SSPX Deal Still on Track? Lawyer Meets w/Francis who Loved ABL Bio

[Heinrich]

What would Bishop Williamson do?

[sisinono]

Father, if you had read your source, and if it is where you got your story you must have read it,  then how come you didn't notice that Moynihan gives as his source Rorate Caeli?

He doesn't say Rorate is his sole source.

Dr. Moynihan lives in Rome. His publication, Inside the Vatican, is highly-regarded by curial types, and this has given him an extensive network of contacts in the Vatican.

He is not the type, therefore, to rely on one internet news report for his information. He can ask Vatican officials to confirm information or to provide details, and this is no doubt what happened here.

I stand corrected, Rorate was not the sole source for Dr. Bob's article. However, you don't say what his other sources were and specifically what was his source for your kneeling before Bergoglio tale.  Did you read his article?

Dr. Bob's source for the tale is a blogpost by Andrea Tornielli of Vatican Insider (not to be confused with Dr. Bob's Inside the Vatican.)   As you would know Andrea Tornielli is the journalist you read if you want to know what the Vatican wants you to think.

Another example of Tornielli's work, you might recall, featured in that hot period of April 2012.  He sensationally gave us the scoop in Vatican Insider that  Bp. Fellay had finally signed the Doctrinal Preamble.

Here is the leading paragraph for those that need their memories refreshed.  "The Society of St. Pius X has replied to the Vatican and the answer is a positive one. Vatican Insider has learnt that the Superior of the Lefebrvians, Bishop Bernard Fellay, has signed the Doctrinal Preamble which the Holy See had presented last September as a condition for the Society to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and secure canonical regularization.

An official confirmation of the reply should be released in the next few hours."

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/lefebvriani-lefebvrians-lefebvrianos-14410/

Here is the excerpt from Tornielli's blogpost that Dr. Bob uses as a source which you in turn use as the source for the tall tale under discussion. It is the sole source for this fabrication that Bishop Fellay knelt for a blessing.   "Vatican Insider has learnt that the meeting apparently took place... When Francis got up after dinner, the fraternity's superior did so also and approached the Pope, kneeling down to ask for a blessing.."

Vatican Insider has learnt - it's a formula! 

[FatherCekada]

I ask sarcastically as Father decided to call Gerard an "idiot".

That is not at all in behaving like a Catholic priest, especially as addressed to  a fellow Christian who is merely addressing Father.

Be ye charitable in all admonition.

It is most certainly not charitable to blow a fuse on someone the way Father did.

Dear Older Salt,

My comment was certainly not a case of "blowing a fuse." The words were all deliberately chosen:

"And finally, your Neo-Ultramontanist comment and your dismissal of pre-Vatican II theological manuals proves only one thing: As regards the science of Catholic theology, you are an idiot who is too full of himself to realize the depths of his own idiocy."

If you consult the WikiPedia entry on "idiot," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot you'll see that it derives from words meaning "person lacking professional skill," "ordinary person, layman," "uneducated or ignorant person," and originally carried along with it the notion of "self-centeredness." The (politically correct) modern term for it is "profound intellectual disability."

All these are entirely accurate characterizations of Gerard as regards his understanding of the science of Catholic theology.

He may be a rocket scientist in his day job and very devout man, but his comments about "Neo-Ultramontanism" and theology manuals demonstrate that he has no business "doing" Catholic theology.

[Older Salt]

I ask sarcastically as Father decided to call Gerard an "idiot".

That is not at all in behaving like a Catholic priest, especially as addressed to  a fellow Christian who is merely addressing Father.

Be ye charitable in all admonition.

It is most certainly not charitable to blow a fuse on someone the way Father did.

Dear Older Salt,

My comment was certainly not a case of "blowing a fuse." The words were all deliberately chosen:

"And finally, your Neo-Ultramontanist comment and your dismissal of pre-Vatican II theological manuals proves only one thing: As regards the science of Catholic theology, you are an idiot who is too full of himself to realize the depths of his own idiocy."

If you consult the WikiPedia entry on "idiot," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot you'll see that it derives from words meaning "person lacking professional skill," "ordinary person, layman," "uneducated or ignorant person," and originally carried along with it the notion of "self-centeredness." The (politically correct) modern term for it is "profound intellectual disability."

