Thu 31st Jul 2014 | Last updated: Thu 31st Jul 2014 at 16:39pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Vatican gives SSPX doctrinal statement to sign

By on Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Cardinal Levada had a two-hour meeting with Bishop Fellay this morning (Photo: CNS)

Cardinal Levada had a two-hour meeting with Bishop Fellay this morning (Photo: CNS)

The Vatican has given the traditionalist Society of St Pius X a formal “doctrinal preamble” listing several principles they must agree with in order to move toward full reconciliation with the Church.

US Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, gave the statement to Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the society, during a meeting at the Vatican that lasted more than two hours.

Although the Vatican did not give the society a deadline, leaders are expected to study and sign the preamble “within a few months”, according to Jesuit Fr Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman.

The cardinal and bishop also discussed possible “elements of a canonical solution” for the society after “the eventual and hoped-for reconciliation”, according to a statement issued by the Vatican after the meeting.

Fr Lombardi said: “Today the most likely solution would be a personal prelature,” which is a Church jurisdiction without geographical boundaries designed to carry out particular pastoral initiatives. It is led by a prelate, who is appointed by the Pope; currently the Church’s only personal prelature is Opus Dei.

The document given to Bishop Fellay to sign “states some doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation of Catholic doctrine necessary to guarantee fidelity” to the formal teaching of the Church, said a statement issued by the Vatican after the meeting.

At the same time, the statement said, the preamble leaves room for “legitimate discussion” about “individual expressions or formulations present in the documents of the Second Vatican Council and the successive magisterium” of the popes who came after the council.

Fr Lombardi would not respond to questions about specific Church teachings and developments listed in the preamble, but said Church tradition has always held there are varying degrees of Church teaching; some require an absolute assent while others are open to interpretation.

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”.

The Vatican statement did not mention any of the specific areas where Bishop Fellay’s group has said the Catholic Church and the popes since the Second Vatican Council had broken with true Catholic tradition. They object to the reform of the Mass, to much of the Church’s work in ecumenical and interreligious dialogue, and to the council’s stand on religious freedom.

Bishop Fellay had said his society went into the talks aiming 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 had said, adding that the dialogue with the Vatican is not a search for compromise but “a question of faith”.

In addition to the society’s rejection of many Vatican II teachings, members also objected to the beatification of Pope John Paul II and, particularly, to Pope Benedict’s convocation of another interreligious meeting for peace in Assisi.

Pope Benedict cleared the way for reconciliation talks with the Society of St Pius X in early 2009 when he lifted the excommunications of Bishop Fellay and three other society 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 Vatican II in continuity with Catholic doctrinal tradition, Church unity, ecumenism, the relationship between Christianity and non-Christian religions, and religious freedom.

The Vatican and the society appointed a commission to discuss the issues and members met eight times between October 2009 and April 2011, the Vatican said.

The meetings “reached the aim of clarifying the respective positions” of the two sides, it said.

COMMUNIQUE CONCERNING THE SOCIETY OF ST. PIUS X

VATICAN CITY, 14 SEP 2011 (VIS) – At midday today the Holy See Press Office released the following communique concerning the postion of the Society of St. Pius X:

“On 14 September at the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Joseph Levada, prefect of the congregation and president of the Pontifical Commission ‘Ecclesia Dei’; Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer S.J., secretary of the congregation, and Msgr. Guido Pozzo, secretary of the pontifical commission, met with Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X, who was accompanied by Fr. Niklaus Pfluger and Fr. Alain-Marc Nely, respectively first and second assistant general to the society.

“Following the appeal of 15 December 2008, addressed by the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, the Holy Father decided to remove the excommunication against the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre. At the same time, he approved the opening of discussions with the society in order to clarify doctrinal problems and to heal the existing rift.

“In order to put the Holy Father’s instructions into effect, a joint study commission was set up, composed of experts from the Society of St. Pius X and from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who met in Rome on eight occasions between October 2009 and April 2011. Their discussions, which aimed to identify and study the essential doctrinal difficulties in the controversial issues, had the result of clarifying the positions of the two sides and their respective motivations.

“While bearing in mind the concerns and demands presented by the Society of St. Pius X about protecting the integrity of the Catholic faith against Vatican Council II’s ‘hermeneutic of rupture’ with Tradition (a theme addressed by Pope Benedict XVI in his address to the Roman Curia on 22 December 2005), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith maintains that the fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See is the acceptance of the text of the Doctrinal Preamble, which was handed over during a meeting on 14 September 2011. The Preamble defines certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church Magisterium and ‘sentire cum Ecclesia’. At the same time, it leaves open to legitimate discussion the examination and theological explanation of individual expressions and formulations contained in the documents of Vatican Council II and later Magisterium.

“At the same meeting, certain suggestions were made for a canonical solution to the position of the Society of St. Pius X, with a view to achieving the desired reconciliation”.

  • Roland Fernandez

    The Pope and the Vatican Magesterium is not an ecclecisatical eupehemism to reflect an organization that is orientally depotic. The Pope and the Magesterium are bound by the laws of God to obey Roman Catholic Tradition and this means that any deviation from the dogmatic definitions as defined and declared by the Popes and the great Councils of the past down through these past twenty centuries is necessarily null and void. Therefore faithful Catholics who respect the Tradition of the Catholic Church must not under penalty of excommunication follow the alient teachings of the Conciliar Catholic Church.

    It is an undeniable fact that the The Vatican – the Church of Rome – has been infiltrated by the heresiarchs of Judeo-Freemasonic- Illuminism since the election of Pope Benedict XV which climaxed with the election of Pope John XIII and his very unlawful inauguration of the Vatican-II Council (1962-65). The Vatican-II Council was officially a Pastoral Council introduced with the covert support of the Talmudic and Cabalastic Jewsand under the excuse of making the doctrines of the Church more compatible to the modern man. This was nothing but a cover to Protestantize the Mass and muddy the doctrines of Roman Catholicism. Brave Catholic priests like the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) under the leadership of Archbishop Lefebvre fought vigorously with the Jewish infiltrators against this diabolical adulteration of Roman Catholic Doctrine, for which they were unlawfully excommunicated. The excommunication has since been lifted and the SSPX priests are very much lawful Catholic priests who believe in Roman Catholic Tradition and celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the same manner that was decreed by His Holiness Pope Pius V.

