It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:17 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
 TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS - Fr. de Cacqueray 
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS - Fr. de Cacqueray
"Ancien regime" of IA has translated a recent editorial by Fr. Regis de Cacqueray, the SSPX District Superior of France. It is from the district magazine Fideliter no. 208, July-August 2012.

It isn't clear from the text where Fr. de Cacqueray's article begins, but it doesn't really matter.

Quote:
TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS

The Rome of Benedict XVI loves us so much that if we reject their proposal, they threaten us with excommunication. It's a bit like a man who would be in love with a young woman, who would hesitate to marry him. He would say, putting a gun to her head: "Marry me within a month, or I'll kill you" What a beautiful love!

In this article Fr. de Cacqueray shows us who might be excommunicated . . . and the pride we must take in being excommunicated by these people without faith.

What will be the credibility of a verdict that conciliar Rome will perhaps soon give concerning the Society? Will they declare it to be schismatic or excommunicated again, or will they exonerate it from these epitaphs? Be that as it may, we do not need to attach an excessive importance to what ever conclusion may be brought. . . as the years go by in the life of the Society, sometimes there are threats and punishments imposed by the Vatican, sometimes there are great compliments and different promises, succeeded by outstretched hands. The most serious of the penalties of the Church were given to sanction the pertinacity of the Society to refuse the errors of the Council, the New Mass, the new Code of Canon Law, and the new religion. As for the promises that were made, their sole consideration always appeared to be to stop the criticism and silence the opposition to the same subjects.

Who deserves to be excommunicated?

One should understand, therefore, that this interminable retraction [palinody] ends by leaving us unmoved and discredits in our eyes those who so easily ply the carrot and stick ... To be excommunicated, and then "de-excommunicated," to be in danger yet again of being excommunicated--one ends up not being impressed much by all these twists and flip-flops. We have so many reasons to consider these unjust sentences null and void! They are discredited in our eyes. First, we are reminded of 1988! The distinguished service rendered by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to the Holy Church by providing her with four excellent Catholic Bishops, through whom the transmission of the Catholic priesthood was fortified was rewarded by excommunication. On this occasion, we noted how, by a mystery of iniquity, the best servants of the Church were mistreated. We do not feel bitter, but we can deduce from all this that the penalty of excommunication no longer makes us tremble.

In this year of the sixth centenary of the birth of St. Joan of Arc, we remember, moreover, that in the history of the Church, there are numerous saints who were mistreated by Church tribunals. Is this also not the history of the Incarnate Word Himself? We are not blind. How is it, even today, that priests, bishops, cardinals—in large numbers—can teach real heresies, advocating a morality that is no longer Catholic, without ever being worried? Who would deserve to be excommunicated? Those trying to convey what the Church has always taught or those who pervert the deposit of revelation?

As for the Pope himself, he must bear in mind that we would have several well-founded reasons to doubt the merits of possible sanctions that he would take concerning us. Certainly, he has adopted a more measured and wise way of applying the Council than his predecessor, but he has nevertheless resolutely followed in his footsteps: interfaith gatherings, visiting mosques and synagogues, active participation in a Lutheran liturgical ceremony in Rome, praise given to Martin Luther, repetition of the scandal of Assisi, beatification of John Paul II, vespers celebrated in the presence of pseudo-Archbishop of Canterbury ...

Condemned for fidelity to the eternal Church!

If he has decided that our bishops or ourselves must be “re-excommunicated,” then we should ask ourselves: “But, ‘re-excommunicated’ by which Church?” By the Catholic Church or by that conciliar church which is a cancer? But this is clear: it is only the conciliar church who would perform this “re-excommunication” : “Cardinal Ratzinger is against infallibility; the Pope is against infallibility due to his philosophical training. Let this be clearly understood: we are not against the Pope as the representative of all the values, which are immutable, of the Apostolic See, the See of Peter. But [we are] against the Pope who is a Modernist, who does not believe in his infallibility, who practices ecumenism. Obviously, we are against the Conciliar Church which is schismatic in practice, even if they do not accept it. In practice, it is in essence an excommunicated church, because it is a modernist church. It is they who excommunicate us, while we want to remain Catholic.” (Lefebvre, Fideliter n.70 p. 8)

That is why excommunication or a declaration of schism which would come from the conciliar church, a sect that has penetrated into the heart of the human part of the Holy Church, should not disturb us. We should rejoice if we were to be condemned for the crime of fidelity to the eternal Church!

