Author Topic: Rome rejects SSPX (Read 9511 times)

tradlover · « **on:** March 16, 2012, 12:13:33 PM »

http://sspx.org/theological_commission/vatican_communique_concerning_sspx-3-16-2012.htm

s2srea · « **Reply #1 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:23:34 PM »

Quote

At the end of today's meeting, moved by concern to avoid an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X was invited to clarify his position in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI.

How much more clarity is needed? What needs to be clarified?

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #2 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:58:47 PM »

Here's the full text:

Quote

Vatican communiqué about SSPX's reply to Doctrinal Preamble

3-16-2012

Vatican City, March 16, 2012 (VIS) Given below is the text of a communiqué relating to the Society of St. Pius X, released this morning by the Holy See Press Office.

During the meeting of September 14, 2011 between Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and president of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, and Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X, the latter was presented with a Doctrinal Preamble, accompanied by a Preliminary Note, as a fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See. This defined certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church Magisterium and sentire cuм Ecclesia.

The response of the Society of St. Pius X to the aforesaid Doctrinal Preamble, which arrived in January 2012, was examined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before being submitted to the Holy Father for his judgment. Pursuant to the decision made by Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop Fellay was, in a letter delivered today, informed of the evaluation of his response. The letter states that the position he expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems which lie at the foundation of the rift between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X.

At the end of today's meeting, moved by concern to avoid an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X was invited to clarify his position in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI.

JustaServant · « **Reply #3 on:** March 16, 2012, 01:01:17 PM »

Can't the Pope simply declare the SSPX regularized?

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #4 on:** March 16, 2012, 01:02:16 PM »

Quote from: JustaServant

Can't the Pope simply declare the SSPX regularized?

Not without trying to modernize them first.

Maizar · « **Reply #5 on:** March 16, 2012, 05:49:39 PM »

As long as the SSPX is able to separate politics from religion, that is "regularization" from "communion", the consequences are only incalculable for Pope Benedict.

Sigismund · « **Reply #6 on:** March 16, 2012, 08:10:18 PM »

Quote from: JustaServant

Can't the Pope simply declare the SSPX regularized?

Of course he could. He does not want to do so.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #7 on:** March 16, 2012, 08:18:12 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: JustaServant
Can't the Pope simply declare the SSPX regularized?

Of course he could. He does not want to do so.

...which is strange, since it would be the best way to destroy the Sspx.

Sigismund · « **Reply #8 on:** March 16, 2012, 09:27:09 PM »

Indeed it would, but this pope has an amazing ability to make the worst decision possible, even when it is contrary to his own interests. He now has his own brand of cologne, for heaven's sake. Even if, like the unjust judge in the Gospel, he cares nothing for God nor man, can't he see how this looks, both to his enemies and people who would like to be his friend.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #9 on:** March 16, 2012, 09:38:09 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Indeed it would, but this pope has an amazing ability to make the worst decision possible, even when it is contrary to his own interests. He now has his own brand of cologne, for heaven's sake. Even if, like the unjust judge in the Gospel, he cares nothing for God nor man, can't he see how this looks, both to his enemies and people who would like to be his friend.

Or, could it all just be a show to make it look like bishop Fellay is holding the line, whereas the reality is that he has ceased calling for a.doctrinal solution before the practical one is laid out?
For Rome to.say the sspx hasn't come.far enough, when they have dropped this requirement, makes me very suspicious of gamesmanship.
It is all a distraction to hide this fact.
A deal is coming.

s2srea · « **Reply #10 on:** March 16, 2012, 09:42:59 PM »

Sent to me via e-mail:

Addendum (Radio Vaticana):

"Bp. Fellay is invited to clarify his position, in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI, from now until April 15."

[UPDATE - 1500 GMT] In an article on today's events, Salvatore Izzo reports the following for Italian news agency AGI:

The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Joseph Levada, delivered [the content of the communiqué] to the Superior General of the Society, Bishop Bernard Fellay, in a conversation that lasted for over two hours ... . During today's meeting in the Palace of the Holy Office - in which the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Abp. Luis Francisco Ladaria, and the Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, Mgr. Guido Pozzo, also took part, while Bp. Fellay was joined by his assistant Fr. Nelly - a complete rupture was avoided by the Holy See, making it clear that Benedict XVI still expects a recompositio.

