Tue 21st Oct 2014 | Last updated: Mon 20th Oct 2014 at 22:34pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Vatican talks are almost over, says head of SSPX

By on Tuesday, 22 February 2011

Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the SSPX, ordains a priest in Econe, Switzerland (Photo: CNS/Denis Balibouse, Reuters)

Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the SSPX, ordains a priest in Econe, Switzerland (Photo: CNS/Denis Balibouse, Reuters)

The superior general of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) has said that reconciliation talks with the Vatican will soon be coming to an end, with little change in the views of either side.

Bishop Bernard Fellay said in an interview published yesterday on the society’s American website that extra problems had been created by plans for the beatification of Pope John Paul II and for an interreligious prayer meeting in Assisi, Italy. These were in addition to disagreements over the changes brought about by the Second Vatican Council.

The talks were launched in late 2009 in an effort by Pope Benedict XVI to repair a 21-year break with the society. The Pope said that full communion for the group’s members would depend on “true recognition of the magisterium and the authority of the pope and of the Second Vatican Council”.

But Bishop Fellay said his society went into the talks with a different purpose: to show the contradictions between the Church’s traditional teachings and its practices since Vatican II. That is “the only goal that we are pursuing”, he said, and the dialogue with the Vatican is not a search for compromise but “a question of faith”.

“Is Vatican II really a stumbling block? For us, no doubt whatsoever, yes!” he said. “Until now Vatican II was always considered as a taboo, which makes the cure of this sickness, which is the crisis in the Church, almost impossible.”

Bishop Fellay said the society has presented its doctrinal arguments in writing to the Vatican, followed up by theological discussion. “It is really a matter of making the Catholic faith understood in Rome,” he said.

Asked whether the Vatican participants in the talks have changed their thinking in light of the talks, Bishop Fellay answered: “I don’t think that you can say that.”

He added that recent events at the Vatican have, in fact, dispelled any “illusions” of progress.

“I am thinking about the announcement of the beatification of John Paul II or the announcement of a new Assisi event along the lines of the interreligious gatherings in 1986 and 2002,” he said.

Bishop Fellay said the scheduled beatification of Pope John Paul II on May 1 poses “a serious problem, the problem of a pontificate that caused things to proceed by leaps and bounds in the wrong direction, along ‘progressive’ lines, toward everything that they call ‘the spirit of Vatican II’.”

He said it was a “mystery” to him how Pope Benedict could convene another interreligious gathering next October in Assisi. The society was highly critical of the first such encounter 25 years ago.

“To ask people to perform religious acts during that gathering is absurd, because there is a radical lack of understanding among the various religions,” Bishop Fellay said.

He said Pope Benedict seems to understand that it is “impossible” for followers of diverse religions to pray together, but he added: “I find that he splits hairs. He tries to justify Assisi.” Bishop Fellay said the pope may be acting under pressure, or because he is alarmed at recent anti-Christian violence.

Asked what Catholics should do regarding the Pope’s announcement of the Assisi meeting, he said: “Pray that the good Lord intervenes in one way or another so that it doesn’t take place, and in any case start making reparation now!”

Bishop Fellay praised Pope Benedict for his 2007 document that eased restrictions on use of the 1962 Roman Missal, the so-called Tridentine rite, which governed the liturgy before 1970. But Bishop Fellay said that so far the move has had practically no effect on the Church’s liturgical life because of “massive opposition by the bishops”.

Pope Benedict cleared the way for reconciliation talks with the SSPX in early 2009 when he lifted the excommunications of four bishops ordained against papal orders in 1988. The Vatican said the dialogue was designed to restore “full communion” with members of the society, which was founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

The Vatican said the talks were to focus on the concept of tradition, liturgical reform, interpretation of the Second Vatican Council II in continuity with Catholic doctrinal tradition, Church unity, ecumenism, the relationship between Christianity and non-Christian religions, and religious freedom.

  • Anonymous

    Forget compassion for the moment, Jeannine. What about a wee bit more in the way of learning? Your original post is full of errors and error never does any good to anyone, only harm. If you don’t have a full grasp of the history of the events you write about, then don’t write. Bitterness doesn’t come from God.

  • Anonymous

    That’s certainly not Catholic charity speaking!