*****
and for those who read French, here is the French original:

Vers de nouvelles sanctions

La Rome de Benoit XVI nous aime tellement que si nous refusons leur proposition, ils nous menacent d’excommunication. C’est un peu comme un homme qui serait épris d’une jeune femme, laquelle hésiterait à se marier avec lui. Il lui dirait, lui mettant un pistolet sur la tempe : "Tu te maries avec moi d’ici un mois, sinon je te tue" Quel bel amour !

Dans cet article l’abbé de Cacqueray nous prouve qui devrait être excommunié...et la fierté que nous devons avoir à être excommunié par ces gens sans foi.

Quelle sera la crédibilité du verdict que la Rome conciliaire rendra peut-être bientôt à propos de la Fraternité ? La déclarera-t-elle schismatique, de nouveau excommuniée ou l’exonérera-t-elle de ces sobriquets ? Quoi qu’il en soit de la conclusion qui pourrait être portée, il ne faudra pas lui accorder une importance excessive... Au fur et à mesure que se sont déroulées les années de la vie de la Fraternité, ce sont tantôt des menaces et des peines infligées par le Vatican, tantôt de grands compliments, différentes promesses et des mains tendues qui se sont succédé. Les peines de l’Église, et jusqu’aux plus graves d’entre elles, venaient sanctionner la pertinacité de la Fraternité à refuser les erreurs du Concile, la nouvelle messe, le nouveau code de Droit canon, la nouvelle religion. Quant aux promesses qui lui étaient faites, elles ont toujours recherché, comme unique contrepartie, de faire cesser ses critiques et d’obtenir qu’elle taise son opposition sur les mêmes sujets.
Qui mériterait d’être excommunié ?

On comprendra, dès lors, que cette interminable palinodie finisse par nous laisser de marbre et par discréditer à nos yeux ceux qui manient avec tant de facilité la carotte et le bâton... À être excommunié, puis « dés-excommunié », à être de nouveau menacé d’être excommunié, on finit par ne plus guère être impressionné par ces coups de théâtre et toutes ces volte-face. Nous avons tant de raisons d’estimer ces peines injustes, nulles et non avenues ! Elles sont déconsidérées à nos yeux. D’abord, nous gardons le souvenir de 1988. C’est par l’excommunication que fut récompensé le signalé service rendu par Mgr Marcel Lefebvre à la sainte Église en la pourvoyant de quatre excellents évêques catholiques, grâce à qui la transmission du sacerdoce catholique s’est fortifiée. Nous avons, à cette occasion, constaté comment, par un mystère d’iniquité, les meilleurs serviteurs de l’Église se trouvent maltraités. Nous n’en ressentons pas d’amertume mais l’on peut déduire de tout cela que la peine de l’excommunication ne nous fasse plus guère trembler.

En cette année du sixième centenaire de la naissance de sainte Jeanne d’Arc, nous nous rappelons d’ailleurs, dans l’histoire de l’Église, qu’assez nombreux sont les saints qui furent malmenés par des tribunaux d’Église. N’est-ce d’ailleurs pas l’histoire du Verbe incarné lui-même ? Et nous ne sommes pas aveugles. Comment se fait-il, encore aujourd’hui, que des prêtres, des évêques, des cardinaux, et en grand nombre, peuvent enseigner de véritables hérésies, prôner une morale qui n’est plus catholique, sans pour autant être inquiétés ? Oui mériterait d’être excommunié ? Ceux qui s’efforcent de transmettre ce que l’Église a toujours enseigné ou ceux qui travestissent le dépôt révélé ?

Quant au pape lui-même, il faut quand même rappeler que nous aurions quelques raisons de douter du bien-fondé de sanctions éventuelles qu’il prendrait à notre égard. Certes, il a adopté une manière d’appliquer le Concile plus mesurée et plus sage que son prédécesseur mais il est cependant résolument demeuré sur ses traces. Réunions interreligieuses, visite de mosquées et de synagogues, participation active à une cérémonie liturgique luthérienne à Rome, éloge appuyé de Martin Luther, réitération du scandale d’Assise, béatification de Jean-Paul II, vêpres célébrées en présence du pseudo-archevêque de Canterbury...

Condamnés pour fidélité à l’Église éternelle !

