FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Bishop Fellay Declares “Jews are our elder brothers in in the old Covenant”
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Is +Fellay calling +Williamson an Anti-Semite? And if so, is this gibberish that follows the "price" to be paid for some kind of agreement with Rome and a new Order within the fold? 
Quote:Superior General of the SSPX, Bishop Fellay Proclaims "The Jews are 'our elder brothers' in the old Covenant"

Fellay: "The Jews are 'our elder brothers'."
"Antisemitism has no place in our ranks."

Strong words of the Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, against any suspicion of Antisemitism.

1. First, in a declaration made yesterday to Famille Chrétienne, the French Catholic weekly, as reported by La Croix this Sunday:

Bishop Bernard Fellay welcomed Famille Chrétienne [French Catholic weekly] on January 31, in his General House of Menzingen, Switzerland. He responded in particular to the accusations of Antisemitism cast at the Fraternity of Saint Pius X.

"We evidently condemn every act of murder of the innocent. It is a crime that cries to heaven! Even more so when it is related to a people. We reject every accusation of Antisemitism. Completely and absolutely. We reject every form of approval of what happened under Hitler. This is something abominable. Christianity places Charity at a supreme level. Saint Paul, speaking of the Jews, proclaims, 'I wished myself to be an anathema [from Christ], for my brethren!" (Rom. 9, 3). The Jews are "our elder brothers" in the sense that we have something in common, that is, the old Covenant. It is true that the acknowledgment of the coming of the Messiah separates us.

"It is very interesting to notice that the Church did not await for the Council to prescribe courses of action regarding the Jews. Since the 30s, even during the war, several texts of Rome provide a very just position: the abominations of the Hitlerist regime must be condemned! 'Spiritually, we are all Semites', Pope Pius XI had said. It is a truth which comes from Sacred Scripture itself, 'we are sons of Abraham,' Saint Paul also affirms."

2. Also by an e-mail message sent this Sunday to the Rev. Dr. Alcuin Reid (forwarded to several blogs):

Statement by Dr Alcuin Reid:

On Friday BBC Radio asked me to discuss recent events concerning the SSPX on 'The Sunday Program' this morning. Following that request I asked the SSPX for comment on the issues to be discussed. Unfortunately Bishop Fellay's reply reached me only after the program aired. His reply, written for publication, states:

"The position of Bishop Williamson is clearly not the position of our Society. Antisemitism has no place in our ranks. We follow fully God's commandments on justice and charity and the constant teaching of the Church. Antisemitism has been condemned by the Church. So do we condemn it. I fully agree with Fr Schmidberger's statement about Bishop Williamson's words. ("

God bless you
+Bernard Fellay
Old news is old news.

Also, give this man a cardinal's hat. 
Here is Michael Hoffman's response.

Now Comes the Great Divide

Quote:By Michael Hoffman | Aug. 30, 2011

Now comes the Great Divide in the Roman Catholic Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), not between Bishop Richard Williamson and Bishop Bernard Fellay, but between the SSPX founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fellay.

This “antisemitism” canard is used as a Pavlovian instrument of auto-suppression ­ to taint any critical study of Judaism. The SSPX rejects antisemitism, Bishop Fellay says. Fine! But what does that have to do with the issues at hand? Is it “antisemitic” to ask if Judaic persons were gassed to death in Auschwitz? Are these gassing allegations now holy Catholic writ, a new gospel? Where is the forensic documentation that St. Edith Stein was “gassed” in Auschwitz-Birkenau? How is it that one hates “semites,” if one dares to ask questions about secular history?

To what extent has the religion of Judaism for gentiles, that some of us refer to as Holocaustianity, supplanted the religion of Jews and gentiles known as Christianity? To what extent is Holocaustianity used to occlude the history of Judeo-Bolshevism’s mass murder of millions of Christians in Russia and Eastern Europe? These distinctions do not concern Bishop Fellay. He defends against the charge of “antisemitism” with the broadest strokes of crude generalities, as if the Patriarch Abraham and the Apostle Paul were all partisans of Zionism, liberalism and the Allied history of World War II.

Why is the statement from Pope Pius XI, “Spiritually we are all semites,” supposed to be some ultimate means for shaming into silence critics of the Talmud, and persons who question Judaic tales of homicidal gassings in Auschwitz? When we dare to ask such questions in the face of rabbinic and Vatican outrage, we are fulfilling our rights as Christians and the imperative bequeathed to us by St. Paul himself: “Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth" (Titus 1:14).

“Spiritually we are all semites.” Indeed!  And when objective and unbiased genetic testing at a high level of scientific verification is performed in the future, we will find many Arabs who are semites and many so-called Jews who are not (Rev. 2:9 and 3:9).

Bishop Fellay seems to endorse Pope John Paul II’s perverse declaration that, “the Jews are our elder brothers in the faith,” although Fellay uses the term “Old Covenant.” Which “Jews” ­ -- ancient or modern? Does Fellay mean to say, the “Jews” of the Israeli state? The “Jews” of Chabad-Lubavitch? Does he refer to “Jews” like Maimonides, the Alter Rebbe, the Chafetz Chaim, Joseph Karo as our “elder brothers” in the “Covenant”?