  • Anonymous

    You’re absolutely correct in your assessment, buiachasach, but all the facts in the world will not move those who believe that Christ Our Lord promised the Popes impeccability.

    I was just been reviewing the scandals of Pope John Paul II’s Pontificate in light of the news that he is to be beatified. He kissed the Koran, was signed on his forehead with the mark of Shiva (the destroyer) by a Hindu priestess, undermined the Church’s indefectability by apologising “for past sins of the Church,” prayed at the Wailing Wall of the Jerusalem Temple, whose destruction for Our Lord foretold as punishment for unbelief, entered a Talmudic Synagogue and did his interfaith act with the Rabbi knowing that the Talmud declares Our Lord to be “a sorcerer and the son of a whore called Miriam the hairdresser,” permitted a bare breasted woman to read the Epistle at one of his Masses and arranged the infamous Assisi gatherings of the worlds fasle religions, whose gods, says Sacred Scripture, are demons.

    This is the Pope they call “the great!” His cause, like that of the other Popes of Vatican II, is being rushed through to the great scandal of the faithful so that the wayward spirit of Vatican II can have champions to hold up for the continuation of the Reformation. The entire process of beatification is being undermined by this new fast track process and the Church made to look insincere, a slave to mob noise and old pals acts. Disgraceful!

  • Daniel Hunter

    The FSSPX are loyal to Pope Benedict XVI.
    They came running when the Holy Father called for the doctrinal discussions etc.

  • Daniel Hunter

    “Of course that they are illicit, and as such sinful to them and to those who receive sacraments from them, at least materially, if not formally.”

    Thier Masses may be illicit but competant Roman authority P.C.E.D. has stated with moral certitude they”the faithful can fullfil their Sunday and holy day obligations WITHOUT INCURRING ANY SIN OR INCURRING ANY CENSURE”

  • Profidebookstore

    It seems irrational to criticise what one does not know and address the criticism to a straw-man. Can you reward us with a brief account of Ecumenism as concived by Vatican II? I am not interested in your comment before we haver established what is Ecumenism as conceived by Vatican II. I presume, you have studied the UR (if you know what the UR stands for).

  • RJ

    You say “the Magisterium is a certain body of teaching that all Catholics can determine”

    You haven’t taken into account the other senses I mentioned.

    Nor do you address the question of whether the individual Catholic is the authoritative interpreter. When you say “all Catholics”, do you mean “each individually” or as a group (e.g. SSPX) or as a majority or as a totality?

  • Profidebookstore

    Your are both right and reasonable; leprechaun and Martyjo have no clue of what is the Cartholic Faith, and at the same time believe that they know more than everybody else. They are an image of the SSPX
    whose “theology” is evident to everybody exept to themselves. The Holy Father has an enormous patience with them.

  • Anonymous

    The matter is not a complicated one. Catholics know from the authentic Magisterial teaching of the Church throughout the ages what they are to hold and believe as most certainly revealed by God and what they must avoid as most pernicious to the Catholic religion.

    This teaching is easily recognisable in the Papal Encyclicals and Dogmatic Councils, as is anything contradictory to it. Now my point has been that the hierarchy of the Church post-Council has indulged in novelties of ecumenism and interfaith initiatives which are condemned by the Magisterial teaching of the Church pre-Vatican II. You will note, however, that these novelties have never been formally imposed on the faithful by Magisterial authority post-Council. Hence, we are not bound in the matter. Nor could we be in the case of so obvious a break with tradition.

    The conclusion is not my own, nor is it that of the SSPX. Rather, it is a clear and unmistakable breach between what has been traditionally and formally taught by the Popes as binding upon the faithful, and what is today informally conveyed by bad example and not binding on the faithful.

    If we are to cast aside the traditional teaching of the Magisterium every time a new Pope is elected, then what becomes of sacred tradition? Are you suggesting that Catholics act like Protestants when they use the authoritative Magisterial teaching of the Papacy as their guide? It’s not quite the same thing as construing from the Bible by one’s own lights, you know!

    What you have to do, and I have requested this many times from many liberals without response, is prove to me that ecumenism and Assisi, for example, are in line with the traditonal, formal Magisterial teaching of the Church, rather than at odds with it. Once this is done, we can move on and expand the debate. Until then, you merely dance around the crux of the matter with spurious argument that ultimately leads to the heretical proposition that a reigning Pontiff is guaranteed divine impeccability and is, therefore, free to embrace previously condemned errors.

