Michael Davies and the SSPX

Want to know more about Michael Davies?

Here are some of his works:
Is Defense of Cardinal Ratzinger
christianorder.com/features/features_2004/features_junejuly04_bonus.html

His last interview, the human side of Michael Davies:
christianorder.com/features/features_2004/features_dec04.html

He even told the editor of the Remnant to stop critizing Cardinal Ratzinger.

Here is Una Voce president Michael Davies(Standing on the right next to Cardinal Ratzinger) and officers w/ our future pope:
http://www.unavoce.org/images/davies%20desaventhem%20siebenburger%20ratzinger.jpg

[quote=bear06]i don’t know that he ever said his statements on lefebrve were incorrect but here’s this for you i’m not quite sure how he reconciles some of the below with some of his other writings but here it is anyway. the poor man always seemed at conflict with himself in much of his writings, in my opinion.

thewandererpress.com/a10-7-2004.htm
[/quote]

Have you actually read some of his works and writing?

The fact remains, as far as I can tell, Michael Davies NEVER thought that Archbishop Lefebvre and company were excommunicated/suspended.

Would it be possible to set up an alternative to Una Voce? Specifically, we need a group that loves and promotes the Tridentine Mass, while remaining ABSOLUTELY loyal to what Rome has said about the SSPX.

I don’t get it. Why do all of these supposedly “loyal” traditionalist groups like Michael Davies so much? He neaver fully repented!

If you believe in loyalty to Rome, don’t go to an SSPX Mass, and don’t support someone who thinks that Archbishop Lefebvre was right!

[quote=GoLatin]The fact remains, as far as I can tell, Michael Davies NEVER thought that Archbishop Lefebvre and company were excommunicated/suspended.

Would it be possible to set up an alternative to Una Voce? Specifically, we need a group that loves and promotes the Tridentine Mass, while remaining ABSOLUTELY loyal to what Rome has said about the SSPX.

I don’t get it. Why do all of these supposedly “loyal” traditionalist groups like Michael Davies so much? He neaver fully repented!

If you believe in loyalty to Rome, don’t go to an SSPX Mass, and don’t support someone who thinks that Archbishop Lefebvre was right!
[/quote]

Oh please come on, do not be ridiculous. It is because of him, many FSSP parishes have been established, he even help establish one in africa. STOP attacking a dead man, at least you can pray for him. You do not know the man, I know people who personally met him and housed him. He has positive things to say about archbishop Lefebvre, no big deal.

“The International Una Voce Federation has played an important role in supporting the use of the 1962 edition of the Roman Missal in obedience to the directives of the Holy See. For this valuable service I express my gratitude to the members of the Federation and extend my blessing.”

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, speaking to the Una Voce Federation,
25 July 1996

We stress that Una Voce does not support or countenance any schismatic or heretical movements. Our mission is to support only the celebration of the Tridentine/Gregorian Rite Mass within the Church, in union with the Holy See and the bishops united with the Supreme Pontiff of the Church as permitted through the 1988 indult, Ecclesia Dei adflicta.

unavoce.org/about.htm

In the one hand we have people attacking Una Voce as an Ecclesia Dei organelle and the other hand they are attacking Una Voce has some sort of schismatic organization. I do not know, my head wants to spin.

GoLatin,

I think the only shure way to find out if Una Voce is ok, is to write to the addresses shown in their official website: fiuv.org/en/3.asp

Notice, also, that in their directory, the SSPX is not listed.

Every religious order that is listed on the FIUV website is approved by the Holy See.

Any writings presented on this webpage are believed to be fully orthodox and in perfect compliance with the teaching magisterium of the Church. We accept that the 1969 Novus Ordo of Pope Paul VI is a valid rite of Mass. We accept that the Second Vatican Council was a valid Ecumenical Council of the Church and we hold that its teachings are to be given the appropriate respect in relation to authority of its decrees.

unavoce.org/about.htm

Can you guys now stop attacking Una Voce?

[www.tcrnews2.com/davies](“http://www.tcrnews2.com/davies2.htm people”)2.htm people might find this website, written before the death of Michael davies to be of interest.

[quote=Iohannes]Have you actually read some of his works and writing?
[/quote]

Yes, extensively. I’m surprised that you can’t see how conflicted he was. I found it rather sad how he seemed to be having a toug of war with his own theories.

[quote=Amado de Dios]GoLatin,

I think the only shure way to find out if Una Voce is ok, is to write to the addresses shown in their official website: fiuv.org/en/3.asp

Notice, also, that in their directory, the SSPX is not listed.
[/quote]

I think this is where many a person is flawed in their theories. People seem to believe that unless you belong to SSPX, you’re OK. This simply isn’t true. I know many people who adhere to the schismatic mentality of SSPX and yet turn and say “We’re not SSPX.” Look at the Remnant folks.

