Tue 21st Oct 2014 | Last updated: Tue 21st Oct 2014 at 13:06pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

SSPX leader calls Jewish people ‘enemies of the Church’

By on Friday, 4 January 2013

Bishop Fellay, superior general of the SSPX (Photo: CNS)

Bishop Fellay, superior general of the SSPX (Photo: CNS)

The head of the traditionalist Society of St Pius X has called Jewish people “enemies of the Church”, saying Jewish leaders’ support of the Second Vatican Council “shows that Vatican II is their thing, not the Church’s”.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, the society’s superior general, said those most opposed to Rome granting canonical recognition to the SSPX have been “the enemies of the Church: the Jews, the Masons, the modernists”.

He said these people, “who are outside of the Church, who over centuries have been enemies of the Church”, urged the Vatican to compel the SSPX to accept Vatican II.

He made the comments during a nearly two-hour talk at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Academy in New Hamburg, Ontario, Canada.

In it he said he had been receiving mixed messages from the Vatican for years over if and how the group might be brought back into full communion with the Church.

He said top Vatican officials told him not to be discouraged by official statements from the Vatican, because they did not reflect Pope Benedict XVI’s true feelings.

The Vatican press office declined to comment on the claims and the society’s Swiss headquarters did not respond to a Catholic News Service request for comment.

However, the US branch of the society attempted to clarify Bishop Fellay’s remark in a statement on its website.

It said: “The word ‘enemies’ used here by Bishop Fellay is of course a religious concept and refers to any group or religious sect which opposes the mission of the Catholic Church and her efforts to fulfill it: the salvation of souls.

The group said “this religious context” is based on Jesus telling the Pharisees in the Gospel of St. Matthew: “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.”

“By referring to the Jews, Bishop Fellay’s comment was aimed at the leaders of Jewish organisations, and not the Jewish people,” the statement said, adding that any accusations of the society being anti-Semitic were false and an example of “hate speech made in an attempt to silence its message”.

Pope Benedict launched a series of doctrinal discussions with the SSPX in 2009, lifting excommunications imposed on its four bishops, who were ordained in 1988 without papal approval, and expressing his hopes they would return to full communion with the Church.

In 2011, the Vatican gave SSPX leaders a “doctrinal preamble” to sign that outlines principles and criteria necessary to guarantee fidelity to the Church and its teaching; the Vatican said the SSPX leaders would have to sign it to move toward full reconciliation.

But Bishop Fellay said he repeatedly told the Vatican that the contents of the preamble – particularly acceptance of the modern Mass and the council as expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church – were unacceptable.

He said the only reason he continued discussions with Vatican officials was because others “very close to the Pope” had assured him that the Pope was not in agreement with hard-line official pronouncements from the Vatican.

According to Bishop Fellay, retired Colombian Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, then president of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, the office responsible for relations with traditionalist Catholics, had told him in March 2009 that the society would be formally recognised.

When the bishop asked how that could be possible when recognition hinged on accepting the teachings of Vatican II, he said the cardinal replied that such a requirement was only “political” and “administrative” and that, “by the way, that is not what the Pope thinks”.

Bishop Fellay said he continued to get similar messages from other Vatican officials, even as the formal talks continued. The verbal and written messages were very credible, he said, because they came from officials who saw the Pope “every day or every two days.”

He said he wouldn’t give names, but he did claim “the secretary of the Pope himself” was among those who told him not to worry too much about hardline Vatican positions.

Even if the doctrinal congregation ruled against the society, he claimed the secretary told him, the Pope “will overrule it in favour of the society”.

“So, you see, I got all of these kinds of messages which were not fitting together,” Bishop Fellay said. “I got an official thing where I clearly have to say ‘no’ and I got other messages – which are not official, of course – but which say, ‘No, that’s not what the Pope wants.’”

The unofficial assurances were what kept him engaged in talks, he said, since the Vatican’s official demands, which carried the Pope’s approval, “would mean the end of our relation with Rome”.

The Vatican has not made the preamble public, but said it “states some doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation of Catholic doctrine necessary to guarantee fidelity” to the formal teaching of the Church, including the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, and that it 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 Church.

Bishop Fellay said Pope Benedict wrote to him, emphasising that full recognition required the society accept the magisterium as the judge of what is tradition, accept the Council as an integral part of tradition and accept that the modern Mass is valid and licit.

Bishop Fellay said: “Even in the Council there are some things we accept,” as well as reject, however, the group wishes to be free to say, “there are errors in the Council” and that “the new Mass is evil”.

