ELEISON  COMMENTS  CCXIV  (Aug. 20, 2011) : "GREEK  GIFTS"  --  I

On September 14 in a few weeks'  time is due to take place in Rome, so we are told, a meeting of Cardinal Levada and Roman officials with the Superior General of the Society of St Pius X and his two Assistants. Catholics who appreciate all that Archbishop Lefebvre and his Society have been given to do over the last 40 years in defence of the Faith need to be forewarned, because that Faith is ever more in danger, and "Forewarned is forearmed", especially by prayer.

It was Cardinal Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who was entrusted two years ago with overseeing the doctrinal Discussions that ran from the autumn of 2009 to April of this year, between Rome and the SSPX. It was Rome that invited the SSPX to this meeting. It seems reasonable to anticipate that the Romans on September 14 will be laying down as to future relations with the SSPX their decision emerging from the Discussions.

Now by all accounts the Discussions made clear that no doctrinal agreement is possible between the SSPX as cleaving to the age-old Church doctrine, and today's Rome as set upon the  Conciliar teaching of the Newchurch, and moreover persevering in this disorientation, as is clear from the Newbeatification of John-Paul II in May and from Assisi III due to happen this coming October. So the situation coming out of the Discussions remains exactly where it was two years ago, going into the Discussions: on the one hand, for the glory of God and for the salvation of souls, the SSPX strives to help Rome back to the true Catholic Faith, whilst for the glory of modern man and for the satisfaction of his ignoble media (as in January and February of 2009), Conciliar Rome is doing all within its power to induce the SSPX to blend into the mind- and soul-rotting ecuмenism of the Newfaith.

What then can we imagine Rome imposing on September 14 ?  Either carrot or stick, more probably, as adjusted by their expertise in its reading of the current state of mind within the SSPX, both. The stick could be a threat of total "excommunication" for the SSPX, once and for all. But who that has the Catholic Faith could be scared by such a threat ?  When Archbishop Lefebvre was threatened for the first time with "excommunication" from the Newchurch, we remember his reply: "How can I be put out of a 'church' to which I have never belonged ?"

On the other hand the cleverest carrot from Rome could be the apparently irresistible offer of "full communion with Rome" on the SSPX's own terms. Only there might be hidden away a little clause that would stipulate that future SSPX Superiors and Bishops might be chosen by a joint committee of Rome and the SSPX with the merest majority of members being -- Romans. After all, would the SSPX be wanting to come under Rome, or not ?  "Make up your minds !" will be their reasonable demand, as Cardinal Ratzinger reportedly cried out in 2001.

Clear minds recall the saying of the wise -- but scorned -- Trojan who did not want the Greeks' Horse to be brought into Troy: "Howsoever it be, I fear the Greeks, even when they bear gifts." But the Trojan Horse was brought in. We all know what happened to Troy.                                                      

Kyrie eleison

`ELEISON  COMMENTS  CCXVI  (Sept.3, 2011) :  "GREEK  GIFTS"  --  III.
 
Speculation is only speculation. Journalists are only journalists. But an Italian journalist claimed last month that he had the authority of a"Vatican insider" for writing that the Sept 14 meeting between Roman officials and the Superior General of the Society of St Pius X with his two Assistants may discuss a possible canonical regularization of the SSPX. Here is a summary of Andrea Tornielli's main points (see  http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/inquiries-and-interviews/detail/articolo/lefebvriani-vaticano-tradizione-fellay-7423/ ) :--
 
The Vatican officials will submit to the SSPX  ( 1 ) a clarification of Benedict XVI's "hermeneutic of continuity" to show how it is the more authentic interpretation of the texts of Vatican II.  "Only if", says Tornielli, this clarification overcomes the doctrinal difficulties will there then be presented  (2)  a solution to the canonical irregularity in which the SSPX bishops and priests still find themselves: an Ordinariat such as was given to the Anglicans in May, whereby the SSPX would depend directly on the Holy See through the Ecclesia Dei Commission. This arrangement would enable the SSPX to "retain its characteristics without having to answer to the diocesan bishops". But  (3)  any such agreement is not certain because "within the SSPX co-exist different sensitivities".
 
From everything we know in public about Vatican-SSPX relations, Tornielli's forecast for the Sept 14 meeting seems highly probable. But each of his three main points deserves comment:--
 
Firstly, as to the doctrinal gulf between today's Vatican and Archbishop Lefebvre's SSPX, it cannot be said that Benedict XVI's "hermeneutic of continuity" is a solution (see EC 208-211). If Tornielli is right, it will be interesting (not edifying) to see how Rome tries once more to prove that 2+2 can be 4 or 5, 5 or 4. Catholic doctrine is as rigid, if not always as clear to us human beings, as 2+2=4.
 
Secondly, as to the canonical arrangement evoked by Tornielli, if - unimaginably - the SSPX were to accept any kind of doctrinal compromise, then in no way could the SSPX both come under the present Holy See (2+2=4 or 5), and still "retain its characteristics" (based on 2+2= exclusively 4). The practical agreement would exercise a constant and finally irresistible pressure to make Catholic doctrine no longer exclusive but inclusive of error, which would be to adopt the Freemasons' ideology and to abandon the very reason for existing of Archbishop Lefebvre's SSPX.
 
And thirdly, Tornielli may well be right that an agreement is not certain, but he and his "Vatican insider" are absolutely wrong if either of them thinks that the problem is one of "different sensitivities". Sensitivities are subjective. The central problem between the Vatican and Archbishop Lefebvre's SSPX is as objective as 2+2=4. At no point in time, reaching backwards or forwards into eternity, on no planet or star created or creatable, can 2+2 ever be anything other than, exclusively, four.
 
When all Archbishop Lefebvre's efforts had failed in the negotiations of May 1988 to obtain from then Cardinal Ratzinger a secure place for the Faith within the mainstream Church, he said some famous words : "Your Eminence, even were you to give us everything we wanted, still we would have to refuse, because we are working to christianise society, whereas you are working to de-christianise it.  Collaboration between us is not possible."                                                            
 
Kyrie eleison.