    The Traditional Latin Tridentine Mass will be officially established once again by tthe Church after Russia is consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of the Mother of God, Mary Most Holy. 

  • Brian A Cook

    There’s a lot that I could say.  I will comment on just one aspect.  I’m afraid that there’s more to “questioning” than meets the eye.  “Questioning” the Holocaust is not about freedom of thought or historical debate.  It is about mainstreaming Nazism and antisemitism.  Willliamson may not be strictly a heretic–as if that were the only thing that mattered–but he is a notorious anti-Semite and extremist. 

  • Roland Fernandez

    It is not the the SSPX community has refused to submit to Papal authority and the Magesterium of the Roman Catholic Churchy. It is the Conciliar Church of Vatican-II that has refused to submit to the Traditionn of the Roman Catholic Church which is the Papacy and the Magesterium. The Conciliar Vatican-II Church is a Jew inflitrated Church whose objective is to undermine and destroy the defined and declared doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic Church. The clergy in the Vatican are Marrano Jews (clandestine Jews) who have been planted in the Church by the Banker Jews, chiefly the diabolical Rothchild dynasty and their American crony counterparts in the USA and Europe. The Jews have never forgiven Jesus for pronouncing verdict against their diabolical, naturalistic, Freemaonic, Illuministic world order and tyhey continue to do so unremitingly. Thanks to wayward and lazy Roman Catholics of the past and present this brood of vipers have nearly suceeded. But they will be thrashed out of existence once the Russia is consecrated by the Pope of Rometo the Immaculate Heart of Mary in the manner She had commanded at Fatima in 1917. 

    The SSPX is a true Traditional Catholic community of brave, courageous and dedicated priests who downright the heresy of Ecumenism. Eumenism declares that all rteligions are equal and are from Gos; all religions are salvational, all members of various of religions are automatically saved with or without the Sacrifice of Jesusw Christ; that the Catholic Church is not an exclusivist Church even though the Catholic Church was instituted by Jessus Christ our Lord nand therefore the Church of Christ encompasses all Christian religious denominations. Thi is nothing but diabolical heresy and utter garbage. The definition of a true Church is the Church that is instituted by God and God alone and certainly not by man. Man made religions are purely diabolical and hence condemnable.

    The SSPX recognizes the Pope as the head of the Roman Catholic Church but this does not mean that the SSPX and its members is expected to believe  and acknowledge garbage in the form of heresies such as mentioned in the above paragraph. Therefore the SSPX is absolutely right to battle these damned heretics who have come to occupy the Catholic Church. Tbne occupation of the Catholic Church is an important step in the strategy of the cursed Talmudic-Cabalistic Jews to bring about the New World Order / One World Government through the United Nations Organization located in New York. It is is inconceiveable to think that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ labored to the sweat of his brow to institute His Church of Eternal Salvation and to then suffer the passion and die as a result of an ignominious death on the Cross just so that all humankind could be saved through their idiotic man made religions and thereby gain Eternal Salvation. If this were the case then what was the reason that God the Father sent His only begotten Son to be sacrificed? It amazes me to think that man has descended to the depths of idiocy and barbarism. Eternal Salvation in God can only be attained when non-Catholics convert to Catholicism which is the one and only true religion established by God Almighty.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Rubbish.  You are the original reason for the saying “clutching at straws.”

    I’m sick and tired of the PC brigade telling me that I can’t question anything about the holocaust or anything about Judaism. There are distinctions to be made anyway within Judaism which, frankly, I can’t be bothered going into. Check it out yourself. But don’t tell me someone, myself included,  that we are anti-Semites because we believe the Gospel accounts of the suffering and death of Christ.  

  • Basil Loft@ss

    Bishop Williamson is a fan of Peter Schiff (Jewish financier) and reads his blog on the basis that Schiff is a “truth teller”. Each to his own. There is no evidence that he supports Nazism (Archbishop Lefebvre died in a German concentration camp for being part of the French resistance and Bishop Williamson is no less an English patriot). Nor is there evidence that Williamson is an antisemite -  his family happily worked for Marks and Spencer.

  • Brian A Cook

    Fine.  Go ahead.  Mock me as being part of the “PC Brigade”.  I’m just repeating the alarm bells that the likes of the ADL has rung.  It’s this sort of whitewashing of known extremists that sometimes sorely tempts me to leave the Church.  Still, I remember that the Church has been growing and developing in truth and charity to witness to the love of a transcendent and personal God.  I try to love and care with a pure heart.  How can I do my part to witness to Christ’s love, though, if right-wing extremism becomes the only thing that people see? 

    I started typing something else as well, but I realized that I shouldn’t bother wasting time and energy.  I’ll simply bow out of this thread.  I’ll go on my way and hope and pray that everything turns out for the best in spite of everything that is sure to cause trouble. 

  • Basil Loft@ss

    ADL alarm bells scare everyone especially the Palestinians. Having said that, no Muslim now seems safe when dem bells ring …

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    Brian, I had no intention of “mocking” you but, with respect, along with the vast majority of modern Catholics you have allowed yourself to be manipulated by the media about Bishop Williamson.  I have in my possession a letter from a top Vatican cardinal bemoaning this very fact (he  was replying to a letter from me about something else and nothing to do with the SSPX yet he broke off to bemoan those bishops who had allowed themselves to be manipulated by the media frenzy over Bishop Williamson’s remarks about the holocaust).

    The fact is, Brian, modern Catholics ask me to not make too much of Archbishop Nichols permitting “gay” Masses; they say nothing about Cardinal Schonborn dialoguing with a bunch of openly  dissident priests in Austria; the Scots bishops are clearly using Fr Michael Fallon as an unofficial mouthpiece for their anger over the new Mass translation, yet because one SSPX bishop queries an historical event, all hell breaks loose. 

