It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:21 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
 SSPX priest attacks the Motu deception 
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post SSPX priest attacks the Motu deception
A brilliant effort, even in such a bad translation! Perhaps one of our Spanish speakers would like to produce a better version?

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16017

Sacerdos, is "laetare" you? If so, well done, well done, well done. Talk about a cat amongst the pigeons. :)

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:36 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 1:24 pm
Posts: 75
New post 
Over at AngelQueen ... TradPGH stated

Quote:
This right here is enough to get this guy banned from the forum.


TradPGH quoted Father Meramo's (SSPX)

Quote:
There is indeed no theologian actually able to prove the infallible certainty of the validity of the episcopal or presbyteral ordinations conferred by the new ordinal. There is left, at least, a positive doubt about their sacramental validity, and even more we could get evidences of their invalidity from theological sacramental heavy motives that we are not allowed to avoid to take seriously into consideration.


I guess TradPGH and many at AQ according to the ANGELQUEEN FORUM USER AGREEMENT would have to ban Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for some of his comments such as:

Quote:
“You well know, my dear brethren, that there can be no priests without bishops. When God calls me—no doubt this will be before long—from whom would these seminarians receive the Sacrament of Orders? From conciliar bishops, who, due to their doubtful intentions, confer doubtful sacraments?” (The Angelus, July 1988, Volume XI, Number 7)


"I don't think it has ever happened in the history of the Church, the man seated in the chair of Peter partaking in the worship of false gods. ... What conclusion must we draw in a few months if we are confronted by these repeated acts of partaking in false worship? I don't know. I wonder. But I think the Pope can do nothing worse than call together a meeting of all religions, when we know there is only one true religion and all other religions belong to the devil. So perhaps after this famous meeting of Assisi, perhaps we must say that the Pope is a heretic, is apostate. Now I don't wish yet to say it formally and solemnly, but it seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his faith, to keep him in the Faith—how can he at the same time be a public heretic and virtually apostatize? So it is possible we may be obliged to believe this pope is not pope. (The Angelus, July 1986, Volume IX, Number 7)



"The See of Peter and posts of authority in Rome being occupied by Antichrists, the destruction of the Kingdom of Our Lord is being rapidly carried out even with His Mystical Body here below" (August 29, 1987 letter by Archbishop Lefebvre, Fidelity magazine, October 1992)



"I have summed it up to Cardinal Ratzinger in a certain words, of course, because it is difficult to sum up this whole situation; but I said to him: 'Eminence, see, even if you grant us a bishop, even if you grant us a certain self-government in relation to the bishops, even if you grant us all the liturgy of 1962, if you grant us to continue the seminaries and Society, as we do it now, we cannot collaborate; it is impossible, impossible, because we work in two diametrically opposed directions: you, you work for the de-Christianization of society, of the human person, and of the Church, and we, we work for its Christianization. They cannot be in agreement.' Rome has lost the Faith, my dear friends. Rome is in apostasy. It is not just words, it is not just words in the air that I say to you. It is the truth. Rome is in apostasy. One cannot have confidence any more in this world. He has left the Church, they have left the Church, they are leaving the Church. It is sure, sure, sure." (Archbishop Lefebvre 1987)


Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:58 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:26 pm
Posts: 92
Location: UK
New post 
Thanks Oremus. That is a good post about AQ and I feel you're right. Archbishop Lefebvre would have got a ban.


Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:53 am
Profile
New post 
Fr. Cekada got rudely banned from AQ! I couldn't believe my eyes.


Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:53 pm

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:42 am
Posts: 740
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Re: SSPX priest attacks the Motu deception
John Lane wrote:
A brilliant effort, even in such a bad translation! Perhaps one of our Spanish speakers would like to produce a better version?

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16017

Sacerdos, is "laetare" you? If so, well done, well done, well done. Talk about a cat amongst the pigeons. :)


Does anyone have the original Spanish version, or know where it might be found? I would like to take a hand in translating it into more readable English....unless it has already been done.

