Author Topic: Archbishop Pozzo dominating xSPX negotiations (Read 2799 times)

Incredulous · « **on:** August 05, 2016, 03:50:33 PM »

More of the interview, reveals how the xSPX will have to accept the Vatican II Council, but they can only differ with Rome on the pastoral interpretation.

Cool & calm, Archbishop Pozzo

The head of the Vatican’s so-called Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Archbishop Guido Pozzo, has revealed in an interview with the German Christ & Welt that Bp. Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), has agreed to canonical regularization under a personal prelature solution, although details are still being worked out. Pozzo added that this regularization will not take place until the remaining doctrinal issues are resolved, while at the same time clarifying that these issues do not include such “non-essential” and “pastoral” topics as ecuмenism, interreligious dialogue, religious liberty, and the relationship between the Church and the modern world.

Just finishing-up the xSPX's paperwork

In plain English: The deal is done, they’re just putting the finishing touches on the wrapping to make it look as presentable as possible.

The interview is somewhat lengthy and has not yet been translated into English in its entirety, although we provide our own translation of some of the more salient portions below. A Spanish translation has been made available here, and the original German can be found here. …

C&W: What has changed in the Vatican’s position since the beginning of the [current] pontificate?

Pozzo: There has been an integration of new perspectives. From 2009 to 2012, particularly the theological debate was at the forefront. There were doctrinal difficulties that hindered the canonical recognition of the Society [of St. Pius X]. However, we know that life is more than just doctrine. In the past three years, there has been the added desire to get to know and understand the Society in its concrete reality. …

C&W: Why has the SSPX been offered the prospect of the establishment of a so-called personal prelature?

Pozzo: This seems to be the [most] suitable canonical form. Mgr. Fellay has accepted this proposal [Vorschlag], even though we still have to work out some details in the coming months. Only Opus Dei has this [personal prelature] arrangement [at the moment]; this is a great mark of confidence for the SSPX. It is clear that a canonical solution presupposes a resolution of the doctrinal questions.

C&W: What doctrinal questions are at issue?

Pozzo: As Pope Benedict XVI explained in his interview book Light of the World, the SSPX bishops incurred excommunication because Mgr. Marcel Lefebvre had consecrated the bishops in 1988 without papal approval.

After Bp. Fellay recognized the [papal] primacy on behalf of the other bishops in 2009, the excommunication was lifted. Pope Benedict XVI stated expressly that the excommunication had nothing to do with the Second Vatican Council but with an offense [Verstoß] against the primacy.

C&W: Why is the Society still in a canonically irregular situation?

Pozzo: The rescinding of the excommunication cannot be equated with a canonical recognition, which cannot happen until there is a resolution of the doctrinal problems. As long as this hasn’t happened, the priests cannot exercise their functions [Amt] legitimately.

C&W: So what is still missing?

Pozzo: The heart of the matter is the question to what extent [bis zu welchem Grad] some texts of the Second Vatican Council are in continuity with the perennial magisterium of the Church.

We are in complete agreement with the SSPX on the principle that the council can only be correctly understood within the context of the whole of Tradition and the perennial magisterium. The council is not a pastoral super-dogma but a part of the entirety of Tradition and the perennial magisterium.

C&W: What does this mean?

Pozzo: This means that although Church Tradition does develop, it can never develop in the sense of a new understanding that represents a contradiction to the former understanding, but [only] in the sense of a deeper understanding of the depositum fidei, of the authentic deposit of faith. In this sense all ecclesiastical docuмents must be understood, including those of the council.

These presuppositions, together with an acceptance of the creed [Verpflichtung zum Glaubensbekenntnis], with the acceptance of the sacraments and the papal primacy, form the basis for the doctrinal declaration that is being put before the Society to sign. These are the prerequisites for a Catholic to be in full communion with the Catholic Church.

C&W: You no longer expect the SSPX to accept all of the conciliar declarations, including the texts regarding ecuмenism or interreligious dialogue?

Pozzo: The Society professes adherence to the defined dogmas of the faith and the Catholic truths which were reaffirmed in the conciliar docuмents. These must, however, be accepted according to the degree of assent that is owed them. Doctrines of the Catholic Church that were proposed by the Second Vatican Council that must decidedly receive internal assent include, for example, the teaching of the sacramentality of episcopal consecration as the fullness of the sacrament of holy orders and the doctrine of the primacy of the Pope and the episcopal college in union with its head, as laid out by the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium and as interpreted by the Nota explicativa praevia [preliminary explanatory note] that the highest authority wanted [to be added to the docuмent].

The SSPX has difficulty with some aspects of the decree Nostra aetate on interreligious dialogue, of the decree Unitatis redintegratio on ecuмenism, and of the declaration Dignitatis humanae on religious freedom or with questions regarding the relationship of Christianity to modernity. These are not matters of doctrine, however, nor are they definitive statements; rather, they are instructions or statements of guidance for pastoral practice. We can continue to discuss these pastoral aspects even after a canonical recognition in order to settle [these questions].

C&W: So the Vatican has lowered the bar?

Pozzo: No. In the past years, we clarified what questions are essential and what topics can still be discussed later. Formerly we tried to reach immediate agreement on all questions, unfortunately without success. Now we’ve asked ourselves: What are the truly essential requirements for being Catholic? In consultation with the Pope, these requirements already mentioned are included in the doctrinal declaration that is being put before the Society. …

C&W: Who guarantees that the controversial questions will not simply be ignored after the canonical recognition?