All these are entirely accurate characterizations of Gerard as regards his understanding of the science of Catholic theology.

He may be a rocket scientist in his day job and very devout man, but his comments about "Neo-Ultramontanism" and theology manuals demonstrate that he has no business "doing" Catholic theology.

Dear Father,
Most men who are called "idiot" or idiocy, referring to their statements, usually take it as an insult.

If I was to go up to you after one of your Masses and call you an "idiot", what would be your 1st reaction?

Even though you will not, you can permit yourself to apologize to Gerard, Father.

[Heinrich]

Arguing with a priest, whether online or in person, is bad taste and not traditional. I think we should all leave well enough alone here.

[FatherCekada]

Most men who are called "idiot" or idiocy, referring to their statements, usually take it as an insult.

If I was to go up to you after one of your Masses and call you an "idiot", what would be your 1st reaction?

Think of it this way, Older Salt:

Just because Gerard is a Catholic with a high speed connection, he thinks he can "practice" the science of theology.

That makes as much sense as me pretending that, because I ride on airplanes all the time, I'm qualified to pilot a 747.

If I made seriously made that claim in a sermon, I suppose you'd be justified in calling me an "idiot." But you might want to soften the blow by buying me a doughnut in the social hall first. 

And BTW, Heinrich, I'm not offended by a little arguing, because that's the nature of the sites. It sometimes helps to clarify issues, answer questions or resolve honest misunderstandings.

[Gardener]

Arguing with a priest, whether online or in person, is bad taste and not traditional. I think we should all leave well enough alone here.

He makes a point of it, though. It's not like people are kicking down the rectory door and harassing him. He believes he holds a position of truth and puts it out there. He doesn't get a pass simply because he is ordained.

He should be addressed respectfully, granted, but by throwing his biretta in the ring he's inviting debate.

[Heinrich]

And BTW, Heinrich, I'm not offended by a little arguing, because that's the nature of the sites. It sometimes helps to clarify issues, answer questions or resolve honest misunderstandings.

Fair enough, Father.

[SouthpawLink]

Gerard,
I assumed that you and he have a history of debating these issues in the past, and that's why he was terse with you.  It's rather unfortunate that we cannot agree on what must be believed, as even the meanings of doctrinal statements to that effect are disagreed upon (see my reference to Fr. Hardon re: Vatican I in another thread).  Other belief-determining factors (e.g., what constitutes a consent of theologians) are also disagreed upon; these combine to create an obstacle to the discussion of Catholic theology, for its very foundation is questioned (what can we mutually rely on to make our arguments?).  But this isn't the topic under discussion, so I'll leave it at that, and we can go on the carousel another time. 

Older Salt,
If you're right, then Our Lord ("whitewashed tombs," "brood of vipers"), St. Paul ("foolish Galatians!") and St. Jerome can all likewise be charged with blowing a fuse on their adversaries.  On the contrary, as I noted, St. Augustine (quoted by St. Thomas) deemed invectives to be appropriate in certain situations (cf. Prov. 26:4-5).  Your charge of uncharitableness is certainly debatable.

[Michael Wilson]

Ref. The story in "Vatican Insider"

The Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X has signed the Doctrinal Preamble proposed by the Holy See, with a few small alterations
Andrea Tornielli
Vatican City
The Society of St. Pius X has replied to the Vatican and the answer is a positive one. Vatican Insider has learnt that the Superior of the Lefebrvians, Bishop Bernard Fellay, has signed the Doctrinal preamble which the Holy See had presented last September as a condition for the Society to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church and secure canonical regularization. An official confirmation of the reply should be released in the next few hours. Apparently the text of the Preamble sent by Fellay includes some non-substantial changes compared to the version originally drafted by the Vatican Authorities. Readers may recall that the Ecclesia Dei commission did not want to make the document (two closely written pages) public because they wanted to leave open the possibility for small changes that would not alter the meaning of the Preamble.

Msgr. Fellay was ready to sign a version of the original preamble that he was presented with the previous year.  He and his two assistants were summoned to Rome for this purpose.  Also, the Pope had been in contact with Msgr. Fellay via a third persons i.e. His personal secretary, informing him that everything was fixed up.  What happened between the time that the Pope told Msgr. Fellay that they had a deal till the time when Msgr. Fellay was presented by Msgr. Muller with the document that obliged him to accept Vatican II and the N.O.M and which Msgr. Fellay rejeccted,  Is still a mystery.