The group will not accept reconciliation if it means no longer being able to make such pronouncements, he said.

Here we publish the full statement issued by the US district of the SSPX on Saturday, January 5:

During a 2-hour conference given in Ontario, Canada on December 28th, 2012, Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society St. Pius X, commented on the relations between the Holy See and the SSPX during the last two years.

During the conference Bishop Fellay stated “Who, during that time, was the most opposed that the Church would recognize the Society? The enemies of the Church. The Jews, the Masons, the Modernists…”

The word “enemies” used here by Bishop Fellay is of course a religious concept and refers to any group or religious sect which opposes the mission of the Catholic Church and her efforts to fulfill it: the salvation of souls.

This religious context is based upon the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ as recorded in the Holy Gospels: “He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth.” (Matthew 12:30)

By referring to the Jews, Bishop Fellay’s comment was aimed at the leaders of Jewish organizations, and not the Jewish people, as is being implied by journalists.

Accordingly the Society of St. Pius X denounces the repeated false accusations of anti-Semitism or hate speech made in an attempt to silence its message.

  • Alphonsus_Jr

    You seem to believe that you’re a devastating interrogator. But in fact, for those with eyes to see, your questions only serve to accentuate the extent of your Conciliar processing and your resulting ignorance. By all means, Inspector Clouseau, keep it up.

  • Benedict

    Let him get on with this rubbish.. Why be Christian and do the opposite of christian morals?! What would SPX think? Jesus was a jew? What would jesus do? What would jesus think? What would the prophets and scribes think?

    New mass is evil? Of course yeh yeh yeh RUBBISH. Welcoming god via tongues gift of the holy spirit and being open as god would like with still the same ultimate sacrifice and mystery. Lets think properly. Lets follow the true holy roman catholic church which was founded by CHRIST and PETER not just a single pope. Fair enough a saint but not a person on which you should build a church on. 
    I respect all faiths and christian denominations but if christian domination can’t respect where they came from and from what teaching and truths they came from (the catholic church) It really bugs me.The image I post is the holy father at holy mass, offering the highest sacrifice in the better,open,moving,holy and yet ancient way? Is this what a society needs.. a society that is growing with atheists and lapsed catholics. YES IT IS. Because in todays society no one wants to get up at 8am for high mass in latin for over an hour because to them its nothing. I myself would like to do this BUT you can’t have everything to please yourself. IM 15, may not be right on everything but I am quite educated in religous history and religous morals in the church. So listen to the young this society will not last another 20 years because it does not appeal to youth. I go to Youth Masses and guess what they love the singing and smiles but when it comes to the eucharistic prayer you could hear a pin drop and the moving atmosphere is almost tangible. Look at world youth day also. Pope comes out everything cheers for ages then at exposition silence falls. Like I said before I do not mean to be offensive but I respect all faiths and christian denominations but if christian domination can’t respect where they came from and from what teaching and truths they came from (the catholic church) It really bugs me.

  • scary goat

     What group or religion would that be, Sweet?  I am as mainstream Catholic as you.  And what habit would that be of calling it a hippie council?  When have I ever used that term previously?  If you notice, I put it in “marks” referring to another poster’s comments.  I tried as best I could to do a job of promoting unity and understanding and peaceful discussion, recognising legitimate concerns of the traditionalists whilst remaining loyal to the Pope and Magesterium. It was an effort at bridge-building.  My point was a bit more listening and understanding all round and a bit less arguing at each other. So often I notice people seem to get stuck in argue-mode when if they actually listened their views are quite close. We could use this place to learn from each other but that’s unlikely when people get stuck in “I’m right you’re wrong” mode.  I did notice your next post agrees with some of what I said. From your post above I can’t help thinking you have misunderstood what I was saying. 

  • GratefulCatholic

    Book of Acts: 7. The Speech and Martyrdom of Saint Stephen: I weep as I read it.
    Thanks be to God, a small faithful Jewish remnant shall eventually prevail: Mat. 23: 33-39, Rom. 1:16, 9:27.

  • Lewispbuckingham

    The enemies of the church, the Jews the masons… ”

    As the son of a mason I find this very offensive. In Australia the Masons have , long ago ,merged their health fund, The United Order of Oddfellows, with ,wait for it, The Hibernian Society.
     About fifteen years ago my father finally could say “It is time for me to make my peace with the Catholic Church,” something I may dare say has already happened in  the life of the Church in Australia.
     If this kind of statement, especially aimed at the Jewish people the first to recognise the God of Abraham, “would mean the end of our relation with Rome’  then so be it.