  • Profidebookstore

    Assisi is one of the best ways of spreading the Gospel throughout the world. Whe the SSPX resent it? Certainly because the spreading of Gospel is not on their agenda.

  • Anonymous

    Assisi is heresy, pure and simple! There was no spreading of the Gospel at the previous two events, one of which spread Buddhism by the placing of the false Buddhist deity atop a tabernacle, this third effort will be just as scandalous.

    Read the First Commandment and then consider that the Pope is recognising, as conducive to world peace, prayers being offered up to false gods at Assisi. Who would ever have imagined a Successor of St. Peter participating in such an insult to the true God!

    The silenced request of Our Lady of Fatima holds the key to world peace, not this new Tower of Babel that is Assisi. What that event is likely to achieve is the descent of the wrath of God upon a rebellious generation of nice humanists.

  • Profidebookstore

    Assisi is a blessing.
    There are no “false religions” in the world. Some, SSPX’ schismatic group – can’t call it Church because I am not sure that their leaders are really bishops – for example, might have a degree of falsity, but no religion is predominantly false. Many are defective, but the defectiveness is not, strictly speaking, an error, but the lack of full truth; otherwise, the SSPX would be an error from top to bottom. And the Islam which has a defective knowledge of God because they haven’t received supernatural revelation, but what they positively believe about God in so far as He can be known by natural reason is perfectly correct….would be a false religion, which is surely not correct. Elsewhere in my comments I have quoted the first verse of Quran (will do it again on request): it is so perfect prayer of praise and petition that I would recommend to all faithful Catholics to include it into their prayers. It would be certainly better than the political “prayer” for “conversion” of Russia, as if we were not all in need a conversion.

  • Profidebookstore

    “Bitterness doesn’t come from God.”
    Of course that it doesn’t. Otherwise He would not love Satan, and without being loved by God, he wold not exist.

  • Profidebookstore

    They already are….

  • Profidebookstore

    I am far from delighted with the New Mass; but, objectively speakig, the EP III is better expression of Catholic Faith than the Roman Canon. What gives value to the latter is its antiguity and continuity with the Mass of Summorum Pontificum, while the EP III, however sound, has no tradition behind it, not in the sense that its content is not traditional, but simply because it is an office product, planted on a pavement.

  • Anonymous

    Do not attempt again to detract from the point under discussion, i.e., the pantheistic heresy of Assisi, with hateful diatribes against the SSPX. And please do not quote to me from the Koran, which is offensive to Catholic ears. If you truly believe that all religions are more or less pleasing to God, then you are an apostate from the true faith. In fact, you are already apostate by your admission to praying prayers from that heretical book.

    The INFALLIBLE dogma is ‘outside the Church no salvation.’ This is what the Church has always taught with complete clarity up to Vatican II. Catholic participation in prayer gatherings with pagans, heretics and schismatics is forbidden under pain of mortal sin. You either accept that divinely established truth or you do not. It depends on whether or not you obey Magisterial teaching.

    Furthermore, your rejection of Our Lady’s Fatima request as “political” shows you to be as much in opposition to the Holy Mother as you are to Her Divine Son. I truly hope for your soul’ sake that you’re just mentally incompetent.

  • Profidebookstore

    Lumen Gentium, for example, contains in its text a replacement of the Latin verb ‘est’ with ‘subsistit in,’ so that the constant teaching of the Church that all divine truth IS contained in her, is changed to read that divine truth SUBSISTS IN her. The clear implication of this change is that other Christian ecclesial bodies also have a subsistence of divine truth that makes them somehow valid before God.”
    False !!!
    To start with, the “is” (est) has no tradition behind it at all: it is Pius XII’s novelty; and it is ambiguous.
    Second: Subsists in is a better expression of what the Catholic Church is.
    Third: “The clear implication” is the false implication. There is no suggestion in Council documents that the Christ’s Church subsists in the non-Catholic communities.

  • Profidebookstore

    .”….but it does not mean ‘extra SSPX nulla salus.’ The dogma is ‘extra ecclesiam nulla salus! ”
    But the SSPX = ecclesia.

