OUR LADY OF FATIMA
CATHOLIC CHURCH
|
|
OUR LADY OF FATIMA CATHOLIC CHURCH |
|
"Catching Up !"
July 17th 2005
My
dear readers – a hiatus of almost two weeks ! Judging by the exceptional
interest displayed by some of my sedevacantist readers -
sorely missed !
The
Return of the Prodigals !
So
much to catch up with ! First the great and wonderful news (which I already knew
for the last two months but is now public) Bishop Thom Sebastian (from Los
Angeles) and most of his clergy have embraced Pope Benedict XVI as our Holy
Father ! Laus Deo Semper !
Needless
to say the critics were not slow in attacking him. This from a sede list:
The fact that he claims to be
independent indicates that he is the
schismatic.
Canon 1325.2, 1917 Code of
Canon Law:
"One who after baptism…
rejects the authority of the Supreme Pontiff
or refuses communion with the
members of the Church who are subject to
him,
he is a schismatic."
But
surely that is the point exactly… he now
does accept
the Pope. The irony of one rejecting a true Pope but calling those who
accept him a schismatic is dealt with below in the French section (apologies to
those of you who do not read French).
|
Cosmetic Unions On
another note I finally watched the video conference given by Bishop
Bernard Fellay of the Society of St Pius X in November last year on the
current situation between the SSPX and Rome. The Bishop’s English is
vastly improved from what I remember as a member of the SSPX in the early
90s. In a real tour de force the
good Bishop explains the very fine distinctions which need to be made with
regards to the current situation in Rome. Admittedly he was referring to
Rome under the pontificate of John Paul II (and that says much for what
one might have hoped as regards the flourishing of Tradition then). With
the accession of Benedict XVI some Traditionalists (myself very definitely
included) because of his apparent distaste for the banality of
the new liturgy as frequently expressed in his writings over the last two
decades, have hoped for a reappraisal of the status
quo and some significant olive branches to those Traditionalists who
are hoping now for better times. We have yet to see the fruits of our
hopes though it has been reported on a French website that Father Franz
Schmidberger (the former superior general of the SSPX) has already had an
audience with the Pope. Bishop Fellay stresses in the video tape extreme caution is to be exercised ! Not without reason is caution to be observed – I myself could recount several cautionary tales of Roman chicanery in my own regard – but “cautious optimism” (a phrase coined by a friend) ought still to be de jour ! I suspect that more than the Sacramental character was conferred upon me at Confirmation in 1990 when Bishop Fellay laid his hand upon my head - his optimism as well !
|
“Where’s
the Cavalry ? They’re still locked in the Barn !” (Not quite)
In
the last couple of weeks a former good modernist friend of mine seems to have
become un-hinged.
(Now
for those of you who might object to my having a good modernist friend I would reply that even Robert Runcie the late
“Archbishop” of Canterbury once observed that some of his best friends
weren’t even Christians. Given the way in which many Traditional Catholics
treat one another I can well see his point.)
In
a series of insulting e-mails he has basically accused the Pope of being a
fraud. The idea is, according to him, that now that Ratzinger is the Pope he
sees the issues from a different perspective. He thinks that the Pope’s
inactivity (the apparent absence of the “Reform of the Reform”) is due to
the fact that he now understands that to rock the boat might cause people to
leave and less people would mean a cash-strapped modern Church without
pocket-money to pay the bills.
|
The
explanation is far simpler – from all those who really know the pope –
Benedict XVI is an honest man so why the delay ? Again the explanation is
simple: wait until the world youth day is past and then we shall begin to
see the changes. Why WYD ? Ratzinger has an image problem. As the Vatican’s law enforcement service at the CDF he was (erroneously) perceived as “Mr Nasty Guy”. No secret about this. Secondly, John Paul II is a tough act to follow. He is still the darling of the masses. I have heard people say they still miss the late Pontiff. Indeed when you become the new CEO you don’t fire the old board. You make friends first and ask questions later. The last group of people (although they should be the first group in all actuality) you need to bring on board are the youth of the Church. The youth are, after all, the future of the Church. Why do so many of our Trad youth abandon the practice of their Faith once they leave high school ? (I know why but most of our clergy haven’t got a clue.) WYD
will be the homecoming of a German Pope who will meet the youth from all
over the world. Once he has cemented his relationship with the youth, once
their loyalty has shifted behind him then he can begin to make the changes
so necessary if we are to reverse the damage done with the abuses that
have crept in since the Second Vatican Council. Then the Bugnini and
Marini types will at long last have had THEIR day and the Church will at
last be free. The other reason why Benedict XVI will take his time is because of the old Roman adage: Festina lente (hurry up slowly). The reason why the Church endures, why she is perennial, is because She makes changes slowly ! This is one vital reason why Vatican II was such a colossal mistake – the changes (any changes) were introduced too quickly. So for my doubting sedevacantist opponents, my modernist friend, and my Traditional Catholic friends who have grown faint-hearted, we must remember that the mess has been with us for 40 years and cannot be cleaned up in 40 minutes and also remember that this Church is of Our Lord’s foundation and subject to His prophecy that the gates of Hell would not prevail ! At the end of his video conference Bishop Fellay raised this same theme. God has already reckoned the number of sins of each one of us – just as he reckoned the precise amount of water he would allow in the boat which the disciples feared would sink while he slept apparently oblivious to the storm. Peter’s barque will not sink and neither will we. |
|
A
Note of Caution
However,
this all being said, just this past week I re-read the long reflection written
by Melanie Calvet (one of the two seers of La Salette in 1846). The last time I
read this was in the original French version which I picked up on pilgrimage to
France in 1996. In transcribing the words of Our Lady, Melanie wrote in part as
follows:
“The
Holy Father will suffer a great deal. I will be with him until the end and
receive his sacrifice.
