Bp Fellay says total VII acceptance no longer a prerequisite!

LoyalViews · #1 Jun 11, '12, 5:15 pm

Has anyone seen this on DICI?

Quote:

From DICI...
What has changed is the fact that Rome no longer makes total acceptance of Vatican II a prerequisite for the canonical solution. Today, in Rome, some people regard a different understanding of the Council as something that is not decisive for the future of the Church, since the Church is more than the Council. Indeed, the Church cannot be reduced to the Council; she is much larger. Therefore we must strive to resolve more far-reaching problems. This new awareness can help us to understanding what is really happening: we are called to help bring to others the treasure of Tradition that we have been able to preserve.

So the attitude of the official Church is what changed; we did not. We were not the ones who asked for an agreement; the pope is the one who wants to recognize us. You may ask: why this change? We are still not in agreement doctrinally, and yet the pope wants to recognize us! Why? The answer is right in front of us: there are terribly important problems in the Church today. These problems must be addressed. We must set aside the secondary problems and deal with the major problems. This is the answer of one or another Roman prelate, although they will never say so openly; you have to read between the lines to understand.

And here is the full article, there's much much more.

Isn't this good news? Bp Fellay is talking as if a decision is soon coming, maybe in a matter of weeks? What about days? Please pray!

But what do you make of this!

Megan7 · #2 Jun 11, '12, 5:29 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoyalViews

Has anyone seen this on DICI?

And here is the full article, there's much much more.

Isn't this good news? Bp Fellay is talking as if a decision is soon coming, maybe in a matter of weeks? What about days? Please pray!

But what do you make of this!

Thanks!

God bless,

PAX

SanctusPeccator · #3 Jun 11, '12, 6:40 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoyalViews

Has anyone seen this on DICI?

And here is the full article, there's much much more.

Isn't this good news? Bp Fellay is talking as if a decision is soon coming, maybe in a matter of weeks? What about days? Please pray!

But what do you make of this!

Without positive confirmation from the Holy See, sees premature to make anything of this at all?

Cristiano · #4 Jun 11, '12, 6:55 pm

I read that article a few days ago and my reaction is that he is now coming out with these statements specifically to cool down some of the hot heads in the SSPX and to avoid any internal split. I am saying that because the tone of the article is quite different from the one of the letter that he sent to the other SSPX bishops. I think that Bp. Fellay is an astute and pragmatic man and that the SSPX is lucky to have him as a Superior General.

LoyalViews · #5 Jun 11, '12, 7:08 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cristiano

I read that article a few days ago and my reaction is that he is now coming out with these statements specifically to cool down some of the hot heads in the SSPX and to avoid any internal split. I am saying that because the tone of the article is quite different from the one of the letter that he sent to the other SSPX bishops. I think that Bp. Fellay is an astute and pragmatic man and that the SSPX is lucky to have him as a Superior General.

That is what I thought as well!

He did say a split could be a possibility in his interview with the CNS, so I could see his effort to prevent such a thing.

LoyalViews · #6 Jun 12, '12, 6:58 am

Please, I don't want this to be a Vatican II or Ordinary Form bash thread. Vatican II was 50 years ago, and it was a valid council. The Ordinary Form of the Mass, IS a valid Mass and we have no right to say it's wrong.

Please don't derail the thread from what I intended it to be, which was a good discussion about the SSPX's regularisation.

Rich C · #7 Jun 12, '12, 7:46 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoyalViews

Please, I don't want this to be a Vatican II or Ordinary Form bash thread. Vatican II was 50 years ago, and it was a valid council. The Ordinary Form of the Mass, IS a valid Mass and we have no right to say it's wrong.

Please don't derail the thread from what I intended it to be, which was a good discussion about the SSPX's regularisation.

I believe that +Fellay would not say this brashly, and only does so to calm some supporters of the Society to help them be obedient to the Holy Father. I'll keep praying.

Also, if what he says is correct, I hope it signals a new interest by the Holy See to examine the council and help clarify the meaning and significance of it's documents. IMHO, a compendium or new syllabus of errors from Pope Benedict would be very helpful to a lot of people.