Thanks.

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon CinC
Moscow, Idaho
U.S.A.


Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:28 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 11:46 pm
Posts: 728
Location: Western Washington, USA
New post 
Pax Christi !

Angel queen,,, what can we say? If it was a newspaper me thinks it would be referred to as " that rag" ......And they are tripping over themselves in admiration for benedict and the MP.......




In Xto,

Vincent


Fri Aug 17, 2007 5:52 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:42 am
Posts: 740
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Original Spanish version...
Never mind. I found it on a French site. I'll work on it after I get our taxes finished this weekend. :cry:

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon CinC
Moscow, Idaho
U.S.A.


Fri Aug 17, 2007 7:05 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:26 am
Posts: 31
New post Alternative translation of Fr Meramo's latest
Dear Mr. Gordon,

I had already given it a shot when I read that you'd try and translate it too. :o

Of course, ideally the translator should be a native-speaker of the English language such as yourself, and since I'm not a natural English-speaker, there are bound to be awkward solutions here and there in the translation that follows.

So please everyone feel free to correct or polish the following translation as they see fit.

(By the way, there was a very good commentary on the Motu Proprio by Fr Hervé Belmont, on his resourceful blog Quicumque - http://www.quicumque.com, which certainly deserves an English translation as well, though I must say it is not so short a text...).

About Fr. Meramo and his commentary, I'd have quite a few things to say, but for now I'll only make these quick observations:

Fr Meramo is reported to have found trouble with Bishop Fellay in reason of former declarations of his. Plus, Mexico, as everyone knows from the case of Fr. Laguérie, is a choice place of exile within the SSPX.

Here, Fr Meramo seems to write in a kind of brainstorm. Plus, it seems to me that there are implicit, but nonetheless clear references made by him to at least two other "classic" texts from priests or former priests of the SSPX on this overall issue: I refer to Fr Jorna's polemical article "Roman Anosmia" (http://qien.free.fr/2003/20030917_dejorna.htm) and specially the Abbé Tam's excellent "La Pseudo-Restoration du Card. Ratzinger" (http://www.marcel-lefebvre-tam.com/pdf/ ... ivre_4.pdf).

Now to the tentative translation.

* * *

On the Motu Proprio: What to think of it?

The state of expectation and optimism surrounding this document is incredible, like a sign or symptom of the state of general battle-weariness within the realm of the traditionalist faithful, who don't seem to have that same spiritual and doctrinal consistency of the past, that is given by solidly rooted principles. It is like a kind of spiritual anaemia or neural deterioration that does not allow for seeing clear. Modernist Rome has always wanted and still wants to neutralize the accusing finger of her betrayal and apostasy, and intends to dillute, if it can't destroy, all traditional resistance which impugnates her error.

The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X is the only ecclesiatical congregation of universal scope (on a world-wide level) -- joined by all the other groups annexed to her -- to oppose modernism, although there are others who also do this, but are more limited on an international level. It is therefore evident that the main goal is to destroy, to annihilate or absorb, or at least to neutralize such resistance by some mean or other, and it seems that the best and most efficacious way would be the slow but firm disaggregation, the dillution of this force, by means of a wide dialectical action, which would allow for the "solve et coagula" (dissolve and coagulate) that is typical of the Antichristian Revolution that currently rules inside the Church itself.

One of the procedures to accomplish victory over the traditionalist resistance is, then, to corrupt by dilluting the concepts, those clear and precise notions that have given birth to said resistance.

The means employed will be to produce a change in the mentality of the faithful who are steadfast in tradition, to allow for the aim desired by the enemies infiltrated in the Church, who govern it by destroying the faith of all time and by creating a postconciliar New Church in accordance with the plans of the universal sinarchy or universal globalization.

Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio has as its goal (in an action of paused audacity) to involve, dillute and absorb the firmest stronghold of resistance against modernism that still stands defending the faith, [a faith] which is more and more deteriorated thanks to the Second Vatican Council.