  • Wiseman

     You give no details or source.
    But presumably they were objecting to its flagrant and unpleasant anti-Semitism, not to its opposition to Vatican II’s liturgical reforms. The idea that the Jews were somehow behind Vatican II and the new directions in Catholicism from the 1960s betrays the mental instability of fringe traditionalists and sedevacantists,

  • Aelred

     Your own discourse is, of course, totally un-hippylike? The teenage contributors to this discussion are inadvertently revealing the extent of Britain’s educational collapse.

    (When used transitively, ‘stop” takes a direct object by the way.)

  • Aelred

     Oh, and the plural of ‘sheep’ is…er…’sheep.’

  • sorojena

    this is sad, and a lesson that even traditionalism can be bad for religion as much as modernism is bad for religion! 

  • Yorkshire Catholic

     I agree with you about the effects — but what is the cause? The Mass remains for me an island of sacredness in a degraded ecclesiastical environment — churches without their historical central tabernacles and evolving into meeting halls, clergy who encourage talking and conversation in church in the name of ‘socialisation’ [the Jesuits being particular offenders in this regard in my experience], the lifting of all discipline about the behaviour of children, the tolerance of people who sit through the Consecration and Communion and most of the service, and the turning of the reading of scriptures into a multi-reader family vaudeville performance, the scrapping of traditional hymns and their replacement by ‘Kumbaya’ and ‘Lord of the Dance’, and the general retreat of doctrine and conviction in the sermons, oh and of course the phasing out of Confession (oops, Reconciliation). Even in Westminster Cathedral, one sometimes finds a queue of people wanting to go to Confession, but no priest turning up at the promised time. Elsewhere confession seems to be increasingly on request — and never emphasized in teaching. Indeed teaching never gets beyond ‘Love your neighbour.”
          Like you I prefer the Latin or Extraordinary form of the Mass, but I do find the English Mass authentically sacred and still treated as such by most congregations. I do not see that sense of contact with the sacred in congregations at the (admittedly very few) Anglican services I have been to.
         The Mass, even amid all the above, is still the Last Supper and the Sacrifice of Calvary and its sacredness–and validity–are beyond dispute.

         But I yearn for the intense religious feeling which marked Catholic services in my pre-Vatican II youth, before prayer and inward devotion were replaced by collective celebration.

  • Monoculturalism

    This is not anti-Semitism, despite this newspaper’s false (and rather libellous) categorisation of it as such. Anti-Semitism is the belief that Jews are biologically evil and irredeemable, i.e. racial anti-Jewishness. The term “Jew” in that sense refers to Ashkenazim, Sephardim and other Jewish ethnic groups. Individuals from within these ethnic groups follow a multitude of religions; primarily false creeds such as Judaism (and, increasingly, atheism), but also Christianity. There is nothing preventing more of them from embracing Christ but their own will. One hopes that more of them will see the light.

    Bishop Fellay, as a Catholic, understands that the only salvation for the Jews is through Christ — and not just for the Jews, but for all other people! It is there for all to read in the Gospels. I am sure Bishop Fellay sees the conversion of Jews (in both senses of the word) to the ways of Christ and His Church as a positive thing, just as Christ himself viewed the conversion of Galilean Jews to Christianity as a positive thing.

  • DM

    The pre-conciliar Church was unambiguously against anti-semitism – cf the encyclicals of Pius XI. Now we have religious liberty, so if I’m a catholic anti-semite, that’s my right, no?

  • JabbaPapa

    No, the existence of religious liberty does not justify using it sinfully.

  • JabbaPapa


  • Burt

    How pathetic of the Catholic Herald to make such a sensational headline out of the talk given by Bishop Fellay. It was a pleasure (to anyone who has bothered to play the You Tube link) to listen to his completely frank and honest appraisal of the inconsistent and frustrating  treatment SSPX have been getting from Rome. 

    To highlight one line from that talk and then to imply Fellay is anti-Semitic is ridiculous. If I was minded to peruse this talk for a sensational headline I would have found a far better one when he claimed he had certain knowledge (He made sure by sending someone to verify this with photographic evidence) that Pope Paul VI mother’s tombstone is covered with Masonic symbolism. Now that is what I call sensational news. How many Catholic Herald readers will object that Fellay referred to Freemasons as enemies of the Church? Even more sensational was his claim that the future Paul VI was revealed to have been a to have been a traitor against the Church acting on behalf of Moscow, this  proof was provided to Pius XII by the Lutheran Bishop of Helsinki. Wow!