Thanks, Maklavan. I think you were suggesting this (I think you were missing an “l”): tcrnews2.com/davies2.html

[quote=bear06]I think this is where many a person is flawed in their theories. People seem to believe that unless you belong to SSPX, you’re OK. This simply isn’t true. I know many people who adhere to the schismatic mentality of SSPX and yet turn and say “We’re not SSPX.” Look at the Remnant folks.

Thanks, Maklavan. I think you were suggesting this (I think you were missing an “l”): tcrnews2.com/davies2.html
[/quote]

Thank you, that article was amazing!:thumbsup:

[quote=maklavan][www.tcrnews2.com/davies](“http://www.tcrnews2.com/davies2.htm people”)2.htm people might find this website, written before the death of Michael davies to be of interest.
[/quote]

You posted an uncharitable article that called Michael Davies a worm. What charity is that.

By the way, Stephen Hand advocates for married priests and women deaconess.

[quote=bear06]Yes, extensively. I’m surprised that you can’t see how conflicted he was. I found it rather sad how he seemed to be having a toug of war with his own theories.
[/quote]

Of course that is easy to see. The Barbarians have taken over. He has seen the decline of Faith in England, people showing no reverence to Holy Communion, he has seen people lose their Latin Mass even though it was popular. He has seen destruction of Churches and the liturgy.

I am conflicted on how much obiedence I should give to me bishop who quietly supports homosexual unions and adoption.

[quote=JKirkLVNV]My own inclination is to stress greater catechisis. I understand that Our Lord is, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, completely present in Both Species and Either Species. If some one doesn’t, then they need to be taught better. Our Lord gave Both, there is no reason NOT to take both (obviously, not at huge papal masses, etc.). It could be argued that by denying the Chalice and giving the Host, we could potentially raise the Chalice in the minds of some to a “higher” level than the Host (ie, only the priests are “worthy” to receive it). Are we going to then reverse and give only the Chalice until they catch a clue? Our Lord gave BOTH, there is no indication that He intended that we should do other than receive BOTH, it is within the Church’s legitimate, Christ-given authority to govern Her Sacraments and to either permit the Chalice or withhold it and She has again allowed it to the laity. It is neither more holy to refrain from the Chalice (we are not worthy of either the Most Sacred Body or the Most Precious Blood) nor is it more “traditional” (in the history of the Church, it was only denied from about the 12th century, so we HAD it for more years (400) than we didn’t have it). And, as you said, “There is a reason the Church changed practices.” Well, here’s a reason she’s changed them again. She had a good think and decided to shift her discipline. Regardless of what we do, the Church is always, absent the Parousia, going to confront problems from within Her ranks and without. It’s been that way from the beginning and will be that way until He comes in glory.
[/quote]

Whether Michael Davies was a good guy or a bad guy can be debated endlessly, but he was certainly correct about some things, such as the fact that the liturgy post Vat II does resemble a Protestant liturgical service more so than prior to Vat II. That is right before our eyes, ears and noses every Sunday at the Novus Ordo rite Mass. Sure it is “valid” in the sense that it was promulgated by the Magisterium, but in as much as it wasn’t supposed to have doctrinal impacts (only disciplinary/procedural ones) we can still question whether it has had good or bad results for the Church. Personally, I think it has made it easier for Protestant converts as it is less foreign to them than the TLM would have been. If those converts are faithful to the Magisterium and help in building the kingdom, that seems like a good thing. If the new Mass helped all Catholics to be properly catechized, that would be wonderful. If new Masses were always and everywhere reverently celebrated, awesome.

But the reality of the last 40 years tells a different story for the Church. See link before for devastating stats on the state of the Church since Vat II reforms from Ken Jones book: Index of Leading Catholic Indicators.

freelancestar.com/News/FLS/2002/122002/12152002/819108/printer_friendly

Letters in response to New Oxford Review article on the same:
newoxfordreview.org/letters.jsp?did=0304-letters

Another opinion:

“After the Council…in the place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it…with a fabrication, a banal-on-the-spot product.”

endorsement of the book, The Modern Rite, by Klaus Gamber (2002. St. Michael’s Abbey Press) by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger from back cover of the book