[ImperialGuardsman]

Gerard,
I assumed that you and he have a history of debating these issues in the past, and that's why he was terse with you.  It's rather unfortunate that we cannot agree on what must be believed, as even the meanings of doctrinal statements to that effect are disagreed upon (see my reference to Fr. Hardon re: Vatican I in another thread).  Other belief-determining factors (e.g., what constitutes a consent of theologians) are also disagreed upon; these combine to create an obstacle to the discussion of Catholic theology, for its very foundation is questioned (what can we mutually rely on to make our arguments?).  But this isn't the topic under discussion, so I'll leave it at that, and we can go on the carousel another time. 

I think this is a great point for all of us.  Having to "go it alone" in terms of theology along with a hierarchy that seems, at the very least, unwilling to properly teach leaves us all on shaky ground. 

[sisinono]

Michael Wilson, my point wasn't to discuss the lead up to the failed negotiations but thanks for your insight. My point was purely to point out that these rags in question have  proven that their reporting is questionable, at best.  Therefore why would anyone choose to believe and propagate anything these journalists claim that they have "learnt", often from undisclosed sources, regarding the SSPX, Bp. Fellay and a deal being in the offing against the testimony of the main person involved, Bp. Fellay.  There is NO evidence whatsoever that there has been any negotiating going on between Rome and the SSPX since two years ago.  Quite the opposite. Nor is there any more to the gossip that Bp. Fellay knelt before Bergoglio.

[Older Salt]

Michael Wilson, my point wasn't to discuss the lead up to the failed negotiations but thanks for your insight. My point was purely to point out that these rags in question have  proven that their reporting is questionable, at best.  Therefore why would anyone choose to believe and propagate anything these journalists claim that they have "learnt", often from undisclosed sources, regarding the SSPX, Bp. Fellay and a deal being in the offing against the testimony of the main person involved, Bp. Fellay.  There is NO evidence whatsoever that there has been any negotiating going on between Rome and the SSPX since two years ago.  Quite the opposite. Nor is there any more to the gossip that Bp. Fellay knelt before Bergoglio.

Catholics always kneel before a bishop and kiss his signet.
All the more reason to act the same before a Pope.

[sisinono]

Older Salt, of course you are right.  However, this is beside the point I am making that one has to take these rags that publish so-called exclusives from undisclosed sources with more than a pinch of salt.     The topic of of this thread has in its title, "SSPX Deal Still on Track?.  The answer is no.  If people choose to believe otherwise then they are going against all the real evidence and first-hand testimonies from Bp. Fellay which say otherwise. 

BTW, Francis does not allow people to kneel before him and kiss his ring.

[FatherCekada]

Michael Wilson, my point wasn't to discuss the lead up to the failed negotiations but thanks for your insight. My point was purely to point out that these rags in question have  proven that their reporting is questionable, at best.  Therefore why would anyone choose to believe and propagate anything these journalists claim that they have "learnt", often from undisclosed sources, regarding the SSPX, Bp. Fellay and a deal being in the offing against the testimony of the main person involved, Bp. Fellay.... Nor is there any more to the gossip that Bp. Fellay knelt before Bergoglio.

OK, why not write Bp. Fellay and ask him this simple question?

"In your encounter with Pope Francis at the Casa S. Marta, did you kneel to receive his blessing?"

Simple enough, right?

Here's Bp. Fellay's contact info:

fsspx@fsspx.org

Mgr Bernard Fellay
Priorat Mariä Verkündigung
Schwandegg
CH – 6313 Menzingen, ZG
Switzerland

There is NO evidence whatsoever that there has been any negotiating going on between Rome and the SSPX since two years ago.  Quite the opposite.

No evidence whatsoever of negotiations? A secret visit to talk with the Ecclesia Dei officials that Bp. Fellay acknowledged only because a leak forced him to? But no negotiations, none, absolutely. Just chatting with the monsignori about how wonderful the Nutella tasted on the breakfast rolls!

It's like a husband being forced to admit he's gone to "gentleman's club" and claiming he had no interest whatsoever in the "entertainment," but went just for the great daiquiris.