    A lot of contributors here are wrong to  imagine that the Jewish religion is the same faith before the Incarnation as it became after. Catholics are in in a sense the true Jews in that the New Testament is the true continuation of the Old Testament.Those Jewish religious leaders who did not convert after the Resurrection were spiritually blind and obstinate to reject the Messiah. Since those times the scriptures of Judaism are not just the Torah but the writings mainly taught by the Rabbis are contained in the Talmud. These contain the most blasphemous, horrible texts imaginable regarding Jesus and Mary.Christ said No man can get to the Father except through Him. The Talmud claims (I hate to type this, but needs be!) Our Lord is in Hell boiling in his excrement.This is why we should pray for them. This is why we must continue to call them to truth so that they recognise that Jesus Christ is their Saviour and Redeemer, their Messiah, and they are honoured in that it was manifestly foretold to them as a people that He would be born amongst them.The problem with some Concilliar texts is that they negate the duty to evangelize, to work and to pray for the conversion of Jews. To me that is an example of the Church acting like an enemy to Jewish people! Not caring whether they find Christ or not is an outrageous sin against charity. Of course today most Jewish people are Jews in name only. (Sadly today the same can be said of most Catholics, Catholic in name only) Their faith is mainly part of their identity more than a strictly followed faith. Many will have a basic belief in God and will of course pray for his beneficence. Many will be atheists too. A sizeable minority will be strict adherents to orthodox (that is Talmudic) Judaism. Those that are can be described as enemies of the Church, even if they do not see themselves starkly this way. Fellay merely pointed out that it was noticeable that it is these Jewish leaders who are supportive of the Modernist errors that have been afloat since the Second Vatican Council.

  • Jpfhays1953

    Fellay’s comments have nothing to do with the state of Israel and certainly not the modern state of Israel. The comments are nothing more than the ages-old anti-semitism. 

    Fellay is a quack, who is no better than any liberal who appoints himself over-seer of the chair of St. Peter. He is as arrogant and ignorant as the left. Except for the lace and brocade, there isn’t an iota of difference between him and his crowd and the kokers on the other end of the spectrum.

  • phil_evans

    “The head of the traditionalist Society of St Pius X has called Jewish people “enemies of the Church”, saying Jewish leaders’ support of the Second Vatican Council “shows that Vatican II is their thing, not the Church’s”.
    This is disgraceful. The rejection of the last Church Council and its position against anti-semitism, is scandalous.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    If you read anything he has said or written in depth, you would choke on your own ignorance.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Excellent post

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    He/she doesn’t care what you actually write, Scary.

  • Akoni

    These SSPX leaders are tearing the Church’s unity & yet they believed in their hearts that they are still following the Lord Jesus. Anyone who is spreading disobedience to the Church & causing disunity is not of God that’s why I lost my trust in these kinds of groups & we have plenty of these in our church today. Sincere catholics must be prudent. There is only ONE VOICE we will listen to, obey & follow & that VOICE is no other than the POPE & the MAGISTERIUM. If we honestly believed the Pope is the Vcar of Christ then look for no other authority except him, & these group shouldn’t have stayed longer. If Bshop Fellay has the Holy Spirit then why cant he understand the explaination of Pope Benefict that Vatucan II is a continuitity of Tradition. Why cant they see the sincerity of this pope for reconciliation? If there’s something in Vatican II that they dont like must they resort to disobedience? They want the Church to bend on them rather than the ither way around. This group is schismatic, they’re true colors were already revealed.

  • Burt

    Thanks Benedict, from you that is a compliment indeed :)

  • Ed


    The SSPX has a long deep-seated history of antisemitism. The Southern Poverty Law Center has some good articles about SSPX and its antisemitic dark side.

  • im_soul_catholic

     No, they are no longer the chosen people because the old covenant is gone and there is a new covenant with Christ and catholics are now the chosen people.  Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation!

  • im_soul_catholic

    It was Jesus, Himself, who said if you are not with me, you are against me. 

  • im_soul_catholic

     The SSPX follows the traditions always taught before Vatican II.  Ecclesiam nulla salus means: “outside the church there is no salvation”.

