is what y'all are trying to, absurdly, finesse as Tradition; Protestantism as Traditionalism.
Did you notice Rosary's quotation marks "Saint" in reference to Pope St. Pius X?????? There is a somewhat but incomplete message in those quotation marks, no doubt. Perhaps Rosary belongs to a mere Society of Pius X (SPX) rather than the better known Society of St. Pius X (SSPX)????? Schismatics come in dozens and they all are ten feet tall?????
I ping Rosary as a courtesy not as an invitation to discussion with me.
In any event, DD, thanks for your ongoing series of brilliant posts in defense of the Church.
Those of us who adhere to the One True Church, and assist at the One True Mass in the form of that faithful remnant known as The Society of Saint Pius the First reject as spurious the so-called 'canonizations' decreed by all the so-called 'popes' of the last 1600 years.
-Arrogant "It's all Greek to me" Bustard
Lynne Cheney just before the dawn of the regime of the Arkansas Antichrist and Mrs. Antichrist, warned us of what we had to look forward to in Clintons' America and she was right. She rooted that argument in the intellectual dishonesty which is the hallmark of the "I, Pierre Rivard" school of politics. It explains the extreme partisanship that has characterized our civil society ever since.
The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, admittedly not one of ours, was capable of sharp insight nonetheless. FDorget his obvious sins of supporting abortion and other Demonratic fare. Concentrate instead on his assertion that each person is entitled to his or her own opinion but no one is entitled to his or her own set of facts.
The dishonesty that has long characterized the social issues civil war in our society now infects inter-church squabbling between the SSPX schism and the actual Roman Catholic Church. SSPX is defined by what amounts to: We dissent. Therefore we are.
Jesus Christ made promises to the Roman Catholic Church at the outset, not only establishing Peter as pope but giving to Peter (and his successors the keys of the kingdom to bind and to loose in heaven as on earth) and Jesus Christ promised to be with His Church (one and the same including JP II and Benedict XVI and ultimately NOT including the Econe 5 and their adherents). If you do not believe in the promises of Jesus Christ Himself, why would you imagine yourself a practicing and believing Roman Catholic or in any way "traditional?" If Jesus Christ is not believable, then just what or who is????? Certainly not one rebellious French archbishop willing to massacre his priestly vow of obedience in order to serve his own offended tastes and imagined grievances!
SSPX is based upon the lies, sins and effronteries of Marcel and his co-conspirators in ecclesiastical crime and their adherents. SSPX advances what is not an "alternative reality" but that which is not, in any sense, reality. That is why SSPX would have real problems with Telling the Truth, which BTW has American History as collateral damage incurred because of the tactics of an academic left run wild with multiplicities of alleged "realities" a la "I, Pierre Rivard." Truth itself is the main victim.
So-called "neo-conservatives" are those who believe in manly foreign and military policy and do not obsess in favor of the concerns of the discredited old America First Committee (which nonetheless disbanded itself one day after Pearl Harbor). Those called "neo"conservatives have a real name: conservatives. So-called "paleo"conservatives have two real names: eccentrics and ahistorical curiosities.
Now, we have the political tactics seeping into what is alleged to be the ambit of Roman Catholicism. We are now hearing of "neo"Catholics. Same silly pretensions, different victim institution. So-called "neo"Catholics are the ones who get their doctrine from the popes (including recent ones), obey papal authority, respect the office and the person of the popes (even when we chafe under their rule as I did under Paul VI and John XXIII who, whatever my irrelevant personal opinions of each of them might be, were also popes fully deserving of respect and obedience). "Neo"Catholics are the ones who understand that Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia and understand that teariung down the authority of one pope will tear down the authority of all popes. "Neo"Catholics are, after all, NOT Protestants. "Neo"Catholics have another and much more accurate name: Roman Catholics in communion with the Holy See and with their diocesan ordinaries, in other words: Roman Catholics.
Again, there is another group who accuse "Neo"Catholics or Roman Catholics of being somehow "unCatholic" for their virtues and not their sins. This group of accusers are called SSPX schismatics. There are others but the SSPX are the noisy ones persistently using their megaphones. Noise does not equal Truth.
There is a long history on Free Republic of numerous SSPX mouthpieces using FR as an advertising forum to waylay, seduce and drag poorly catechized Catholics into schism. In response, actual Catholics rise to the defense of the Roman Catholic Church and its leaders. When lambs are found wandering among the schismatic wolves, Roman Catholics rush to the defense of the lambs. The wolves of SSPX resent the interference of Roman Catholics with lunchtime for the wolf pack, as is expected, in direct proportion with the innocence and gullibility of the lambs.
It has been said that the road to hell is broad and the road to heaven narrow. Catholics, real Roman Catholics, practice a narrowly CATHOLIC faith. Narrow and exclusionary, perhaps, particularly if those excluded are absolutely joined at the hip with a schism whose excommunicated leaders and adherents presume to seek to allow bishops to choose and consecrate other bishops as they please without so much as a by-your-leave to the excusive authority of the popes over the choice of bishops and in direct defiance of papal authority and orders in such matters.
Do not presume that those who advocate defiance of papal authority as their cult hallmark are "to the right" whatever that may mean in an ecclesiastical context. Forst, the terms left, right and center arose in pre-revolutionary France and the right was the monarchist group (hint: the pope is the earthly monarch of Catholicism); the left were the antimonarchist and anti-civilization Jacobins who ultimately beheaded Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette; the center joined armadilloes in having yellow stripes poainted down their backs like "moderates" always do).
When the mean-spirited SSPX attacks on the Roman Catholic Church, John Paul II, Benedict XVI (admittedly lesser attacks so far as SSPX holds its collective breath hoping for an absolving but quite undeserved miracle, clicking together the heels of their ruby red shoes and repeating a mantra of There's no place like Rome/There's no place like Rome/There's no place like Rome....which is, in their estimation NOT praise of Rome) come to an end, when SSPX has been publicly repudiated by its publicly humiliated penitential leaders and adherents and Marcel denounced for what he was, Catholic will consider being kind to the prodigal then-former cultists. Even then, there will always be a Williamson.
Finally, I suspect that I have been here longer than you have and that I will be here long after you are gone. Religiously, repent, return to Roman Catholicism and get found. At the end of that process Catholics will be kind to the formerly lost sheep who repent. Comforting you in your errors and your rebellion would be no kindness. Quite the contrary. You are either Catholic or you are not. We are. You're not, as JP II ruled (at least as to the SSPX guys).
See later pings on this thread. I forgot to ping you. Sorry.
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.