    Sorry, but unless a bishop is a heretic, his personal views on politics, fashion or anything else are no big deal.  The media fear a restoration of true traditional Catholicism, hence their focus on Bishop Williamson. Don’t let them manipulate you. 

  • An American Seminarian

    I cannot speak for the UK nor Ireland, but in the United States, although we have more than our share ‘liberal leaning’ Bishops, I do not know of one who could truthfully be called an authentic heretic, nor even one who is obediently defiant of the Holy Father and has remained so despite numerous overtures. As for situation in Austria, my understanding is that measures such as suspension and excommunication are very much on the table. I would suggest that Cardinal Schonborn is trying to gather the ‘lost sheep’ before such measures might become necessary. And a final note, the employ of the term ‘heretic’ is not something that should be done without considerable forethought and prayer. “Get a grip” one might say.

  • Sweetjae

    “The errors that infest the church,” is the quote from Fr. Davide Pagliarani,
    superior of the Society of St. Pius X in Italy.

    These are not words of compomise. there is no acceptance that there was an
    excommunication of bishops for schismatic behavior. No one in the Society of St.
    Pius X feels any remorse nor acknowledgement that they are in error.

    The church must renounce the Second Vatican Council and declare Paul VI, John
    Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI to be ANTI-POPES in order to please this
    band of outlaws.

    The church can exist with or without these men. Benedict has said as much
    about some progressives in the church. Time is at hand to say the same about
    these men who deny Vatican II and 4 popes. Let them be protestants.

  • Sweetjae

    Editor Ct,

    You can’t even have the
    capacity to distinguish between between the man that sits in Peter’s Chair and
    the Authority of Peter’s Chair…all you have written so far in other past
    comments is obstinacy,  incoherent and just plain cognitive dissonance.

     

    All councils were pastoral, in
    one way or another. Even if someone in a high place says that it is “pastoral”
    no one has said yet that its doctrinal assertions do not command at least
    religious assent, and that its strictly pastoral directives do not command
    obedience. The output of Trent was predominantly strictly pastoral, for
    example. And even strictly pastoral directives frequently contain moral
    implications. The large body of Catholic moral doctrine has never been
    formulated by the Magisterium in terms of strictly moral doctrine, but it was
    worked out by theologians from pastoral practice. Magisterial teaching includes
    both the Ordinary and Extraordinary teaching of the Church. I think most people
    know that this encompasses both the Pope teaching authoritively on his own, or
    with the bishops in union with him.

     

    The problem is you are like Koher protesting against the Authority of Moses. The guy was shallowed whole!

  • Sweetjae

    EditorCt what you and SSPX put are just pure fabrication and lies. What the heck are you saying not binding? Yes not binding to you because you are a protestant!.

    “In view of the
    pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided any extraordinary statement of
    dogmas that would be endowed with the note of infallibility, but it still
    provided its teaching with the authority of the supreme ordinary Magisterium.
    This ordinary Magisterium, which is so obviously official, has to be accepted
    with docility, and sincerity by all the faithful, in accordance with the mind
    of the Council on the nature and aims of the individual documents.”
    ~Pope Paul VI, General Audience of 12 January 1966.

  • Sweetjae

    “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.”
    ~Catechism of the Catholic Church, #89

    I guess you and SSPX don’t recognize the Authority of the Catechism of the Catholic Church too, then WHY don’t you and SSPX just establish your own church with your own tradition? And make bishop Fellay your pope, like Lutherans did for Luther! Makes sense!

  • Sweetjae

    Thanking the SSPX? are you serious? Then we should give thanks to the Reformation too! If not for the action of Martin Luther, we wouldn’t even recognize the errors and heresies in the writings and homilies of these catholic hierarchy on purgatory, Petrine primacy and  communion of saints.

    Hooray to “Bible Alone” by the protestants. Hooray to “tradition Alone” by the SSPX and Sedevacantists.

  • Sweetjae

    Papolatrist! Is that your best argument against the One, Holy, Catholic Church…same words by protestant fundamentalists attacking the Church and our beloved pope Benedict, fall in line EditorCt because the line is loooooooong for the heretics and schismatics. (though not formal but quilty in your heart). For 2,000 years we have been dealing with people like you.

  • Sweetjae

    EditorCt will you just shut up your blatant lies!!!! Where does this idea that “no matter how wrong the pope is, we shut up and wait till God sorts it out”?

    You like the protestants I used to debate with put the same arguments like yours. They say in their wicked twisted  and mocking words that Catholics worship the Pope, that he doesn’t sin or the Authority of the Church is not binding to christians….same words, same feathers, same clones!

  • Sweetjae

    Very true…in fact they already did, they are interpreting the Tradition without the Living Authority of the church much like the protestants interpreting the Bible without the Living ordained Authority of the Church. They consider themselves above the pope and Magisterial Authority thus becomes their own magisterium without realizing it much like the protestants again where they despised the Authority of the Pope but without realizing it they become popes themselves!

  • Sweetjae

    EditorCt your argument is appalling! You again failed miserably in distinguishing between the sins of what you called “liberal” clergy and the OBSTINATE refusal and denial of  a binding and ratified Authority of the Church  on Vat2 and Catechism. Big difference. Get a grip.

  • Sweetjae

    Yes a lot of arrogance and self-pride.

  • Sweetjae

    Editor Ct said, “As for the Society’s “unwillingness to accept  the Council”… the Society – like a lot of people, myself included,only refuse to accept those parts of the Council which contradict what the Church has always taught and that anyone with a  truly Catholic sense and soul, must do. ”
    Luther said, “We can not accept the decree and teachings of Trent, we only accept the first four (4) councils of the church as orthodox”.

    Same words, same tactic of cherry picking, same clones!

  • Sweetjae

    YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY WRONG!!! These are the lies and fabrications of SSPX and Sedevacantists! Then if you don’t accept why just leave and start your own little church? Why all these protest anyways you are already in schism in your heart so far…make bishop Fellay your pope and Magisterium…its easy!

  • Sweetjae

    Who is going to pass and make binding judgments that the church made “modernist way”? YOU? SSPX? Sedevacantist?