The goal is to silence the frontal repudiation of the new mass, [a silence obtained] by the acknowledgement that the Tridentine Mass (the Mass of All Time or of Saint Pius V) has never been suppressed, though the new mass continues being the ordinary (the common or general) form, and the Tridentine Mass the extraordinary (the special or particular) form or expression of the same rite. Which is inadmissible, for being a manifest error of doctrinal import, since Mgr Lefebvre had already said that the new mass was a bastard rite, that it was evil and it was not Catholic, that it was proximate to heresy, that it was protestantizing, that it was contrary to the sacrosanct tradition of the Church, so how can one claim today that it is the same rite? It is absurd, just like it is absurd to think, to believe or to say that, with the motu proprio, the Tridentine Mass recovers its rights, to the point of singing a Te Deum, or to consider it a posthumous triumph of Mgr Lefebvre's, when [in actuality] the rights of the Mass of always cannot consist, at best, in a juridical equality in face of the new mass, that is, both [the new and the Tridentine] as the ordinary form, which would already be an offence against the exclusivity of the Catholic and Tridentine Mass, compared to the new mass which is protestantizing or protestant, according to how it is looked or evaluated, given that if we concentrate on the definition, as it appears on article 7 of the Institutio Generalis of the new missal, we have the Protestant meal without attenuations. Now, there is not even equality of rights (which would already be to limp), but even worse, [they have] unequal rights, the new mass is the common or ordinary one and the Tridentine Mass the special or extraordinary one, which is to say, the concubine is the ordinary woman, the woman of every day, and the legitimate wife is the extraordinary woman, that of odd days, and hence the legitimate woman is not even equally a master in her house on pair with the concubine.

This also shows that it is a case of universal indult camuflated, masked as an special extraordinary right. With all of that, the aim is that in order that the privilege be obtained, one must pay the price of acknowledging the concubine and accepting that both serve the same lord, even though one is the ordinary one and the other the extraordinary one. What better hand could have been dealt by the devil dressed as an angel of light?

Plus, under the appearance of good, we are given as gift the illusion of a mirage, like for example, that it sows division in the modernist field or that modernist priests might say the Tridentine Mass. The former [hypothesis], Benedict XVI himself has undertaken to dismiss, for, as he himself notes, in order to say the Tridentine Mass there are required a liturgical culture and a minimum knowledge of Latin that the majority of priests do not possess, so that, things remaining thus, the new mass is both in fact (the real situation) and by right (the juridical norm) the ordinary rule.

The apparent advantage of modernist priests having the possibility (the freedom) of saying the Tridentine Mass is another illusion, produced by mirage after living for practically forty years in the desert of the abominable desolation caused by the liturgical revolution; for what good does it serve or benefit us that modernist priests say the true Mass, if their doctrine is still and remains modernist, since their philosophical and theological formation is modernist and this is something very hard to suppress, to change; the only thing that would happen would be for them to favour the confusion, like whitened sepulchers, white on the outside but rotten inside, whitened or masked by saying the Tridentine Mass but rotten inside by the modernist mentality or formation, with the aggravating circumstance that there is no theological warrant of the infallible certainty of their sacerdotal ordinations conferred with the new rite. There is no theologian who is able to prove the infallible certainty of ordinations with the new rite. There exists, as a minimum, a positive doubt on validity. And all this not to say that we have proof of its invalidity by weighty reasons of sacramental theology, that may not be disregarded. Anyway, without entering straight into this question, it suffices for us that sacerdotal ordinations conferred with the new rite are devoid of the seal of infallible warrant which excludes all doubt of invalidity.

I hope that these reflections accomplish that we be consolidated on the truth and on its exclusive rights, without dialectical amalgamates between good and evil, between truth and error, between God and the Devil, between Christ and the Antichrist, between the Church of Christ and the New Church Synagogue of Satan or of the Antichrist.