[quote=Confiteor]Whether Michael Davies was a good guy or a bad guy can be debated endlessly, but he was certainly correct about some things, such as the fact that the liturgy post Vat II does resemble a Protestant liturgical service more so than prior to Vat II. That is right before our eyes, ears and noses every Sunday at the Novus Ordo rite Mass. Sure it is “valid” in the sense that it was promulgated by the Magisterium, but in as much as it wasn’t supposed to have doctrinal impacts (only disciplinary/procedural ones) we can still question whether it has had good or bad results for the Church. Personally, I think it has made it easier for Protestant converts as it is less foreign to them than the TLM would have been. If those converts are faithful to the Magisterium and help in building the kingdom, that seems like a good thing. If the new Mass helped all Catholics to be properly catechized, that would be wonderful. If new Masses were always and everywhere reverently celebrated, awesome.

But the reality of the last 40 years tells a different story for the Church. See link before for devastating stats on the state of the Church since Vat II reforms from Ken Jones book: Index of Leading Catholic Indicators.

freelancestar.com/News/FLS/2002/122002/12152002/819108/printer_friendly

Letters in response to New Oxford Review article on the same:
newoxfordreview.org/letters.jsp?did=0304-letters

Another opinion:

“After the Council…in the place of the liturgy as the fruit of organic development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it…with a fabrication, a banal-on-the-spot product.”

endorsement of the book, The Modern Rite, by Klaus Gamber (2002. St. Michael’s Abbey Press) by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger from back cover of the book
[/quote]

The assertions that the Mass resembles a Protestant service is addressed in this thread, forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=1088338#post1088338

People are getting their histories backwards, the Protestants started copying us. Read it, I’m tired of answering this assertion in thread after thread, esp. since the idea that the Protestants had a hand in the drawing up of the Mass can only be gleaned from radical traditionalist sites, not from reputable histories of the liturgy, ie, places that will also tell you that John XXIII was a Mason, as was Paul VI and Bugnini, and that Siri actually won election as Pope, and Cardinal Ottavianni was tricked, etc, ad nauseum. If the Holy Father asserts it’s banal, then it’s up to him to fix it. I doubt he’s going to do much more than tighten up on rubrics (Cardinal Arinze has said that the Pauline Mass isn’t going anywhere), but we’ll see what we’ll see. The Holy Father hasn’t asserted that the Pauline Rite is Protestant. Davies was mistaken, historically MISTAKEN, by the assertion that the Mass was Protestantized. A link to a site quoting from his tract was answered in the thread.

[quote=bear06]I think this is where many a person is flawed in their theories. People seem to believe that unless you belong to SSPX, you’re OK. This simply isn’t true. I know many people who adhere to the schismatic mentality of SSPX and yet turn and say “We’re not SSPX.” Look at the Remnant folks.

[/quote]

Uh… don’t know exactly what you mean here (there should be a “dunce” emoticon), but I just wanna make clear that I’m not SSPX, I’ve never been one, and do not support them. Imo, they are in a grave position.

[quote=GoLatin]The fact remains, as far as I can tell, Michael Davies NEVER thought that Archbishop Lefebvre and company were excommunicated/suspended.

Would it be possible to set up an alternative to Una Voce? Specifically, we need a group that loves and promotes the Tridentine Mass, while remaining ABSOLUTELY loyal to what Rome has said about the SSPX.

I don’t get it. Why do all of these supposedly “loyal” traditionalist groups like Michael Davies so much? He neaver fully repented!

If you believe in loyalty to Rome, don’t go to an SSPX Mass, and don’t support someone who thinks that Archbishop Lefebvre was right!
[/quote]

If you think you can set up a better group go right ahead.

[quote=Iohannes]If you think you can set up a better group go right ahead.
[/quote]

Why would any Catholic want to do that? That sort of action is very Protestant in nature…

[quote=AltarMan]Why would any Catholic want to do that? That sort of action is very Protestant in nature…
[/quote]

This doesn’t make any sense at all considering that Una Voce itself is not protestant. Not sure where the protestant thing came in here…

A Catholic can setup an apostolate any time that they wish in order to promote Catholic teachings as long as they are not schismatic and are in line with the Holy See.

Iohannes wrote:

By the way, Stephen Hand advocates for married priests and women deaconess

By the way - would you please provide the evidence?

In any event - since there HAVE been married priests (and un-married papal AND priestly fathers of illegitimate children), and since the issue of “married priests” is disciplinary - why do you carp about Hand exercising an opinion about this?

Furthermore, would you also deny that there have been “women deaconesses” legitimately in the Church in times past - and being also a disciplinary matter falls legitimately within the bounds of personal opinion?

Are you against personal opinions being exercised legitimately?

Thanks.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.