    This is the problem, when I read Matthew 16:18, I didn’t see Jesus Christ say “Thou art **Fellay** or thou art **Moises** and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of Hell shalt not prevail”.

  • Sweetjae

    I concur however the pope and the church can only do so much, its up to the leaders of SSPX to recognize the Authority of the Church or else it’s like all over again with Martin Luther 500 years ago.

  • Sweetjae

    I totally agree with you, Brother!    The pendulum of disobedience swings both ways, to the left there is protestantism to the right there is the radical traditionalism. Both are proud!

  • Sweetjae

    Abuse?? Martin Luther said the same charge that the  pope and the church abused him and calvin to  accept the  teachings of purgatory and petrine primacy.

  • Moises Carvalho

    Man, you’re angry!!! hahahaha.

    And your anger is making you very, very blind. Your childhood attacks against me and Editor TC will not make we change our positions. Why? Because we DO KNOW what we are talking about. You, at the contrary, show complete ignorance in your bla-bla-bla spreading so much hate against us.
    Think about it: Nor me or Editor TC made any personal judgements against any of ours “contenders” in all this discussion. To say that the IIVC takes the road of protestantis is very, very different to say “you, sweetjae, are a protestant, heretic”. Its just a fact that is already known for everyone who studies the case that the Novus Ordus was made with SIX PROTESTANTS since its beggining. Maybe you didn’t know that. Just as your complete ignorance about the SSPX makes you throw stones so unfairly against that instictution, against me and against Editor TC.

    Who told you we are sedevacantists?
    Who told you we do not accept the post-conciliar popes?

    I’ll not cut and paste fragments here of my “toolkit” like said another friend of yours. I’ll give you the entire text. Don’t worry. Not a big text.

    http://www.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q15_sedevacantists.htm

    You could also read this:

    http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m002rpMisunderstandingMass.htm

    Sweetjae. Editor TC and I are catholics. Roman Catholics and Apostolics, just like you. However, we are not blinds. We know about all poiticians fights that occur in our church. We know about all those freemasons and comunists that infiltrated in the church to try to destroy her from inside. That’s what explains not only the council, but also the very ashamed Metz Accord in wich John XXIII compromised the church to stop her attacks against the Communism. The same communism that were classified by Pius XI as the worst enemy of the church. Same communism that made Our Lady come from the sky to prevent us from those errors, in Fatima. Also, Pope Pius X knew ’bout those enemies who already infiltrated in our Mother Church. That’s why he wrote that the major enemies of the church are already INSIDE, not outside the church. You can read this in his Pascendi Dominici Gregis, 1917.

    Ok. We have that famous promess of Our Lord Jesus Christ, that He says the gates of hell will never defeat our church. And we believe it. That’s why, even after that council we remain with our hopes, our church, and… our pope!

    May the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary shine uppon your way and help you to understand our cause.

    Sincerely,

    Moises C. Reis

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    There’s just nothing left for me to add, Moises Carvalho – well said!

  • Moises Carvalho

    Thank you, EditorCT.

    And may Our Lady bless your hard fight trying to make some people understand what they can not see (or still don’t want it for pure cowardice)

    Much of what we are saying here is very well documented in the book  “Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption into the Catholic Church” and  “Goodbye! Good Men: How Catholic Seminaries Turned Away Two Generations of Vocations From the Priesthood” by Michael Rose.http://www.amazon.com/Goodbye-Good-Men-Liberals-Corruption/dp/0895261448http://www.amazon.com/Goodbye-Good-Men-Seminaries-Generations/dp/0967637112Have a fine weekend. And do not let your patience go down too much. In my experience on this kind of discussion, whenever you have to explain what you have said a couple of times, its the clear signal that the others just want to keep a ridiculous discussion with retorical insults. In other words, they are not really worried for this unprecedent crisis, but just want to keep their illusion that everything is okay and will try to burn everyone who tries to wake them up.

  • Moises Carvalho
  • Sweetjae

    I’m not angry my friend i’m just tired of your attacks against the One
    Apostolic Catholic church. Oh by the way, the Sedevacantists also have a strong
    devotion to the Rosary, Fatima and Sacred Heart but they are outside of the
    church, meaning you can call anybody you want to paint yourselves as faithful
    catholics but Our Lord knows the pride and obstinacy of your mind and hearts
    towards His Church.

     

    We don’t have any leaning towards SSPX however I love the Latin Mass from
    true Traditionalist Catholics who are in FULL Communion with Peter.

  • Sweetjae

    I agree with you that we hope there is a reconciliation, the Church and pope can only do much (like in Luther’s time) however the ball is now on the side of SSPX, i hope there won’t be another Reformation that occurred 500 years ago.

  • http://www.catholictruthscotland.com EditorCT

    You keep likening the SSPX to Luther yet Luther was a schismatic who said “Destroy the Mass and you destroy the Church” – how on earth can you think there is any resemblance unless you adhere to the heresy of papolatry where you think it is not allowed to criticise a pope.  Check Canon Law on this – you are, in this matter as in so many others, totally wrong and far from having a Catholic mind on the subject. Are you aware of historical precedents for daring to correct erring popes, such as St Catherine of Siena and St Athanasius? You appear to have a very Protestant view of the papacy – Protestants always criticised us for thinking the pope is a divine being whose every word commands obedience.  Not so as any truly educated Catholic knows.

  • Anonymous

    At http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mershon/070410 you will find more objective information regarding the status of the SSPX. Here’s a snippet: “The respected German canonist Dr. Georg May, professor emeritus of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, summarized the irony shown above in a January 12, 2003 letter, when he wrote: “The SSPX is not schismatic because she neither rejects the subordination to the Roman Pontiff nor rejects the communion with the bishops (can. 751).” And the explicit irony is found in the immediate following statement where Prof. Georg said, “Rather, the latter reject communion with the Society.”

