AGREEMENT HERE

Website:

http://www.dinoscopus.org

  (FYI: The website has not yet been updated; this was sent via email box.)

email-header

Number CCCLXV (365)
July 12, 2014
AGREEMENT HERE
On December 13 of last year, in St Martha’s House in Rome where the Pope is currently living, the Pope met briefly with Bishop Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St Pius X. The Society officially denies that the meeting had any significance, but an Italian commentator having some familiarity with how Rome operates, one Giacomo Devoto (G.D.), argues that the meeting was proof that a Rome-SSPX agreement has been reached. See http://www.unavox.it/​​ArtDiversi/​​DIV812_Devoto_Notizia_intrigante.html.
In brief:—

On the morning of the 13th Bishop Fellay and his two Assistants at the head of the SSPX met in the Vatican with the heads of the Ecclesia Dei Commission at the invitation of Monsignor Guido Pozzo, restored to the Commission by Pope Francis to deal with the problematic relations between Rome and the SSPX. An official publication of the SSPX, DICI , claims that this meeting was merely “informal,” but G.D. says that even being informal it cannot have taken place without there having been beforehand a series of discreet contacts to repair the public breach of relations in June of 2012. Also, says G.D., such a meeting is the necessary preliminary to any “formal” meeting.

In any case after that meeting Msgr. Pozzo, Msgr. di Noia and the three heads of the SSPX repaired to St Martha’s House where the Pope also happened to be lunching. When the Pope stood up after the meal to leave, Bishop Fellay went over to him, they exchanged a few words in public view and the Bishop kissed the Pope’s ring (or knelt down for his blessing, according to Rome’s Vatican Insider ). DICI again minimised the encounter as nothing more than a chance meeting with a spontaneous exchange of courtesies. On the contrary G.D. reasonably m aintains that even such a “chance” encounter cannot have taken place without the Pope’s previous knowledge and approval.

Moreover, says G.D., in the art of diplomacy such a meeting is a finely calculated ice-breaker, of elastic interpretation, designed to mean as much or as little as one wants. On the one hand the courteous contact was there for all to see in a public place frequented by important Newchurch officials, and it could be seen as papal support of whatever had gone on at the morning’s meeting with the Commission. On the other hand both Rome and the SSPX could plausibly deny that the encounter had any real significance beyond an exchange of courtesies.

Thus when rumours began to circulate in the new year, for months the SSPX denied that there was any question of a Rome-SSPX agreement. Only on May 10 did DICI admit that there had been any contact at all between the Pope and Bishop Fellay, and then DICI so minimised the event t hat G.D. takes it as a sure sign that an agreement has been reached in private. (In modern politics, as the cynical saying goes, nothing can be taken as true until it is officially denied.)

In fact the main problem, for Pope Francis as for Bishop Fellay, is not how to come to an agreement which they both want, but how to get their left and right wings respectively to accept an agreement. However, the problem is being solved for them day by day as the Society, once glorious for its defence of the Faith, becomes the inglorious Newsociety. For indeed how many Newchurch bishops can still be fearing the Newsociety as a threat to their Newchurch? And how many SSPX priests are still convinced that any agreement with Rome would be a disaster, especially if they are promised that “they will need to change nothing”? Such an agreement will hardly need to be announced. In many minds and hearts it is already here.

Kyrie eleison.

© 2011-2014 BRN Associates, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

A non-exclusive license to print out, forward by email, and/or post this article to the Internet is granted to users who wish to do so provided that no changes are made to the content so reproduced or distributed, to include the retention of this notice with any and all reproductions of content as authorized hereby. Aside from this limited, non-exclusive license, no portion of this article may be reproduced in any other form or by any other electronic or mechanical means without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review, or except in cases where rights to content reproduced herein are retained by its original author(s) or other rights holder(s), and further reproduction is subject to permission otherwise granted thereby.

Permissions inquiries should be directed to editorial@dinoscopus.org.

CHURCH INFALLIBILITY — IV

Eleison Comments – CCCLVIII (358)

Posted: 23 May 2014 07:24 PM PDT

JMJ

BishopWilliamson
CHURCH INFALLIBILITY — IV

To Cardinal Newman is attributed a wise comment on the 1870 definition of the Pope’s infallibility: “It left him as it found him.” Indeed that definition will have changed nothing in the Pope’s power to teach infallibly, because it belongs to the unchanging nature of God’s true Church that God will protect it from error, at least when its supreme teaching authority is engaged. All such engagement is now called the Church’s “Extraordinary Magisterium”, but only the name can have been new in 1870, just like the name of the “Ordinary Universal Magisterium”. If Vatican I declared the latter also to be infallible, it must also have been so from the beginning of the Church. To discern the realities behind the two names, let us go back to that beginning.

By the time Our Lord ascended to Heaven, he had with his divine infallibility entrusted to his Apostles a body of doctrine which they were to hand down intact to his Church to the end of the world (Mt. XXVIII, 19-20), doctrine which all souls were to believe on pain of damnation (Mk. XVI, 15-16). This Deposit of the Faith, or public Revelation, God was bound to make recognisable and accessible to souls of good will, because obviously the true God could never condemn eternally a soul for refusing to believe in an untruth. By the death of the last Apostle this Deposit was not only infallible but also complete.

Then from the Apostles onwards would God protect all churchmen from ever teaching error ? By no means. Our Lord warned us to beware of “false prophets” (Mt. VII, 15), and St Paul likewise warned against “ravening wolves” (Acts, XX, 29-30). But how could God permit such a danger to his sheep from erring pastors ? Because he wants for his Heaven neither robot pastors nor robot sheep, but pastors and sheep that will both have used the mind and free-will he gave them to teach or follow the Truth. And if a mass of pastors betray, he can always raise a St Athanasius or an Archbishop Lefebvre, for instance, to ensure that his infallible Truth remains always accessible to souls.