  • Profidebookstore

    I disagree. You are right in a way, but we must never give up hope that they would eventually return to the Church, although – humanly speaking – it is impossible.

  • crouchback


    Enough already….OK, so you say there are no false religions…..fair enough…..lets break this down a bit and see if we can run an experiment to prove your point. In our Church hall last Thursday evening there was a Liturgical Dance class, I wasn’t there, obviously, but I think we can imagine what was going on. Now, why have a liturgical dance class when there was no liturgy taking place..??….Or may be they are practising for an up coming liturgical dance that will take place during an actual liturgy at a yet undisclosed date….

    Whatever, taking your thesis that there are no false religions, there will be no false expressions of religion either..??, If you decree that there is no falsity, then your not going to recognise it even if it’s under your nose…right..?? so I would imagine that you will lend your weight to this putative liturgical dance. The thing is does the Catholic Church have such a ritual on it’s books. I think we all know the answer to that one. Ergo, what where the liturgical dancers doing….answering the call of the Holy Spirit..?? making up the deficiencies in the Body of Christ in a very deep and meaning full way..??…Lets be generous and say Yes, will the parish priest give them….”Leg Room” , again we’ll be generous, he gives them the floor at 10 o’clock mass first Sunday of Advent…plenty of time for the ladies to “shake their booties” 8 whole months. They should be like Fred and Ginger by that time…..And I’ll make sure I’m there with my camera at the ready so we can all enjoy the moment on You Tube.

    Now…going back just a bit, every one of us on this blog will have learned to read with something like….The Cat Sat On The Matt, simple enough.repeat after me The Cat Sat On The Matt, I take it you all got that, you’ve all been able to read that the cat in fact sat on the mat. Now when the first Sunday of Advent comes round and I’m standing recording the Liturgical Dancers most of you will know that cameras also record sound as well, and God in his infinite wisdom has decreed that. that Sunday is to be the first Sunday of the New Translation of the Missal…..here are the opening sentences ……

    In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. .
    The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,
    and the love of God,
    and the communion of the Holy Spirit
    be with you all.
    Grace to you and peace from God our Father
    and the Lord Jesus Christ.
    The Lord be with you.
    The people reply:
    And with your spirit.

    I’d bet that in just about every parish in the land, you will not be able to find a priest, most of whom have benefited from a University education of reading the simple sentences that the Church, inspired by Jesus Christ has put to paper. The word “Communion” will be the first major stumbling block. if they skip past that, they fall on their faces at the…”with your spirit”….Seen the King’s Peach….as Al Jolson said…..”You ain’t seen Nuthin’ yet”…..then…..

    I confess to almighty God
    and to you, my brothers and sisters,
    that I have greatly sinned
    in my thoughts and in my words,
    in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,

    And, striking their breast, they say
    through my fault, through my fault,
    through my most grievous fault;

    Then they continue:

    therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
    all the Angels and Saints,
    and you, my brothers and sisters,
    to pray for me to the Lord our God.

    Now all this, might seem a bit over the top, but it was you who said that there were no false religions. I would say that come the first Sunday of Advent there are in fact going to be countless examples of False Religion. Is there a single Bishop in this land who shouted from the roof tops for a re translation of the Roman Missal……if there were…and I’ve spoke to several, I never heard them. As for the priests as I’ve already hinted there it will be hard to find a single priest anywhere in the country able to pick up a simple text and read it clearly. This isn’t because they can’t read….The Cat Sat On The Mat….we know they can……it’s because the simple text will stick in their throats.

    I propose several things here…..First the ever helpful Bishop Fellay should issue an SSPX Motu Proprio. From the first Sunday in Advent all SSPX Churches will have for at least One Year the Traditional Mass said in the vernacular…..in order to help the slow boys at the back with their reading.

    Second. Bishop Fellay, declares that all SSPX Churches will be closed to the laity, except for one altar server on the first Sunday of Advent. The laity should dress them selves in suitably disguised attire and infiltrate their local parishes armed with cameras to film priest who can read simple sentences…..but due to bad faith will NOT read what the Church proposes. The SSPX laity should consider making themselves inconspicuous by dressing as Pirates, Onion Johnnies, Red Indians and Cowboys…..how ever those dressing themselves as Liturgical dancers. Mohammedans or that guy from Borat will be excommunicated.