  • im_soul_catholic

     “The author wants a clear distinction
    to be made between hatred of the Jewish nation, which is Anti-Semitism, and
    opposition to the Jewish and Masonic naturalism. This opposition on the part of
    Catholics must be mainly positive by acknowledging, not only individually, but
    socially, the rights of the supernatural Kingship of Christ and His Church, and
    by striving politically to get these rights acknowledged by States and public
    life. For this indispensable undertaking … the active and effective union of
    Catholics … is absolutely necessary.”Fr. Fahey – http://www.cfnews.org/Fahey-AntiSemitism.htm

  • Amkennedpayen

    He’s not right….but he’s not wrong. We have a lot to learn though !!!! Will we ever ?????

  • Alan

    Every non-Christian rejects Jesus Christ, implicitly or otherwise.  Are those billions all “enemies of the Church”?  If so, why single out these 3 small groups (Jews, Masons, modernists)?  The way I see it, the only “enemies of the Church” are those who attack it: aggressive atheists, Islamist fundamentalists, and Paisleyite Protestants.  Not the Jews.

  • Fed_Up18

    a) Conflating Jews with Israel is antisemitism. When you gripe about Israel & say “Jews” you are *proving* that criticism of Israel has its roots in antisemitism.
    b) The “Palestinians” are NOT “as badly treated in Israel”: They do NOT LIVE IN Israel! They live in their own special little enclaves *given to them BY Israel* because they a) refuse to recognize Israel & 2) Israel is so desperate for peace that she has given in to their uinreasinable demands that say “we can try to kill you every day for years, but you must give us land.” Which is rpoeciely what is going on over there: check the statistics on rockets from Gaza.
    c) YOU are the one being PC by insisting on seeing all brown people as victims, insisting that “Jews can be held to a higher standard “just because”, & assuming that all Jews are white.

  • Lewispbuckingham

     Right on Alan.There are supposed 7.063 billion people alive at the moment, to be scientific say plus or minus ten percent.If there are about a billion Catholics does that mean everyone who is not a Catholic is the enemy of a catholic.
     That’s absurd.
     If that is the Fellay thinking then it is not reasonable.
    No wonder the Vatican is making slow progress with reconciliation, because if the SSPX meme is to be ‘If you are not with us you are against us, and we are the true church. It then follows that you are our enemy so we cannot trust or talk as you are our enemy………………’.and so forth in an endless loop.
     Then it is time that wiser SSPX heads prevail.

  • Alban

    What do you expect from such a bigot?

  • Christopher Forrester

    Some Jews are enemies of the Church. Some of these are ethnic, cultural or religious Jews. Some of these are secular Jews, some lapsed. I am thinking of leading figures in the French Revolution for example. It is true that a certian Jewish loby has used and confused the Christian fulfilment of the Old Law. Also the nullity of the Old Law with a racial dislike or hatred of Jews. How can that be as there are semetic Christians and the Church is racially blind. The SSPX have expelled Bishop Williamson and his views are false. There are many recorded interviews with ex SS officials who confirm Nazi  systematic killing of Jews, Slavs, Gyspsies, and political enemies. There were even over 2,400 priests and religious imprisoned in Dachau .
    So the SSPX have expelled an ignorant man from their midst.This is good.
    Yet the some Jews will play the race card to avoid charges they dislike Christians. Recently a Greel Orthodox priest in Jerusalem went to Court because certain rabbis and Jews there routinely spit on Christians and Christian clergy in the streets there.

  • andHarry

     God said to the Jews, “I will bless those who bless you and I will CURSE those who will curse you”.

    As someone who was brought up to regard Jews with suspicion it took some time before my attitude  to them changed, but, eventually, change it did. My parents were decent Catholics, and not to blame for the attitudes they often unconsciously passed on. As Philip Larkin wrote:’ Your parents **** you up. They don’t mean to, but they do.’
    My freedom in Christ has increased, and I now claim a blessing rather than a curse. Another one bites the dust.

  • im_soul_catholic

    Our Lord said if you are not with me, you are against me so yes they are. Not true. Read some of Poncin’s books and you’ll find out!  Some can be read online. Also,
    check out:  http://romancatholicheroes.blogspot.com/2011/10/vicomte-leon-de-poncins-1897-1976.html

  • im_soul_catholic

     Bishop Williamson is a very holy bishop and like a great many others he questions something that is against the law.  Did you know Hitler had Jewish Soldiers?  http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Jewish-Soldiers-Descent-Military/dp/0700613587  Is mocking Jesus Christ against the law?  Is being anti-catholic against the law?  Something is rotten in Denmark.  Wake up!