We are however in a time to cry, reciting a Miserere, and may God have mercy on our miseries, and may we not follow the illusion and the mirage of an unfounded optimism which does not correspond to the reality of the irreversible and final crisis we live in.

May the Most Holy Virgin protect us and, [endowed] with her steadfastness before the Cross, may we remain firm in the faith and in the love for her Divine Son.

Father Basilio Méramo (SSPX)
Prior of Vera Cruz (Mexico)
August 4th, 2007


Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:42 am
Posts: 740
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Re: Alternative translation of Fr Meramo's latest
Zaqueu wrote:
Dear Mr. Gordon,

I had already given it a shot when I read that you'd try and translate it too. :o

Of course, ideally the translator should be a native-speaker of the English language such as yourself, and since I'm not a natural English-speaker, there are bound to be awkward solutions here and there in the translation that follows.


Ha! Listen, Bub, if I spoke Spanish half as well as you speak/write English, I would be very, very happy! :D

Your translation is not only at least as good as anything I could produce, but it has been done FAR faster than I could ever hope to do it.

Excellent job, Young Fellow!

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon CinC
Moscow, Idaho
U.S.A.


Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:32 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:26 am
Posts: 31
New post Definitive translation
Dear Mr. Gordon,

Thank you very much for the corrections you've been so kind to send me. It's been half a month already since you did this, and I see I won't have time to implement them on my post above as I had intended, so I'll just post the corrected version of the translation.

I meant to comment on some things I found a little peculiar on certain statements by Fr Meramo, but that will have to wait as well.

Anyway, thanks again!

Yours in JMJ,
Felipe

* * *

On the Motu Proprio: What to think of it?

The state of expectation and optimism surrounding this document is incredible, like a sign or symptom of the state of general battle-weariness within the realm of the traditionalist faithful, who don't seem to have the same spiritual and doctrinal consistency of the past, which was given by solidly rooted principles. It is like a kind of spiritual anemia or mental deterioration that does not allow for seeing clearly. Modernist Rome has always wanted and still wants to neutralize the finger accusing her of betrayal and apostasy, and intends to dilute, if it can't destroy, all traditional resistance which impugns her errors.

The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X is the only ecclesiastical congregation of universal scope (in a world-wide sense) -- joined by all the other groups annexed to her -- to oppose modernism, although there are others who also do this, but they are more limited on an international basis. It is therefore evident that the main goal is to destroy, to annihilate or absorb, or at least to neutralize such resistance by some means or other, and it seems that the best and most efficacious way would be the slow but firm disaggregation, the dilution of this force, by means of a wide dialectical action, which would allow for the "solve et coagula" (dissolve and coagulate) that is typical of the Antichristian Revolution that currently rules the Church Herself.

One of the procedures to accomplish victory over the traditionalist resistance is, then, to corrupt by diluting the concepts, those clear and precise notions that have given birth to said resistance.

The means employed will be to produce a change in the mentality of the faithful who are steadfast in tradition, to allow for the aim desired by those enemies infiltrated into the Church, who govern it by destroying the faith of all time and by creating a post-conciliar New Church in accordance with the plans of the universal sinarchy or universal globalization.

Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio has as its goal (in an action of leisurely audacity) to dissolve, dilute and absorb the firmest stronghold of resistance against modernism that still stands defending the faith, a faith which is deteriorated more and more thanks to the Second Vatican Council.

The goal is to silence the frontal repudiation of the new mass, a silence obtained by the acknowledgement that the Tridentine Mass (the Mass of All Time or of Saint Pius V) has never been suppressed, though the new mass continues being the ordinary (the common or general) form, and the Tridentine Mass the extraordinary (the special or particular) form or expression of the same rite.