    Third that all men and Liturgical Dancers of good will ascertain from their parish priest before the Summer Holidays if in fact they will in good faith read the simple sentences contained in the new Translation of the Roman Missal, with nothing added and nothing taken away……a simple Yes…..or ….No …will suffice.

    After all these long years of blethering about Justice and Peace…..how many Catholic Priests will feel up to the task of giving a simple Yes…or…No…..Just answer….???

    What do you think Profidebookstore will you be as faithless as me in thinking that most of them will ….”shit the nest”…??? I’d bet you are with me on this one, but you’ll look in your Big Book of Saints Quotes, to try and worm your way out of ……..Yes…..or …..No….

    Your name, Profidebookstore, I’d guess there is really is a bookstore behind that name ….Yes….or …No….. I like books have you any in your store for selling….Yes…Or…..No….
    In these trying economic times I’ve still got several Baw Bees tucked away, waiting for the right book to buy Let us know where the store is and I’ll consider buying some of your books…..Yes.

    Crouchback is my name…..I’m a direct blood relative of the entirely fictitious St Gervais Crouchback VC…..There was a Yes man, if ever there was.

  • crouchback

    Will you ask your parish priest his intentions in reading the simple sentences in the new translation of the missal faithfully….Yes…or ….No….

    Will he do it Yes…or ….No…..

    I’d bet that both can be answered in the negative…and it’s till only February….how many parish priests will be in the Loony Bin come the first Sunday of Advent…..due to an over abundance of Bad Faith.


  • crouchback

    See WDTPRS.COM Fr Z amongst a whole host of commentators down the years has said bluntly that the Bishops ARE Catholic Bishops…..therefore their priests are Catholic priests……ergo…..the SSPX masses are catholic masses …….

    How many priests will be saying Catholic masses come the first Sunday In Advent, the day the Church rolls out the new translation of the Roman Missal…???

    If your priest deliberately with malice afore thought decides that he knows better than the whole Church and sticks to the mass you had to day….instead of replacing that with the New Translation…will you be as quick to censure him as you are to censure the SSPX….

    Thought not

    Illicit is for some other guy, some one you feel might deserve a good kicking, especially if there is a crowd already delivering said kicking…..

    How do you think you’ll feel when it’s just you and your priest…if he happens to go against the Church and not read the simple text…or decides that he can improve on it by adding bits here and there….???

    Will you feel that you should deliver the first kick…and than when he’s down…add a few more….

    Not comfortable ….eh..!!…OK kicking what you perceive to be wierdo’s who go against the will of the Pope….

    But what will you do if your own Priest…….your own…..Priest…….lets the side down…???

    I hope you’ll come back and tell us….???

  • Profidebookstore

    “We don’t use our own judgment in such matters, but rather the judgment of the authentic Magisterial teaching of the Papacy “, but what is “the judgment of the authentic Magisterial teaching of the Papacy ” is – “our own judgment”.

    What is the difference between this kind of logic and none? The difference is – none.

  • Profidebookstore

    What have you read thus far about the Doctrine on Intention in relation to the issue of validity of sacraments?
    Answer: nothing.

  • Profidebookstore

    “Assisi is heresy, pure and simple”. Could we learn from traditional sources what this new definition of “heresy” is all about?

    To put an end on the Fatima “messages”. Could we learn what of all those “messages” is formally declared as true by the Magisterium?

  • Profidebookstore

    That quote from Quran is offensive only to those who do not believe in Merciful, Compassionate Creator of the world, Master of the Day of Judgement.

  • Profidebookstore

    What a waste of time and space. All for the irrelevant things.

  • Profidebookstore

    “The authentic Magisterium of the Church is that of the consistent teaching of the Papacy, not the whims of individual Popes.” –

    Perfectly true, at last. For examples of whims of individual Popes, see Syllabus of Pius IX, Mortalium Animos, and the “is” of Pius XII.

  • Profidebookstore

    Martyjo and Luise = Mutual Admiration Society

  • Profidebookstore

    The SSPX “has never refused submission to His Holiness when he speaks, acts or commands in line with sacred tradition by the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium” ,

    except when they judge that what the Pope teaches is not “in line with sacred tradition by the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium” as they conceive it; in other words when he does not speak what they want him to speak.