Francisco · « **Reply #11 on:** March 17, 2012, 02:38:33 AM »

What is Bishop Fellay's position on the New Mass? I wish he would make a public statement on this issue, which would help some of us make up our minds as to what to do in the event of a Rome-SSPX deal.

credo12 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 17, 2012, 05:45:29 AM »

Quote from: Francisco

What is Bishop Fellay's position on the New Mass? I wish he would make a public statement on this issue, which would help some of us make up our minds as to what to do in the event of a Rome-SSPX deal.

The vast majority of priests and faithful are opposed to a 'deal'. As a layman, I would be opposed to Bishop Fellay. Of course he surpressed Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais' "Faith Imperiled by Reason: Benedict XVI's Hermeneutics"

The approach Bishop F is taking will destroy the SSPX as will any control of it by Rome. Benedict XVI is as heretical and modernist as ever.

Maizar · « **Reply #13 on:** March 17, 2012, 06:39:27 AM »

The situation has some paradoxes. The SSPX actually stands to lose a great deal, materially and spiritually, by being assimilated through compromise into the political structure under Benedict. On the other hand, the Pope stands to lose credibility and money in the plate, in the eyes of traditional (true) Catholics if he does not overtly accept Tradition and starts a return to Orthodoxy and Orthopraxis. On the other hand, the Pope would anger the Masons and the Jєωs if he gave into SSPX, which (if he is not truly a man of faith) would sway him more strongly, since his physical safety depends on not offending certain groups.

So the SSPX is actually in a position of strength in these negotiations, but places itself in a position of weakness by accepting Benedict's authority. It also has weakened itself by not defending Bishop Williamson, because it has shown that it is prepared to make sacrifices (even one of a Bishop) at the altar of Zionism.

Successive Popes have committed outrageous and scandalous public acts against the Faith, including Benedict XVI. The modern Catholic Church is riddled with sɛҳuąƖ scandal, financial corruption, and the systematic weeding out of Catholic seminarians who are against Modernism. How the SSPX hopes to survive if it is regularized is hard to comprehend, except if it does not compromise on faith and morals. If the Society does give in, then in my eyes it ceases to be the hope for the future, but merely a temporary source of valid sacraments until the inevitable disappearance of Tradition from the visible Church - and what then?

Stubborn · « **Reply #14 on:** March 17, 2012, 08:07:49 AM »

Quote from: Maizar

The situation has some paradoxes. The SSPX actually stands to lose a great deal, materially and spiritually, by being assimilated through compromise into the political structure under Benedict. On the other hand, the Pope stands to lose credibility and money in the plate, in the eyes of traditional (true) Catholics if he does not overtly accept Tradition and starts a return to Orthodoxy and Orthopraxis. On the other hand, the Pope would anger the Masons and the Jєωs if he gave into SSPX, which (if he is not truly a man of faith) would sway him more strongly, since his physical safety depends on not offending certain groups.

So the SSPX is actually in a position of strength in these negotiations, but places itself in a position of weakness by accepting Benedict's authority. It also has weakened itself by not defending Bishop Williamson, because it has shown that it is prepared to make sacrifices (even one of a Bishop) at the altar of Zionism.

Successive Popes have committed outrageous and scandalous public acts against the Faith, including Benedict XVI. The modern Catholic Church is riddled with sɛҳuąƖ scandal, financial corruption, and the systematic weeding out of Catholic seminarians who are against Modernism. How the SSPX hopes to survive if it is regularized is hard to comprehend, except if it does not compromise on faith and morals. If the Society does give in, then in my eyes it ceases to be the hope for the future, but merely a temporary source of valid sacraments until the inevitable disappearance of Tradition from the visible Church - and what then?

Well, they already said they would not give in - when +Fellay said if you want us, then take us "as is".
Rome already was told by SSPX no deal if Rome wants SSPX to accept the conciliar errors.

Based on the history of the NO, regardless of how good Rome might make things sound, they cannot be trusted to do the right thing - at least not until they do something right.

Acknowledging there even is a crisis and that the NO is the implement of destruction would be a good first step for Rome. Until then, history teaches Romes intentions are dubious intentions.