Which is inadmissible, for being a manifest error of doctrinal import, since Mgr Lefebvre had already said that the new mass was a bastard rite, that it was evil and it was not Catholic, that it was proximate to heresy, that it was protestantizing, that it was contrary to the sacrosanct tradition of the Church, so how can one claim today that it is the same rite? It is absurd, just as it is absurd to think, to believe or to say that, with the motu proprio, the Tridentine Mass recovers its rights, to the point of singing a Te Deum, or to consider it a posthumous triumph of Mgr Lefebvre's, when in actuality the rights of the Mass of all time cannot exist, at best, in a juridical equality beside the new mass, that is, both the new and the Tridentine as the ordinary form, which would already be an offence against the exclusivity of the Catholic and Tridentine Mass, compared to the new mass which is protestantizing or protestant, according to how it is looked at or evaluated, given that if we concentrate on the definition, as it appears in article 7 of the Institutio Generalis of the new missal, we have the Protestant meal without attenuations.

Now, there is not even equality of rights (which idea has already been abandoned), but even worse, they have unequal rights, the new mass being the common or ordinary one and the Tridentine Mass the special or extraordinary one, which is to say, the concubine is the ordinary woman, the woman of every day, and the legitimate wife is the extraordinary woman, that of odd days, and hence the legitimate woman is not even equally the mistress in her own house on par with the concubine.

This also shows that it is a case of universal indult camouflaged, that the Tridentine Rite is masked as an especial extraordinary rite. With all of that, the aim is that in order that the privilege be obtained, one must pay the price of acknowledging the concubine and accepting that both serve the same lord, even though one is the ordinary one and the other the extraordinary one. What better hand could have been dealt by the devil dressed as an angel of light?

Plus, under the appearance of good, we are given as a gift the illusion of a mirage, like for example, that it sows division in the modernist field or that modernist priests might say the Tridentine Mass. The former hypothesis, Benedict XVI himself has undertaken to dismiss, for, as he himself notes, in order to say the Tridentine Mass there are required a liturgical culture and a minimum knowledge of Latin that the majority of priests do not possess, so that, things remaining thus, the new mass is both in fact (the real situation) and by right (the juridical norm) the ordinary rule.

The apparent advantage of modernist priests having the possibility (the freedom) of saying the Tridentine Mass is another illusion, produced by another mirage after living for practically forty years in the desert of the abominable desolation caused by the liturgical revolution; for what good does it serve or benefit us that modernist priests say the true Mass, if their doctrine is still and remains modernist, since their philosophical and theological formation is modernist and this is something very hard to suppress, to change; the only thing that would happen would be for them to favour the confusion, like whitened sepulchers, white on the outside but rotten inside, whitened or masked by saying the Tridentine Mass but rotten inside by the modernist mentality or formation, with the aggravating circumstance that there is no theological warrant for the infallible certainty of their sacerdotal ordinations conferred with the new rite. There is no theologian who is able to prove the infallible certainty of ordinations with the new rite. There exists, as a minimum, a positive doubt on validity. And all this not to say that we have proof of its invalidity by weighty reasons of sacramental theology, that may not be disregarded. Anyway, without entering straight into this question, it suffices for us that sacerdotal ordinations conferred with the new rite are devoid of the seal of infallible authority which excludes all doubt of invalidity.

I hope that these reflections accomplish that we are consolidated in the truth and on its exclusive rights, without dialectical amalgamates between good and evil, between truth and error, between God and the Devil, between Christ and the Antichrist, between the Church of Christ and the New Church Synagogue of Satan or of the Antichrist.

We are however in a time to weep, reciting a Miserere, and may God have mercy on our miseries, and may we not follow the illusion and the mirage of an unfounded optimism which does not correspond to the reality of the irreversible and final crisis we live in.

May the Most Holy Virgin protect us and, [endowed] with her steadfastness before the Cross, may we remain firm in the faith and in the love for her Divine Son.

Father Basilio Méramo (SSPX)
Prior of Vera Cruz (Mexico)
August 4th, 2007


Sat Sep 01, 2007 2:54 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.