  • Profidebookstore

    Come on Ignasi. Saint Josemaría, Cardinal Wyszynski, Joseph Ratizinger were all heretics. The stupendous writings of the SSPX reveal their profound knowledge of Saint John Chrysostom and Saint Agustine. Just have a look at their theological magazines which are recognized by the whole world’s theological community – the master-pieces beyond comparison. And before you eyes is the prolific output of their pupils here in this Post.

  • Profidebookstore

    “The SSPX is absolutely devoted to the entire papacy and to its teaching, even if individual Popes diverge from it.”

    Reply: “Nothing could be further from the truth”.

  • Profidebookstore

    ” the SSPX hasn’t changed anything of the Faith”
    There is no precedent in history to what the SSPX do now. They take upon themselves not only interpretation of the Scripture but also of the Tradition itself. They even take liberty to judge what belongs to Tradition and not. They contradict the teachings of the popes prior to Vatican II, for instance Pius XI and XII. Simply: they are Neoprotestants.

  • Profidebookstore

    “The whole business comes down to poor education in Catholics and a wrong understanding of loyalty and obedience.” – Of course, but there are some who are completely impervious to education because they know everything.

  • Profidebookstore

    What a waste of time and space!!!
    “None of you offers any objective argument based on the traditions of the Church.” -
    Surely, any reasonable argument must start with definition of terms used. Could we learn what is tradition according to the teaching of the Church, including reference to the teaching document/s, in which this subject is involved.
    My guess: we will not get the answer.

  • Profidebookstore

    “In 1969, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci” – My copy of that “critical study” (Lumen Gentium Foundation) has the Ottaviani’s “signature” only: no Bacci is on the list; other “theologians” are in hiding. I have already commented the Ottaviani v. 1969/1970 editions.

    Anyway, look at this nonsense : “The formula ‘Memoriale Passionis et Resurrectionis Domini’ is ..,inexact, the Mass being the momorial of the Sacrifice alone, in itself redemptive, whilst the Resurrection is the consequent fruit of it” (p. 10). So what we have here is the blood-thirsty god who lets his son be killed for our salvation, and rewards him with the resurrection as “as the consequent fruit of ” (sacrificing him).

    And look at liturgical “evidence”: “the ‘Unde et memores’ clearly and finely distinguishes: “…tam beatae Passioni, nec non et ab inferis Resurrectionis, sed et in caelum gloiosae Assensionis” (the “nec non” and “sed et” are emphasised in italics).

    So the fault of the OF is in the omission of “nec non” and “sed in”, which is missing in Suscipe Sancta Trinitas too. “Ottaviani and Bacci” must have had a session in a pub before they endorsed this “study”.

  • Profidebookstore

    “That’s why this Pope was not allowed by God to impose the new Mass using infallibility.” What a display of knowledge!!!
    A Papal infallibility cannot be “imposed” at all, because all what he exercises is the infallibility of the Church.
    That apart, the liturgy doesn’t come under the scope of infallibility at all, but it is under the jurisdiction regarding worship, and is covered by the dogma of Primacy. But it is a notorious fact that the SSPX do not want to hear about the difference between the two.

    Why? Because it doesn’t suit them.

  • Profidebookstore

    We already discussed “the statement of Cardinal Ratzinger on the subject of Vatican II”, and I have cornered you, Martyjo.

  • RJ

    You haven’t addressed the other senses of magisterium (Pope and bishops; their authority); moreover, you say that Tradition can be determined easily (by whom? individuals like yourself? groups?). The Protestants say the same about Scripture, don’t they? I would say this is an important question.

    I’m not sure what you mean by Ecumenism.

  • Profidebookstore

    “It was only under Pope John Paul II and the new 1982 Code of Canon Law that the latae Setentiae punishment was introduced while every other punishment of the 1917 Code was downgraded”

    Nothing was downgraded, and the latae sententiae excommunication was introduced after the retired Bishop from Vietnam attempted to consecrate the supporters of the alleged apparitions in Spain. Subsequently, the series of slot-maschine sedevacantists (incidentally, I know of some in SSPX centres who were sedevacantists, known to priests, and still admitted to sacraments – an example of intercommunion) “bishops” were “consecrated”; from which the four “traditionalists” are different only in name.