    Prof. Georg was the Professor of Canon Law, Law of Church-State Relations and Canonical HIstory from 1960 to 1994 at Mainz University. He has been a well-respected priest for more than 40 years in the Archdiocese of Mainz. The Professor’s conclusions appear to be consistent with those of the Holy See as expressed in numerous public interviews and written correspondence emanating from the PCED, specifically Cardinal Castrillón and Msgr. Camille Perl, president and secretary of the commission.1. The SSPX is not schismatic, because she neither rejects the subordination to the Roman Pope nor rejects the communion with the bishops (can. 751). Rather the latter reject communion with the Society.2. Because the Society is not schismatic, its members are not excommunicated. Both are untrue allegations, made by those, whom the reflective mirror presented to them by the Society irritates.3. Absolutely nobody incurs any punishment by attending the masses of the Society. Of course one can fulfill one’s Sunday obligation by attending a Sunday mass in a chapel or church of the Society. Whoever alleges otherwise, reveals that he merely fears concurrence.”
    Oh yes, and you may wish to read Zenit’s report on Cardinal Kurt Koch’s September 16th inter-religious address in Munich declaring an “Ecumenism of Martyrs,” which His Eminence goes on to describe as a union of Catholic and Protestant martyrs in heaven.

    You may even be interested in Archbishop Nichols’ recent inter-religious statement in Birmingham, a fairly lengthy commentary in which the Archbishop recalls “…a memorable visit to the Central Mosque for Friday Prayers and lunch,”…an outstanding seminar on spiritual themes in the Sikh Gudwara on the Soho Road” and “…an event in the Singer’s Hill Synagogue when I was able to present a precious Torah Scroll.”

    His Grace concludes with this astounding statement: “Dialogue requires a ‘sincere religious conviction’: one which is comfortable in the tenets of one’s own faith and ready to give an account of them. And it requires ‘openness to truth’: truth as something we seek, something by which we want to be possessed, not something which we believe we already possess as our own.”

    That declaration is at least a tacit denial of the infallible dogma ‘extra ecclesia nulla salus.’ Contrary to Archbishop Nichols’ assurance, the Catholic Church proclaims very precisely that she alone does possess all truth. The SSPX upholds this divinely revealed truth, refusing the modern falsehood of solidarity with erroneous religions for peace’ sake, and for that it is declared schismatic. I think Our Lord may have a different view of matters.

  • Anonymous

    Luther also said “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic religion.”

    In a March 1965 interview with L’Osservatore Romano, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, architect of the new Mass of 1969, declared: “We must remove from our Catholic Liturgy and prayers all that can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethern, that is for the Protestants.” Principle amongst those who later assisted Fr. Bugnini in his creation of a new order of Mass in the vernacular was a Lutheran minister. In 1975, Mgr. Bugnini declared Vatican II to have been “a conquest of the Catholic Church.”

    Was he right? Well, with the new Mass came a Reformation. Latin was outlawed, Churches were stripped of their high altars (and in many cases their altar rails and tabernacles), the priest turned his back on God to become a “President” facing the “the assembly” over a table. Then came Communion in the hand while standing, and under both kinds, lay ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, secular music, etc., etc. Sorry, what was that you were saying about the SSPX and Luther? 

  • Anonymous

    Note that your Catechism quotation specifies ordinary magisterial teaching “that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.” That rules out the Conciliar Reformation of the past forty something years, which has sown only confusion and division in the hearts and minds of the Catholic faithful.

    Concerning Luther. He also said “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic religion.” In a March 1965 interview with L’Osservatore Romano, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, architect of the new Mass of 1969, declared: “We must remove from our Catholic Liturgy and prayers all that can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethern, that is for the Protestants.” Principle amongst those who later assisted Fr. Bugnini in his creation of a new order of Mass in the vernacular was a Lutheran minister. In 1975, Mgr. Bugnini declared Vatican II to have been “a conquest of the Catholic Church.”Was he right? Well, with the new Mass came a Reformation. Latin was outlawed, Churches were stripped of their high altars (and in many cases their altar rails and tabernacles), the priest turned his back on God to become a “President” facing the “the assembly” over a table. Then came Communion in the hand while standing, and under both kinds, lay ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, secular music, etc., etc. Sorry, what was that you were saying about the SSPX and Luther?

  • Anonymous

    Note that your Catechism quotation specifies ordinary magisterial teaching “that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.” That rules out the Conciliar Reformation of the past forty something years, which has sown only confusion and division in the hearts and minds of the Catholic faithful.

    Concerning Luther. He also said “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic religion.” In a March 1965 interview with L’Osservatore Romano, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, architect of the new Mass of 1969, declared: “We must remove from our Catholic Liturgy and prayers all that can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethern, that is for the Protestants.” Principle amongst those who later assisted Fr. Bugnini in his creation of a new order of Mass in the vernacular was a Lutheran minister. In 1975, Mgr. Bugnini declared Vatican II to have been “a conquest of the Catholic Church.”Was he right? Well, with the new Mass came a Reformation. Latin was outlawed, Churches were stripped of their high altars (and in many cases their altar rails and tabernacles), the priest turned his back on God to become a “President” facing the “the assembly” over a table. Then came Communion in the hand while standing, and under both kinds, lay ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, secular music, etc., etc. Sorry, what was that you were saying about the SSPX and Luther?

  • crouchback

    Stick to fixing your own wrecked parish / diocese / religious order you silly billy before you blether on about one of the most successfull orders in the history of the church.

    Give us a clue to your diocese so we can judge how well your bishops have done over the last forty years

  • Anonymous

    Note that your Catechism quotation specifies ordinary magisterial teaching “that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.” That rules out the Conciliar Reformation of the past forty something years, which has sown only confusion and division in the hearts and minds of the Catholic faithful.

    Concerning Luther. He also said “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic religion.” In a March 1965 interview with L’Osservatore Romano, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, architect of the new Mass of 1969, declared: “We must remove from our Catholic Liturgy and prayers all that can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethern, that is for the Protestants.” Principle amongst those who later assisted Fr. Bugnini in his creation of a new order of Mass in the vernacular was a Lutheran minister. In 1975, Mgr. Bugnini declared Vatican II to have been “a conquest of the Catholic Church.”Was he right? Well, with the new Mass came a Reformation. Latin was outlawed, Churches were stripped of their high altars (and in many cases their altar rails and tabernacles), the priest turned his back on God to become a “President” facing the “the assembly” over a table. Then came Communion in the hand while standing, and under both kinds, lay ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, secular music, etc., etc. Sorry, what was that you were saying about the SSPX and Luther?