S’il décidait que nos évêques ou que nous-mêmes devions être « réexcommuniés », nous devrions alors nous demander : « Mais "réexcommuniés" par quelle Église ? » Par l’Église catholique ou par cette église conciliaire qui lui est une métastase ? Or cela est clair : ce n’est que cette église conciliaire qui procéderait à cette "réexcommunication" : « Le cardinal Ratzinger est contre l’infaillibilité, le pape est contre l’infaillibilité de par sa formation philosophique. Que l’on nous comprenne bien, nous ne sommes pas contre le pape en tant qu’il représente toutes les valeurs du siège apostolique, qui sont immuables, du siège de Pierre, mais contre le pape qui est un moderniste qui ne croit pas à son infaillibilité, qui fait de l’œcuménisme. Évidemment, nous sommes contre l’Église conciliaire qui est pratiquement schismatique, même s’ils ne l’acceptent pas. Dans la pratique, c’est une Église virtuellement excommuniée, parce que c’est une Église moderniste. Ce sont eux qui nous excommunient, alors que nous voulons rester catholiques. » (Mgr Lefebvre, Fideliter n.70 p. 8)

Voilà pourquoi l’excommunication ou la déclaration de schisme qui proviendrait de l’Église conciliaire, secte qui s’est introduite jusqu’au cœur de la partie humaine de la sainte Église, ne doit pas nous inquiéter. Nous nous réjouirions si nous devions être condamnés pour crime de fidélité à l’Église éternelle !

Abbé de Cacqueray, fsspx - Editorial de Fideliter n.208, juillet-août 2012

_________________
In Christ our King.


Wed Jul 11, 2012 3:59 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 12:07 am
Posts: 48
New post Re: TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS - Fr. de Cacqueray
Quote:
We are not blind. How is it, even today, that priests, bishops, cardinals—in large numbers—can teach real heresies, advocating a morality that is no longer Catholic, without ever being worried?


Right, you are not "blind" yet you dont include the "pope" on the list of excommunicates?

Quote:
As for the Pope himself, he must bear in mind that we would have several well-founded reasons to doubt the merits of possible sanctions that he would take concerning us.


Why not just say that the "pope" is a heretic who "deserves to be excommunicated" like the rest of them?

Quote:
But [we are] against the Pope who is a Modernist, who does not believe in his infallibility, who practices ecumenism.


Surely that is heresy, plain and simple?

I would laugh to see Benerat excommunicate SSPX, Fellay and all. They pull their punches on him and he wallops them with a knock out.


Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:31 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 12:07 am
Posts: 48
New post Re: TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS - Fr. de Cacqueray
Quote:
But [we are] against the Pope who is a Modernist, who does not believe in his infallibility, who practices ecumenism.


Surely even a child knows that is heresy?

The pope doesnt believe in papal infallibility? Pull the other one.

Quote:
we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA ... he possesses ... that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals.

So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.


Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:23 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 12:07 am
Posts: 48
New post Re: TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS - Fr. de Cacqueray
Quote:
Certainly, [Benedict] has adopted a more measured and wise way of applying the Council than his predecessor, but he has nevertheless resolutely followed in his footsteps: interfaith gatherings, visiting mosques and synagogues, active participation in a Lutheran liturgical ceremony in Rome, praise given to Martin Luther, repetition of the scandal of Assisi, beatification of John Paul II, vespers celebrated in the presence of pseudo-Archbishop of Canterbury ...


Is that sentence coherent?

How is this "a more measured and wise way of applying the Council": "interfaith gatherings, visiting mosques and synagogues, active participation in a Lutheran liturgical ceremony in Rome, praise given to Martin Luther, repetition of the scandal of Assisi, beatification of John Paul II, vespers celebrated in the presence of pseudo-Archbishop of Canterbury"?

"more measured and wise"??? measured? wise?

It seems that the SSPX not only covers up (very badly) the heresy of Ratzinger but it also pretends (very badly) that he is "more measured and wise". They make claims in Ratzinger's favour even while they supply evidence to the contrary.

Sorry but this thinking seems as bad as what SSPX accuses the Modernists of: that they are "so confused" that something can be true and not true at the same time.

He is not a heretic but he doesnt believe in papal infallibility.

He is measured and wise but... (list)


Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:41 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: TOWARD NEW SANCTIONS - Fr. de Cacqueray
I hope you're enjoying yourself, because you're not really taking care to be precise, or to understand what was written.

The blasphemous Assisi III was conducted in a less blatantly blasphemous manner than Assisi I, for example. This is well known, and is used by defenders of Ratzinger to claim that he is more conservative than Wojtyla was.

The text above is refuting that argument.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:57 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.