    Incidentally, it is on record somewhere in the SSPX publications that the Abp. Lefebvre, while “Vicar Apostolic and the first Metropolitan Archbishop of Dakar, and Apostolic Delegate to French Africa”, expressed himself with admiration of Moslems he met there, and appreciation of their Faith in God.

  • Profidebookstore

    “There is no official statement of the Church that forbids the faithful from attending Mass and the sacraments at an SSPX church”
    Even if it were, it would be disobeyed, with encouragement by the SSPX; so what is the point? Alternatively, the Church would have to turn into an Official Statement Programme, if she were to go on and on endlessly with a ban on all those errors, abuses etc. she would have to deal with according to your wise recipe of “swift” action.

  • Profidebookstore

    ” He kissed the Koran, in which Our Lord’s divinity is denied and the Blessed Trinity is blasphemed.” etc

    Somebody has run out of steem and has now begun with retrieval of already publishes wisdom, and calumnies.

  • Profidebookstore

    “The SSPX and Catholics like myself are the ones who really do love the Pope”

    “Hand up” all who believe this.

  • Profidebookstore

    “Rather, you just keep advocating blind obedience to imagined Magisterial teaching”

    Could we have an account of criteria by which the true Magisterial teaching is recognized; not what somebody else claims to be the right criteria, but the Magisterial criteria themselves.

    Answer: we will get nothing. Tick please: true or false.

  • Profidebookstore

    “Or will you prove to me that these new doctrines are in line with the Church’s perennial Magisterial teaching? ”

    The ecumenical doctrine, the doctrine on religious liberty, on non-christian religions are all parennial doctrines. That has been definitely demonstrated already, in competent commentaries. But one must, of course, start with reading documents which “traditionalists” never do.
    Has our friend Martyjo read the UR, DH, or NE ? Reply: Not, it would be a mortal sin. Does he know what these techincal abbreviations stand for ? No, why should he. What is the worst enemy of God: knowledge, of course: that is the reason why the Moslem’s knowledge of God is false.

  • Profidebookstore

    “You should re-read the statement of Cardinal Ratzinger on the subject of Vatican II, where he laments the turning of that pastoral Council by some into a “superdogma.” ”
    These are official statements confirming Papal infallibility in “decisive” matters pertaining to what has been divinely revealed.” They in no way apply to a pastoral Council (Vatican II) that deliberately avoided infallible definitions.

    We discussed all these matters and you resigned in dispair. Shall we start all over again?

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry you can’t understand what I believe to be a very explicit explanation of the authentic Magisterium, and how Catholics should abide by it. The same explanation is applicable regardless of whether we are talking about the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterial teaching of the Church. The ultimate acid test, of course, by which any Papal teaching is to be viewed, is in light of what previous Popes and Councils have taught in the matter. I can’t add anything further.

    The ecumenism issue is easy. Can you provide me with any Magisterial teaching up to Vatican II that upholds, rather than condemns, the novelty of ecumenism?

  • l.theuma

    Bishop Fellay,
    Can you tell us which Church Jesus Christ instittuted. Surely not your Church. It seem that you do not beleive in the power of the Holy Spirit inspireing the caoucil. Do you pretend that you alone are endowed with it. Far from that. There are diverse spirits. Woe if an alien sprit is leading you.

  • Anonymous

    “Sacred Tradition by the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium” to use your own words, is unambiguous.

    Its interpretation is not open to conception by this individual or that. In today’s parlance: “It does what it says on the tin”.

    Would you kindly provide one example of the SSPX disagreeing with an utterance by the Pope where – wait for it! – that utterance fully conforms with Tradition, with the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium.

    If you cannot provide such an example, then please stick to what you know best, running a bookshop or reading the Quran or whatever, and cease your uncharitable attacks on one of the very few organisations that is doing its level best to defend Tradition and all that it tells us about securing eternal life.

    Just one example will do – not your boring and dismissive: “Like you-know-who” if you please.

  • Anonymous


    There are numerous books (“The Rhine Flows into the Tiber” by Fr. Ralph Wiltgen comes to mind for one) that illustrate how the Rhine Fathers orchestrated, hi-jacked and mis-represented the business of the Second Vatican Council with the results that we have all seen during this past 40 or so years.

    May I respectfully suggest that you address your impertinent question about being led by alien spirits to them rather than to Bishop Fellay?