Smiley Catholic · #8 Jun 12, '12, 6:34 pm

Unfortunately, Bp. Fellay is quite confused, Here's what he said to SSPX Friends and Benefactors: "the Secretariat of State ... set as a necessary condition of our canonical existence that we fully accept what we consider the principle source of the current problems (Vatican Council II) and to which we have always been opposed..." (Letter #74, Easter, 2009).
As the whole world was told, and certainly Bp fellay knows, Swiss Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews and a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, spoke to reporters May 16, 2012.Cardinal Koch had just left the meeting of the doctrinal congregation examining Fellay's latest " Preamble" response.
“There are questions to clarify in discussions with this community. I can’t say more than that,” he told reporters, echoing a Vatican statement saying the reconciliation talks are ongoing, that public statements by the SSPX superior general, Bishop Bernard Fellay, leave in doubt whether the SSPX as a whole accepts the entirety of “Nostra Aetate,” including its condemnations of anti-Semitism and of the idea that the Jews were to blame for the death of Jesus.
“All the doctrinal decisions of the church are binding on a Catholic, including the Second Vatican Council and all its texts,” Cardinal Koch said when asked if the SSPX would be expected to accept all the teachings of Vatican II.
Bp. Fellay knows full well that The Roman Cardinals , and the world's Bishops insist on total acceptance of the Vatican Council II decrees.Why he is allowing this confusion is quite mysterious. He is either trying to fool Rome, or he is trying to fool the SSPX faithful. The Archbishop said many times-- we have nothing to do with thie Rome-- it is a new faith-- when they come back to the faith, we will talk.[i]www.sossaveoursspx.com[/

TradionalWay · #9 Jun 14, '12, 1:12 am

I pray we get a answer soon

PJM · #10 Jun 14, '12, 3:09 pm

[quote]=LoyalViews;9397449]Has anyone seen this on DICI?

And here is the full article, there's much much more.

Quote:

Isn't this good news? Bp Fellay is talking as if a decision is soon coming, maybe in a matter of weeks? What about days? Please pray!

But what do you make of this!

His Excellency is NOT "His Holiness".... Be catreful here.

PRAYER IS CERTAINLY called for,

God Bless,
PJM

LoyalViews · #11 Jun 14, '12, 5:04 pm

[quote=PJM;9409038]

Quote:

=LoyalViews;9397449]Has anyone seen this on DICI?

And here is the full article, there's much much more.

His Excellency is NOT "His Holiness".... Be catreful here.

PRAYER IS CERTAINLY called for,

God Bless,
PJM

Oh yes I know that, my allegiance is to the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI, Vicar of Christ, Successor of St Peter. I just really hope for this regularisation!

PJM · #12 Jun 15, '12, 7:26 am

Quote:

=TrueLight;9399763]That sounds good, but that is not what is happening is it?

The Vicar of Christ has decided that it is worthwhile to engage in conversation and negotiation with the SSPX. We can only guess at the reason why. My guess is that even though the SSPX is wrong in certain ways, they are right in their desire to maintain our Catholic traditions.

So the Vicar of Christ is not taking this all or nothing approach.

Why should we?

WELL SAID!

Thanks,
Pat

ConstantineTG · #13 Jun 16, '12, 4:35 pm

Isn't it a major concern that a group in communion with Rome is allowed not to accept ALL councils that Rome accepts? How it that even called "communion"?

thistle · #14 Jun 16, '12, 6:25 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

Isn't it a major concern that a group in communion with Rome is allowed not to accept ALL councils that Rome accepts? How it that even called "communion"?

You and I don't know the facts so its pointless speculation based on hearsay.

ConstantineTG · #15 Jun 16, '12, 8:53 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by thistle

You and I don't know the facts so its pointless speculation based on hearsay.

The only fact that we need to confirm is if indeed they are exempt from accepting Vatican II. If they are, for whatever reason, then it is a major concern.