  • Anonymous

    Note that your Catechism quotation specifies ordinary magisterial teaching “that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.” That rules out the Conciliar Reformation of the past forty something years, which has sown only confusion and division in the hearts and minds of the Catholic faithful.

    Concerning Luther. He also said “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic religion.” In a March 1965 interview with L’Osservatore Romano, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, architect of the new Mass of 1969, declared: “We must remove from our Catholic Liturgy and prayers all that can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethern, that is for the Protestants.” Principle amongst those who later assisted Fr. Bugnini in his creation of a new order of Mass in the vernacular was a Lutheran minister. In 1975, Mgr. Bugnini declared Vatican II to have been “a conquest of the Catholic Church.”Was he right? Well, with the new Mass came a Reformation. Latin was outlawed, Churches were stripped of their high altars (and in many cases their altar rails and tabernacles), the priest turned his back on God to become a “President” facing the “the assembly” over a table. Then came Communion in the hand while standing, and under both kinds, lay ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, secular music, etc., etc. Sorry, what was that you were saying about the SSPX and Luther?

  • Anonymous

    Note that your Catechism quotation specifies ordinary magisterial teaching “that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals.” That rules out the Conciliar Reformation of the past forty something years, which has sown only confusion and division in the hearts and minds of the Catholic faithful.
    Concerning Luther. He also said “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic religion.” In a March 1965 interview with L’Osservatore Romano, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, architect of the new Mass of 1969, declared: “We must remove from our Catholic Liturgy and prayers all that can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethern, that is for the Protestants.” Principle amongst those who later assisted Fr. Bugnini in his creation of a new order of Mass in the vernacular was a Lutheran minister. In 1975, Mgr. Bugnini declared Vatican II to have been “a conquest of the Catholic Church.”Was he right? Well, with the new Mass came a Reformation. Latin was outlawed, Churches were stripped of their high altars (and in many cases their altar rails and tabernacles), the priest turned his back on God to become a “President” facing the “the assembly” over a table. Then came Communion in the hand while standing, and under both kinds, lay ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, secular music, etc., etc. Sorry, what was that you were saying about the SSPX and Luther?

  • Moises Carvalho

    Ups, so tired of this pointless discussion that I clicked in the “like” button. Of course that wasn’t what I meant.

    Sweetjae:

    First, don’t call me “friend”. I’m not friend of yours.

    Second, where, in my words, I ATTACKED the Catholic Church? I’m aways explaining, that the problems are the modernists inside the church with the clearly goal to destroy her from inside. If you don’t want to accept that there are many traitors inside the Church, then, you don’t believe just in ME. You don’t believe in St Pius X! Also, if you were just a little bit more interesting in know what is happening with the church in this time of unprecedent crisis, you’d READ more, and stop saying bullshits!!! The infiltration of the comunists led by the KGB and the plans of the freemason to also get infiltrated in the church is so well documentaded today. Man, get aknowledge of the books I’ve posted above. Read the Pascendi. And go read, before make those silly attacks you make. Want to know how much silly are your attacks?
    In your commentary above this last, you said the SSPX WERE SEDEVACANTISTS. In your last commentary, you reffered them as “Sedevacantists also”, giving the idea of sedevacantists as a third group, ’cause I proved you SSPX IS NOT SEDEVACANTIST.

    You cleary show that you don’t know what you are talking about!

    Third, I DO ACCEPT Benedict XVI as pope and legitimate heir of St Peter’s throne. So, why can’t you put me at that group you call “true traditionalist catholics who are in full communion with Peter?” Not that YOUR setence of excomunication for me means anything. I’m just curious to know what I’ve done to receive “Sweetjae’s Chruch setence of excomunication” (!!!)

    Fourth, please, now that I’ve deffended myself of your attacks, unless you’ve something interesting to debate, stop this silly and pointless discussion. I don’t want to talk to you anymore.

    Again, may the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary shine uppon your way to help you to understand our cause. And give you peace.

    In Corde Jesu, Semper,

    Moises C. Reis

  • Sweetjae

    You are tired? Me I’m just amazed by your incoherence and cognitive dissonance. 

    Moises:

    Firstly, the feeling is mutual on the friendship thing.

    Secondly, Everybody knows you and SSPX position on matters of the Magisterial Authority, Pope , Vatican , CCC and Novus Ordo. You always say they are all valid but at the same time you stab us on our backs by attacking and underlining all of them. Don’t deny it Moises I dare you to go to SSPX website and see for yourself all your garbage, trash and rubbish you say about the pope and Vatican2 are well documented that makes the SSPX a two-faced entity. Even the articles and beliefs of your beloved Lefebvre which are all lies that will I cite in here that would  make you a LIAR just like your father.

    June 29, 1976

    Archbishop Lefebvre derisively stated on the occasion of his suspension from
    the administration of the Sacraments by Paul VI:

    “We are suspended a divinis by the Conciliar Church and for the Conciliar
    Church, to which we have no wish to belong. That Conciliar Church is a
    schismatic Church”.

    Mar. 19, 1978

    Today he says: “The Catholic-protestant mass, a spring henceforth poisoned
    which produces incalculable ravages. The ecumenical mass leads logically to
    apostasy.”

    [Lettre aux amis et bienfaiteurs No. 14. Mar. 19, 1978.] 

    “All these (pre Pope John XXIII) Popes have
    resisted the union of the Church with the revolution; it is an adulterous union
    and from such a union only bastards can come. The rite of the new mass is a
    bastard rite, the sacraments are bastard sacraments. We no longer know if they
    are sacraments which give grace or do not give it. The priests coming out of
    the seminaries are bastard priests, who do not know what they are. They are
    unaware that they are made to go up to the altar, to offer the sacrifice of Our
    Lord Jesus Christ and to give Jesus Christ to souls.”