The religion of Orthodox Judaism is a complete betrayal of the Old Testament. Those who follow it are not our elder brothers in the Old Covenant of the Bible. Their faith consists of the Talmud and worship of themselves, not worship of God (Babylonian Talmud: Bava Metzia 59b and Mo’ed Kattan 16b). Contemporary Orthodox Judaism is a blasphemy, many hundreds of times more corrupt that it was at the time the Pharisees persecuted Jesus Christ.

What then does Bishop Fellay’s phrase actually denote, “our elder brothers in the Old Covenant”? Does it denote that because today’s Israelis and Zionists allege that they are physically descended of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, we Christians have a solidarity with them based on their race? If that is the case, what then does the bishop make of the words of St. John the Baptist, when he said, in response to the racial brag of the Pharisees: “Do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." Matthew 3: 9-10.

The ancient Pharisees had the same prestigious idea about their racial heritage as does Bishop Fellay. But what did Christ say to them in response? “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God” (John 8:39-40).

“Do not presume to say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father...

“If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did...”

This is a radically different doctrine from the one put forth by the recent popes and the SSPX Superior General. Both St. John and Our Lord Jesus Christ defined the Jews’ connection to Abraham on the basis of their “fruits” and their “works.”

What are the fruits and works of the Christ-hating rabbis?

On what basis, other than racial prestige, can they be termed “elder brothers in the covenant”? Such a statement is liberal nonsense, concocted to curry favor with counterfeit-Israel and the Vatican that has become its most pernicious servant.

Is it “antisemitism” to reject this modernist palaver about Christianity’s supposed “elder brothers”? We adhere instead to the traditional Biblical and Catholic standard ­that the members of the synagogue of Judaism constitute the Antichrist.

We hear a great deal of thunder from Bishop Fellay about “Antisemitism,” and not a whisper about the Judaic Antichrist. What does Scripture say? “Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father.” 1 John 2:22-23.

To deny this fact, by spreading confusion concerning what is the “covenant” of “the Jews,” and claiming that the covenant of “Jews” in general, without qualification, precedes and is the elder brother of Christianity, is a scandal, a source of grave confusion, and an abdication of the prophetic voice of warning which Marcel Lefebvre desired that his successors would embody.

While Bishop Richard Williamson’s remarks in the past have sometimes been intemperate and poorly timed, his views on Judaism do not differ from those of Archbishop Lefebvre. Therefore, is Bishop Fellay suggesting indirectly that Archbishop Lefebvre was “antisemitic?” Is this why some of Lefebvre’s speeches have been suppressed by Fellay?

Another of the four SSPX bishops, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, is well aware of the truth about Judaism. It is unfortunate that out of a mistaken sense of diplomacy he remains silent while Bishop Fellay continues to publicly batter a mostly defenseless brother bishop (Williamson) for supposed “sins” of Hitlerism and antisemitism of which he is not guilty.

Bishop Fellay states concerning Judaic persons: “Christianity places Charity at a supreme level.” Yet he has no charity toward Bishop Williamson. He repeatedly drags his name and reputation through the mud and uses him as a scapegoat.

In fact, Bishop Fellay has managed to sufficiently bully Bishop Williamson into avoidance of the truth. Williamson has in recent weeks more fervently denounced the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, than any rabbi. In his last column he attacked “Protestantism and liberalism” as the great evils of history. He omitted Judaism. His self-censorship is patently in deference to the lynch mob atmosphere Bishop Fellay has stirred against him. The silence of the other two SSPX bishops in the face of Fellay’s scurrilous campaign of calumny has no doubt emboldened Fellay.

Bishop Tissier de Mallerais is presiding over a two-day “Kingship of Christ” symposium in Kansas City in October that studiously avoids any serious or sustained study of Judaism or its disastrous infiltration of the modern Church. Of course, he is “just being diplomatic.” In this emergency, at five minutes to midnight on the clock of destiny, such avoidance is a dereliction of the duty incumbent upon the office of bishop.

How is it that clerical Catholic fellow-travelers with Judaism are so bold as to proclaim their liberalism from the housetops, while those who know the truth dare not? How does God work His will on earth if not through his human instruments on earth? And if those instruments are too enamored of timidity in the name of diplomacy, then what?

The Catholic Church has witnessed the current and past pope visit synagogues several times ­-- not to admonish the sinners and instruct the ignorant in those places ­ -- which would be a salutary missionary activity to undertake, in the spirit of the apostles and St. Vincent Ferrer ­-- but rather, the two popes encouraged the enthralled in those synagogues to remain in their sins!

Bishop Fellay has cut his suit to fit the pattern of the modern Vatican, wherein the ancient weed of Neo-Platonic Kabbalism and Talmudism has emerged in full bloom in two pontificates, to the ruination of countless souls. If the salvation of souls is not our highest objective, then what is? If souls are being lost to eternal damnation because Archbishop Lefebvre’s successor believes he must play the part of the consummate politician in order to save the SSPX from the wrath of the Roman curia and the Zionist government of Germany (where the SSPX has schools and a seminary), what then?