Nevertheless that Deposit will be unceasingly exposed to ravening wolves, adding error to it or subtracting truth from it. So how will God still protect it ? By guaranteeing that whenever a Pope engages all four conditions of his full teaching authority to define what does and does not belong to it, he will be divinely protected from error – what we call today the “Extraordinary Magisterium”. (Note how this Extraordinary Magisterium presupposes the infallible Ordinary Magisterium, and can add to it no truth or infallibility, but only a greater certainty for us human beings.) But if the Pope engages any less than all four conditions, then his teaching will be infallible if it corresponds to the Deposit handed down from Our Lord – today called the “Universal Ordinary Magisterium”, but fallible if it is not within that Deposit handed down, or Tradition. Outside of Tradition, his teaching may be true or false.

Thus there is no vicious circle (see EC 357 of last week) because Our Lord authorised Tradition and Tradition authorises the Magisterium. Indeed it is the function of the Pope to declare with authority what belongs to Tradition, and he will be divinely protected from error if he engages his full authority to do so, but he can make declarations outside of Tradition, in which case he will have no such protection. Now the novelties of Vatican II such as religious liberty and ecumenism are way outside of Church Tradition. So they come under neither the Pope’s Ordinary nor his Extraordinary Magisterium, and all the nonsense of all the Conciliar Popes does not oblige any Catholic to become either a liberal or a sedevacantist.

Kyrie eleison.

Tradition is of Popes the measuring-rod Because it came at first only from God.

© 2011-2014 Richard N. Williamson. All Rights Reserved.
A non-exclusive license to print out, forward by email, and/or post this article to the Internet is granted to users who wish to do so provided that no changes are made to the content so reproduced or distributed, to include the retention of this notice with any and all reproductions of content as authorized hereby. Aside from this limited, non-exclusive license, no portion of this article may be reproduced in any other form or by any other electronic or mechanical means without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review, or except in cases where rights to content reproduced herein are retained by its original author(s) or other rights holder(s), and further reproduction is subject to permission otherwise granted thereby.

FAREWELL, SSPX.

JMJ

“I accept with sincere belief the doctrine of faith as handed
down to us from the Apostles by the orthodox Fathers,
always in the same sense and with the same interpretation.” – Pope St. Pius X

“The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries
nor innovators, but men of tradition.” – Pope St. Pius X


BishopWilliamson

FAREWELL, SSPX.    Number CCCLV (355)   —    3rd May 2014

http://www.dinoscopus.org/index.html#thisweek

Bad news from France : the 40-year fight for the Faith by the Society of St Pius X against the modernists in Rome is virtually over. Oh, the Society’s priories, schools, seminaries and associated convents and monasteries will continue to function, to provide for at least a while valid sacraments and decent doctrine, maintaining all the appearances of Tradition, but the essential fight for the complete Faith will be censored, or self-censored, out of existence. It looks like being only a limited number of priests more that will have the understanding of Archbishop Lefebvre’s work and the necessary courage to break ranks and take to the hills.

The news is that the modernists in Rome are offering to the Society a « recognition by tolerance » without the need for any formal agreement or signed document such as raised within the SSPX so much opposition to a deal with Rome in the spring and early summer of 2012. Here is the essence of how the Society’s Second Assistant, Fr. Alain Nély, expressed it, with enthusiasm, to two members of religious Orders three months ago : « The solution for the SSPX will be its unilateral recognition by Rome…we will not be asked to sign anything…to see how things evolve…we shall see. »

To prevent such a revelation from spreading, the Society’s Superior General wrote to the two religious concerned that they had misunderstood Fr. Nély’s remarks because there was no kind of « agreement » in view. Of course not. Therein lies the cunning of the proposed « recognition » without signature. It will allow numbers of SSPX priests to pretend that nothing will have changed so that they can continue their ministry just as before. Thus, as reported, Bishop Fellay himself recently told SSPX seminarians in Zaitzkofen : « There is no question of signing any agreement, etc., etc.» However, ten minutes later, « But if Rome proposes a recognition of tolerance for us, that’s a different matter, that would be very good. »

And so there is every likelihood, sooner rather than later, that a large number of SSPX priests will docilely follow their official leaders into the embrace of the loving modernists in Rome, an embrace that will become over time as tight as necessary to stifle any remaining effort to fight against that deadly modernism which is killing off the official Church and putting millions of souls on the path to Hell. In retrospect one may guess that Bishop Fellay has worked skilfully with the Romans towards this embrace for at least the last 15 years. Bishop de Galarreta has seen what is at stake, but has thrown in his lot with Bishop Fellay. Bishop Tissier also sees clearly the deadly threat to the Archbishop’s work, but he does not see the need to follow the Archbishop’s example of putting the Faith before all normal rules of obedience and unity.

And so, dear friends, if we wish to keep the fullness of the Faith and help others to do so, we must at least internally take to the hills. Have no fear. Keep a cool head. There is no need to lose heart, or despair. God does not change, and the fight for his cause becomes more glorious than ever. Priests, keep watch, and above all do not deceive yourselves that nothing in the Society is changing. It has already essentially changed. Lay-folk, keep watch also, and pray, and God will give you the leaders and priests of your prayers. In God we trust, and in his Blessed Mother.

Kyrie eleison.

Catholics, when you see how Rome fulfils
A cry for recognition, take to the hills !

————->>>Read, “The Oath Against Modernism” by Pope St. Pius X:
000
000

Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!