    So Mr. Moises, do you want some more of your beloved Lefebvre’s LIES AND DEGENERATE IDEAS???? He is your pope right??

    Thirdly, I know you and SSPX are not Sedevacantists but what I’m driving at is that both of you are very related the only difference is that the latter don’t recognize the post-conciliar popes  and Vatican2 more so that both of you practiced the novel idea of “Sola traditio” where you put the judgment and decision on yourselves of what the Sacred Tradition truly says and not the Living Authority of the Church. You and Editor Ct always deny this however your actions prove otherwise well at least the protestants claim they adhere to “Sola Scriptura” and admitted it which only proves you and SSPX are just plain charlatans.

    Fourth, Mr. Moises when I read your post regarding “infiltration” I have concluded you are one of those paranoid Conspiracy Theorists to say the Church is being and was infiltrated by communists, masons, gorillas, martians and Avatars. So what?, do you think the Lord would forfeit His Great Promise to His Church? Do you trust in the Promise or rather trust in some tabloid articles? That is the BIG DIFFERENCE between you and the rest of the Catholics.

    Fifth, even the Sedevacantist have a strong devotion to Fatima and Sacred Heart but they are outside of the ARK (Church and if you read the doctrine – outside of the Catholic Church there is no Salvation applicable 
     If one is guilty of visible ignorance.)

    Lastly, I thank you for your blessings, May Our Lady of Fatima let you and SSPX see your pride and arrogance against her Son’s  only ordained Authority on Earth.

  • Sszorin

    Blind obedience to superiors is a practice straight out of communist or nazi state machinery or freemasonic stinkhole.You really do not understand what the Catholic Church is or what is to be a Catholic. We are required to heed and to obey the members of ” the Church teaching ” as long as they adhere to, protect and teach the deposit of faith. It is a right and a duty of all Catholics to resist those in the hierarchy who would spread errors and heresies. Even the pope himself. A modern example : ” the spirit of Vatican II.” heresy of parallel salvation for Jews, that is, the Covenant of the Old Testament is the sufficient means of salvation for Jews. They have no need for Jesus. His redemptive suffering and death on the cross applies only to goyim. You would be surprised how many bishops, even cardinals adhere to this heresy that our ” Elder Brethren ” have a separate track to the Kingdom of Heaven.  After Vatican II. the preaching of the Gospel to Jews was practically abandoned. The Auschwitz chickens came to Vatican to roost. How clever of them. In pointing out this error the Society of St. Pius X. in this instance is doing what Catholics at large should had been doing when the ” jinn of Vatican II.” started wrecking the Church. The Society is right in questioning the legacy of John Paul II. He ceded enormous amount of ground to the original, the oldest and the biggest and the cruelest enemy of the Catholic Church without getting anything in return. To the contrary, it was not the gratitude of Jews that increased and the corresponding reciprocal adjustment of their teachings regarding Jesus Christ and his followers that came. What increased was the arrogance and the venom and what came was more more of the hatred and of the malfeasance. It will be a wonder to ponder for the times to come that in our age those that stood for the Catholic Tradition and defended the dogma and the faith were called schismatics and the schizophrenics in power who were not reconciled to the deposit of faith of the Catholic Church called themselves Catholics.

  • Anonymous

    Moises

    I have learnt from many previous exchanges with Sweetjae that he lives in a comfortable world of his own making (similar to the Danny Kaye film “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty”) and that it is a waste of time trying to convince him of reality.
    No matter what the quality of the evidence you put before him, he sticks to his own erroneous grasp of the situation.
    One of his favourite taunts is that the SSPX should go off and start its own Church. The fact that the SSPX exists simply to preserve the Church that Christ founded, and to protect its teachings from error, means that it cannot “go off and start its own Church” as there is nowhere to go other than to stay where it is!  What is it that blinds Sweetjae to the obvious conclusion, which is that it is the Conciliar Church which has veered off course and that it is the Conciliar Church which needs to return to Tradition – Tradition as enshrined in the Extraordinary Magisterium built up down the ages?
    It will be very interesting to see whether Sweetjae still rails against the SSPX after full communion has been restored.
    My prayer is that the Vatican will recognise the validity of the SSPX position, and will set aside all those parts of the second Vatican Council, and all the liberal practices which it has spawned, which lack congruity with the Extraordinary Magisterium, and that the Church will be able to return to the business of saving souls.

    God bless.

  • M Blanton

    On the contrary, SSPX is not a splinter group! They never
    left the Church! Rome formally left
    the Church  at  Vatican II. The SSPX is merely a priestly
    society

    which adheres to and passes on only that which Peter handed
    down. They

    did not go to Rome
    to accept a ‘deal’ or ‘compromise’. If you believe

    that then you are mindless sheep reading only the Vatican
    and the

    media’s take on this. Listen and read Bishop Fellay’s own
    words from day one:

    They went to Rome
    to convert it back to the One True
    Church. What did

    they find after all these months of doctrinal discussions?

    Unfortunately they found these Roman cardinals have lost
    their faith

    or never had it to begin with. They found only cardinals
    steeped in

    the twisted mindset of leftist German philosophy instead of
    the sound

    Thomistic philosophy. 
    Why doesn’t the Vatican
    force the New Mass liberal Bishops who abuse the Mass by celebrating their
    ‘clown’ and ‘pepsi’ Masses sign a doctrinal preamble? 

    These holy SSPX defenders of truth have for so long

    consistently corrected and admonished the boat of Peter to
    veer back

    on course. May God bless them for in the fullness of time it
    will show

    that this holy Society preserved the priesthood.

  • Sweetjae

    Mr. Leprechaun again, I would like to settle this once and for all of who really is the one in error with a question of all time:

    IF THERE IS A DISPUTE-DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO ABIDING CHRISTIANS, WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PASS AND MAKE JUDGMENT OF WHO GOT IT RIGHT AND WHO IS WRONG? WHO WILL SETTLE THE DISPUTE?

    Now, Mr. leprechaun please answer that question directly ( with Bible and Patristic Fathers quotations) and not dance around like you always do.