To Bishop Fellay, we say, if your Excellency truly loves the “Jews,” then you will tell them the truth which the Church of Jesus Christ has always proclaimed to them: they have no faith and no covenant without Christ. They abandoned the Old Testament religion of Israel when they abandoned Jesus. They are not custodians of the Bible; neither do they honor it, or the Patriarchs. In their texts, they denigrate Noah, Isaiah and even Abraham. They use a Pharisaic and Kabbalistic exegesis of Scripture with multiple levels of alleged meaning, which degrades the Word of God into a mere totem, whereupon man’s fantasies are projected and institutionalized.

This fantastic Talmudic and midrashic exegesis has been taken up by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI and incorporated into the Catholic hermeneutic. We will give but one example. On Holy Name Sunday in both Novus Ordo (diocese of Spokane) and even traditional pulpits (Fraternity of St. Peter), which we have heard with our own ears, in 2010 and 2011 respectively, it is taught that the Name of God (YHVH) was so holy it was to be pronounced only once a year by the high priest. This teaching is put forth with the strong implication that we are to imitate this “Biblical” example concerning the Name of God.

This is not Biblical, however. It is false doctrine -- a counterfeit human tradition about the Name of God nowhere to be found in the Word of God. The God of Israel repeatedly demanded that His people be known by His Name and that His Name be invoked by them (Exodus 3:15). The superstitious proscription against pronouncing God’s name, except once a year, is from the written record of the once oral law of the Pharisees -- the Mishnah -- which, with the Gemara, forms the Talmud.

On June, 29, 2008 the "Letter to the Bishops' Conferences on the Name of God," a document promulgated by the "Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments," ordered, at the direction of Pope Benedict XVI, God's name is "neither to be used or pronounced" in Catholic liturgy, hymns or prayers. Pope Benedict is promulgating the word of the Pharisees in Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1, in preference to the Word of God in Exodus 3:15 and Psalm 145:21 (Jerusalem Bible translation). This is how serious are the inroads of Talmudism into Catholicism.

Will Bishop Fellay resort to invoking the tiresome device of crying “antisemitism” as a way to silence vigilance and protest over the fact that Pope Benedict prefers to obey the Talmud rather than the Old Testament? Christians are indeed children of Abraham. How then can they be children of a Talmud in which Abraham and the God of Abraham have no part?

Where God is, there is the Truth. The truth about Pharisaic Judaism, of which today’s Orthodox Judaism is the direct descendant, was declared by Jesus Christ, recorded in the New Testament, taught by the early Church, the Fathers of the Church and all the saints canonized before 1970. Yet, suddenly the modern zeitgeist has determined that Truth is “antisemitic”!

And you, Bishop Fellay, do you still claim to be the guardian of the traditional Catholic Society founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, or have you become the paladin of the politically correct lucubrations of the modernist heresy?

Please discuss. Especially those of you who have criticized JPII for his new form of ecumenism. Or does +Fellay get a pass? This does not look like a good development.

(08-31-2011, 11:33 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: [ -> ]Old news is old news.

Also, give this man a cardinal's hat. 

OK, I'll put you down for give him a pass.

Please discuss. Especially those of you who have criticized JPII for his new form of ecumenism. Or does +Fellay get a pass? This does not look like a good development.

This news is almost 4 years old....
um...move on.
I actually posted this in another thread today, but will post it here as well since it's relevant:

Quote:A few years ago Bishop Fellay of the SSPX gave a really interesting talk on ecumenism. He stated the Vatican II document on ecumenism is correct that there are other truths in other religions, but complained that the document didn't label what had hitherto been labeled false religions as false religions. Because he stated even if a religion has 90% of the truth that isn't really good enough. So for example he said a student taking a test who answered "what is 2+2" with a "3" would not get very far in convincing his teacher that "3" is 3/4th of "4"! 

He then gave an interesting analogy to Assisi II. He said at Assisi II all the different religious groups there didn't actually pray together, but setup in different rooms and prayed separately. Thus, he compared Assisi II to an airport where various airplanes were docked at the terminal.  But, he said at this airport only one of the airplanes could fly, that of the Catholic Church.  Now this doesn't mean that the other groups didn't have airplanes. Indeed, he stated the Orthodox actually had a fully functional airplane capable of flight. Alas, Orthodoxy's plane lacked a pilot, the Pope, and thus would not get far.  The various Protetsant sects airplanes were even in worst shape as they had engine trouble as they lacked the full sacraments.  And, further down the line the Buddhist's airplane was only made of paper mâché. 

I like his take on ecumenism.  Here is the video in full:

Let's all throw Williamson under the bus to appease the deicides!

How charitable of Fellay!
(09-01-2011, 12:05 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]Let's all throw Williamson under the bus to appease the deicides!

How charitable of Fellay!

This (unfortunately)...
I hate it when two-and-a-half year old news is posted as if it were new.
(09-01-2011, 12:34 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: [ -> ]I hate it when two-and-a-half year old news is posted as if it were new.

oh, BTW, Mel Gibson is coming out with a new movie, it's called The Passion of the Christ.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6