The
mischievous would attempt his life several times to do harm and shorten his days
but neither him nor his successor will see the triumph of the Church of God”
In
my opinion the first paragraph refers quite fittingly to Pope John Paul II. At
the funeral Mass, the former Cardinal Ratzinger evoked the memory of the late
Pontiff at the window of his apartment on Easter Sunday of this year unable to
address the crowds and days later taken from among us. As She tenderly put it:
“I will (…) receive his sacrifice”.
The
first paragraph references the two attempts on the life of John Paul II (not
merely the assassin’s bullets in St. Peter’s Square on May 13, 1981, but
also a year to the day later at Fatima, whither John Paul II had repaired to
thank Our Lady for he protection of his life, a former Priest of the Society of
St Pius X evidently unhinged, brandished a knife, intending to take the life of
the Pope even at the feet of her image !)
As
an aside – is there any real difference between the bombers on 9/11 in New
York, 3/11 in Madrid and now 7/7 in London who kill and maim innocent people in
the name of their “religion” and “Traditional” Catholics who would seek
to kill the Pope supposedly in the name of their “religion” ? We de-cry the
fanaticism of one group… what about the other ?
If
the first paragraph is a reference to the pontificate of John Paul II as I
maintain, look at the words of the second half of the next sentence: “neither
him nor his successor will see the triumph of the Church of God”. Evidently,
then, if the successor is Benedict XVI, while he may set in train reforms, we
should not expect to see any time soon the re-birth of the Church !
Pour
Nos Lecteurs Français
Le Sédévacatisme n’est qu’un anachronisme bien que j’ai démontré
(des maintes fois dans ces pages) l’illogique
de cette thèse-là. D’après
le premier concile du
Vatican en 1870 nous sommes assurés une succession perpetuelle dans la primauté
de Pierre jusqu’à la fin du monde. Le problème c’est que les experts (soit
les théologiens
laïques ou les canonists laïques – meme des prêtres !) ne peuvent pas
comprendre le vrai sentiment de cette expression car ils le considèrent comme
une expression très inconveniente pour leurs apostolats – une discussion a éviter.
Sans doute il y a toujours une explication simple pour ce subterfuge: si on a
passé plus de 20 ans attaquant le papauté de Jean Paul II (ou autre), c’est
presque impossible (par motif d’humilité) de croire que Benoît XVI soit le
Pape lui-même. Il faut trouver n’importe quelle espèce d’héresie exprimé
par ces intrus pour se vanter plus d’avantage.
Eh bien, si on assisté au Saint Sacrifice celebré par des clercs qui opinent de cette manière chaque fois qu’il leur faut prêcher; pourquoi se surprendre quand les laïques eux-mêmes adoptent la même manière pour critquer leurs <<ennemis>> sur le web. Par exemple: je viens de lire sur un <<blog>> français sédévacantiste que je suis une <<idole> (quoi que ce soit) et que je suis <<Monseigneur>>... (alors un simple laïc il paraît) et tout ça écrit sans doute par des laïques eux-mêmes hors de l’Eglise pour avoir rejetté l’office de Sa Sainteté Benoît XVI !
Il me faut rappeler a mes chers lecteurs que L’Eglise Elle-même nous enseigne que le Pape est le principe de l’unité dans L’Eglise. Pourquoi s’étonner alors, que le soi-disant mouvement <<Traditionnel>> s’est déchiré comme papier – faute de chef en raison de schisme du légitime successeur de Saint Pierre !
C’est le Père Guérard des Lauriers qui a écrit qu’en temps de vacance du Siège Apostolique (et J’écris cela pour les Sédés car il est bien évident qu’il n’y a pas de vacance d’après moi) on ne peut jamais étiqueter comme schismatique personne car c’est le rejet ou le refus du Successeur de Pierre qui constitue le délit de schisme. Or s’il n’y a pas de successeur comment est-ce qu’on peut etre litéralement <<schismatique>> ?
En
tout cas, pour moi la situation est un peu plus evidente et beaucoup moins
simple que la solution sédévacantiste – les Papes du Concile sont équivoqués
par rapport à la théologie en comparaison avec le Magistère et la Tradition
de toujours. La décision officielle reste seul avec les autorités compétents
et J’attends la décision de L’Eglise. Pourqoui se précoccuper en avant ?
Il nous reste le combat pour la Foi qu’il nous faut mener sans cesse !
Alors pour les <<canonistes>> et les <<théologiens>> qui connaissent rien du tout (en vérité) qu’ils continuent à juger et à condamner (commes s’ils étaient le Bon Dieu)! On sait dejà que selon la mesure qu’ils jugent ils seront jugés ! Verbum Domini ! La seule <<idole>> qui reste c’est le dieu du sédévacantisme !
+TF
  
|
Copyright© Our Lady of Fatima Spring Hill, |
|