  • Sweetjae

    Mr. leprechaun, as with previous interactions with you, you are always proven wrong and ignorant (eg. Magisterium is based on Tradition, Cherry picking tactic of choosing an Orthodox council etc.) Now your latest salvo is again a staggering failure.

    You asserted that SSPX simply “preserve” the Traditions and protect its Teachings from error and that the Church can’t go off as there is nowhere else to go.

    Firstly, your assumption is already full of errors by itself and they are self-refuting. By self-refuting I mean it contains a contradiction within itself, meaning it can not be true. There is nowhere found in Sacred Tradition that  anyone nor any society can interpret Sacred tradition outside or apart from the Living Authority of the church, so right away SSPX is in the wrong foothold already. 

     Secondly, SSPX accepts only those councils (or those parts of councils) that agree
    with his interpretation of Tradition, which interpretation is heavily
    influenced by their preconceived paradigm. And in doing so, because they retain control over what rules of the faith stand or fall, they has set themselves up as
    their own ecclesastical authority. In the same way, thier conclusions about what
    tradition belong in the Sacred tradition relate to what agree with their preconceived paradigm.
    And in doing so, they has set themselves up as their  own ecclesiastical authority
    vis-a-vis Scripture and Tradition. Barring a claim that the Holy Spirit infallibly guides them to the right conclusion about the tradition, they has effectively placed themselves over
    Tradition. This is a great irony.

    If Mr. leprechaun’s assumption is true, then Tradition is just a tradition meaning it’s all from the PAST not a perpetuity of the living Authority and Teachings of the Church. If it is just from the past then the challenges of any particular age is insurmountable because the current challenge is not addressed in the past e.g. if we live only before pre-Vatican 1, issues like Embryonic stem cell, cloning,  DNA-manipulation etc. are considered non-essentials for the Church according to the principle of Mr. leprechaun.

    If you lived in the first 300 years of Christianity then the doctrine of Purgatory is considered not a Tradition because its not defined until 1,5000 years later by the Church, this is how the logical process Mr. Leprechaun and SSPX espouses but rather a specific Teaching  made by the church in any age would become a Tradition and can only BE interpreted by the same Authority who made it on the first place and NOT ANY MAN NOR LEPRECHAUN NOR SSPX!.

    I will be be very happy if SSPX accepts the offer of the Church and be united FULLY however, like what i have said before the ball is in the court of the SSPX.

  • Anonymous

    Simple, Sweetjae.  Two abiding Christians could not be in dispute (about matters of Faith and Morals) because there is only one version of the truth, and for them to be in dispute, one or other of them must have taken a stance at variance with that truth.

    There is no need to cite quotations from the bible or from your living magisterium to determine the correct position. 

    When the Holy Ghost descended on the Apostles, He instilled in them what they were to teach.  For close on two thousand years, the successors of St Peter have ensured that those teachings were upheld, and some of the faithful became martyrs rather than accept any variation from those teachings.

    Consequently, it is only necessary to look at what was taught during all that time in order to determine the truth, and thus to resolve which of the two Christians is right.

    How many of your Rhine fathers would be prepared to become martyrs in support of Freedom of Religion, False Ecumenism or Collegiality?  As Paul Daniells might say: “Not a lot, sunshine”.

    Have I answered your question, Sweetjae, in terms that you can comprehend?  If not, kindly point out to me, without dancing around, where I am wrong.  As the Jesuits used to say, you can argue as long as you like about how many legs a sheep has, but when night falls, the answer is “four” and there is no getting away from it.

  • Anonymous

    Sweetjae,

    I am sure your persistent stubbornness would test the patience of Job himself .

    Mr. leprechaun, as with previous interactions with you, you are always
    proven wrong and ignorant (eg. Magisterium is based on Tradition, Cherry
    picking tactic of choosing an Orthodox council etc.) Now your latest
    salvo is again a staggering failure.
    “.  Proven wrong by whom, Sweetjae?  Yourself?  To your satisfaction?

    In your opinion, apparently so, but by any other standard, no!  “Proven”? – Not proven.

    You asserted that SSPX simply “preserve” the Traditions and protect its
    Teachings from error and that the Church can’t go off as there is
    nowhere else to go.
    “.  Sweetjae, if you are going to quote my assertions, please do me the honour of getting them right. I did not say that “the Church can’t go off . . . “.  What I did say was that the SSPX cannot go off . . . – but I won’t hold my breath pending your apology.

    You seem to be obsessed with the SSPX’s desire to “interpret” the Church’s teachings. The SSPX quotes many instances of the Church’s teaching, but I await examples from you of where the Society has interpreted said teachings.

    With the exception of the final paragraph, the remainder of your rant appears to have been cut and pasted from a source which you have not had the literary good manners to acknowledge, judging by the irregular line length, the sudden and obvious upgrade of the register of the text, and the content, so forgive me if I do not waste my time on it. [I didn't learn nothing during my many years at the chalkface].

    As for your closing remark, I am glad to see that there is something that can make you happy, but you have got even that wrong.  The SSPX is defending that which the Holy Ghost instilled in the heads of the original Apostles when He descended upon them.  The SSPX is in the court of Truth.  It is the Conciliar Church, the Rhine Fathers, their adherents, the Liberals and the Modernist bishops who are collectively in the wrong court, and it lies with them to return to the pre-Vatican II position (coincidentally, this is just like the two abiding Christians whom you instance elsewhere n’est-ce pas?).  Notice that I have not included Pope Benedict XVI in this list.  He is the prisoner of these wolves – something at which he hinted on his election to office.

    Once that is achieved, and the Church starts telling the world that the Church is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ and outside of which there is no salvation, then that is what would make me happy.

  • KenjiroShoda

    Fortunatly, there was no mention in this “preamble” of any acknowledgement of Vatican II, it;s principles, the teaching of Vatican II popes that the SSPX has to acknowledge.  Rather, it states on the contrary that the principles and practices that came from Vatican II are open to legitimate discussion (and criticism).
    This is a big concession from the Vatican, and finally an acknowledgement that noting of Vatican II is infallible or etched in stone.
    It’s about time.