  • im_soul_catholic

     None of the popes before Vatican II went into a synagogue or had an Assisi with false religions and JPII was the first one to do so.  If you are on Facebook, check out about JP II at:  https://www.facebook.com/pages/Pope-Benedict-XVI-Catholic-Prudence-Counsels-NOT-to-Canonize-JPII-in-Haste/192580334096734

  • im_soul_catholic

    I think you better read this about the masons:  http://www.scripturecatholic.com/freemasonry.htm

  • darylbrown

    No. A poor post lacking understanding of the written word of Pope Benedict and the documents of the Second Vatican Council.

    Extreme ignorance.

  • darylbrown


    You mean the post-conciliar Church surely? Please edit and correct your comment.

  • darylbrown

    Benedict Carter. You are consistently in error wherever you comment on the Internet.

  • darylbrown

    Blind Traditionalism is bad for the soul. Study and absorb the documents of the Second Vatican Council during this Year of Faith.

  • Lewispbuckingham

     Dear im_soul_catholic, I am not quite sure of your meaning.
    Historically both Christ the high priest and St John were in and out of Synagogues so I suppose if it were good enough for them it could be good enough for modern Popes.
     Now these were events that even preceded Trent so the SSPX should have no problem with them.

  • Semperfidelis

    Your quote:”were not Mary and Jesus Jewish people?” [END OF QUOTE]. Both for Jews and for nazis, the jewishness depends of race, it is a phisical condition. For Catholics it is a matter of Faith: if a Jew converts, he is not a Jew anymore.

  • Parasum

    They are not “the chosen people of God” – they were, but not now. If ever they are converted *en masse* (as St. Paul hoped) that will not undo the supersession of the “Israel according to the flesh” (the Israel descended genealogically from Abraham) by the “Israel according to the Spirit” (“the children of the promise”, at first Jewish only, but after Pentecost Gentile as well), who have inherited the promise to Abraham of the Messiah; a Promise, which is Christ, received through faith & not works, in whom the Gentiles as well as the Jews have believed.

    In the end, those (Jews) who have not believed, will believe – but that will not undo the receiving of the Promise through faith in Christ; it will not put the receiving of Christ back upon  its pre-Gentile basis. That is all St. Paul, in Romans. And it leaves no place for supersession to be denied, nor for any other Messiah than Christ, nor for any other economy of salvation that that which has Christ, the Seed promised to Abraham, as the fulfilment of that promise, for “all the promises of God find their “Yes” in Him”.

    If Jesus is not the “One Lord” St Paul calls Him in Ephesians, there can be many Christs,  manty Churches, many Gods, many Saviours, many “name[s] given under heaven, by which man can be saved” – despite the explicit denial of St Peter that there could be another such name than His. Supersessionism makes Jesus Christ the god of the Catholic tribe, the little god they worship: it make Arius, Macedonius, Nestorius, Eutyches & Dioscorus look like pillars of orthodoxy; for it deprives Christ of His Kingship, His Mediatorial office, His fulfilling of all the promises of God, it makes God a liar, it disembowels the NT and evacuates it of all its meaning, & it makes the Church’s repeated, frequent, unambiguous & consistent witness to the excellence of  Christ into the drivellings of an idiot. Yesterday the Church adored Christ as Lord & God – now she spits in His Face & tramples Him beneath her  feet.

    The destructive power of of this heresy  is unlimited. If Arianism and those Christological errors are heresies, it is far more so, for it goes far further than they do. So it is just as well that the NT contains warnings against false teachers.

  • Alphonsus_Jr

     Notice Jabba’s implicit embrace here of the myth of progress and his resulting chronological snobbery. This is characteristic of those infected by modernism and the evolutionism at its root.

  • AG

    Uh oh… This doesn’t look good for the SSPX.

  • Sweetjae

    What i’m saying is, give respect to any person affiliated with any religious group, RESPECT his beliefs and religion, unlike these so called ‘traditionalists’ who instead of a civil or christain dialogue where disagreement may naturally arise but rather resort to ad-hominem and prejudice towards the very structure (Vat2) the other people holds Sacred. Then call themselves ‘catholics’.

    Anyways, directly quoting you, “I think the Hippie Council is not totally off the mark”. What do you mean by this?

  • Sweetjae

    Blah, blah…..insisting you have INFALLIBLE interpretation is an evolutionism to the max.

  • Sweetjae

    An excellent example of infallibility claimed by himself.