Pozzo: The SSPX has committed itself to dialogue. The continuation of the discussion need not scare anyone and can only be enriching for the entire Church. In my talks with representatives of the Society I have encountered many open minds in this regard, even though there are also some more rigid and more skeptical attitudes [to be found] at the same time. …
(Julius Müller-Meiningen, “Seid gehorsam — bitte!” [“Be obedient — please!”], Christ & Welt 32/2016; our translation.)

Christ & Welt [“Christ & the World”] is a supplement to the German national weekly Die Zeit. This interview with Mr. Pozzo was published in its edition n. 32/2016 and was conducted by Julius Müller-Meiningen, the same journalist who in 2015 reported on the presence of an anti-Francis dossier that was making the rounds in the Vatican.

We could provide endless commentary on this now, but we can leave that for later, because obviously we have not heard the end of this yet and we might as well just wait until the text of the doctrinal declaration is released in public.

One thing is clear: The Society of St. Pius X as we have known it is history.

Source: Link

RogerThat · « **Reply #1 on:** August 05, 2016, 04:04:45 PM »

If there was a deal, why did Bishop Fellay put his name and signature to the July 2016 post-superior meeting letter? The one that pretty much said that it is "essential" for a new Pope for major changes to occur or for a major change in Pope Francis.

Incredulous · « **Reply #2 on:** August 05, 2016, 05:00:51 PM »

Quote from: RogerThat

If there was a deal, why did Bishop Fellay put his name and signature to the July 2016 post-superior meeting letter? The one that pretty much said that it is "essential" for a new Pope for major changes to occur or for a major change in Pope Francis.

So your asking "Who's lying?"

I found Archbishop Pozzo's answers to be straight-forward and clear-cut.

It was somewhat refreshing to read, because he doesn't "talk in circles" like Bp. Fellay.

Inadvertently perhaps, +AB Pozzo made some points that ring true for loyal Catholics who watch Bp. Fellay like a cat watches a mouse:

1. In plain English: The deal is done, they’re just putting the finishing touches on the wrapping to make it look as presentable as possible
(i.e, Final details are an attempt to save the xSPX's face)

2. After Bp. Fellay recognized the [papal] primacy on behalf of the other bishops in 2009. (i.e. he sold out his predecessor +ABL).
3. We are in complete agreement with the SSPX on the principle that the council can only be correctly understood within the context of the whole of Tradition and the perennial magisterium. (Really?)

4. These must, however, be accepted according to the degree of assent that is owed them. Doctrines of the Catholic Church that were proposed by the Second Vatican Council that must decidedly receive internal assent include, for example,

the teaching of the sacramentality of episcopal consecration as the fullness of the sacrament of holy orders and the doctrine of the primacy of the Pope and the episcopal college in union with its head, as laid out by the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium and as interpreted by the Nota explicativa praevia [preliminary explanatory note] that the highest authority wanted [to be added to the docuмent].

(Means Bp. Fellay has sold the farm and Rome is in clear control)

In any case, thanks for asking.

Fatimagirl · « **Reply #3 on:** August 09, 2016, 10:59:42 PM »

I put this link up regarding a great discussion going on on the blog One Peter Five regarding this situation under another conversation on our forum -- but don't want it to be lost -- so I'm putting it up here as well.

Take a look:

http://www.onepeterfive.com/abp-pozzo-on-sspx-disputed-vatican-ii-docuмents-are-non-doctrinal/

Fatima girl

Incredulous · « **Reply #4 on:** August 10, 2016, 12:20:27 AM »

Quote from: Fatimagirl

I put this link up regarding a great discussion going on on the blog One Peter Five regarding this situation under another conversation on our forum -- but don't want it to be lost -- so I'm putting it up here as well.

Take a look:

http://www.onepeterfive.com/abp-pozzo-on-sspx-disputed-vatican-ii-docuмents-are-non-doctrinal/

Fatima girl

Good find!

Fellay is likely pulling his hair out because Pozzo is revealing far too much about the nature of the SSPX compromises.

nctradcath · « **Reply #5 on:** August 10, 2016, 04:56:29 AM »

Why would the "Archbishop" lie? He has nothing to lose. You would think it would stick in Bishop Fellay's craw to kowtow before a man who is not a real bishop or priest.

TKGS · « **Reply #6 on:** August 10, 2016, 06:59:25 AM »

Quote from: nctradcath

Why would the "Archbishop" lie? He has nothing to lose. You would think it would stick in Bishop Fellay's craw to kowtow before a man who is not a real bishop or priest.

Bishop Fellay does not believe that this man, or any Conciliar priest or bishop, is not a real priest or bishop. He believes they are true representatives of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Why would talking with them "stick in his craw"? If he is right, after all, and they are truly "the Church", he should be "kowtowing" before them.

Incredulous · « **Reply #7 on:** August 10, 2016, 08:43:16 AM »

You and Nctradcath are both right, and that explains the masonic nature of the whole charade.

In 2008, Fellay dedicates two issues of the Angelus to sell the sheep on the validity of the Novus ordo rite of Holy Orders.

But I tell you, once the deal is done, the xSPX is going to bust-out, into their full Consiliar "high church" glory.

They are going to play the role of the Novus ordo elite, with their long cassocks & incense, and will try to act as the newChurch's pastoral guides.

It's coming... that's what the new seminary in VA is about and why they are upgrading their current chapels to accommodate the Novus ordo novices into learning the xSPX's version of tradition.

It's going to be wild!

Fellay and his team actually think they can pull it off.
It's analogous to the Jєωs thinking they can rebuild the Temple.

AJNC · « **Reply #8 on:** August 14, 2016, 03:48:18 AM »

Has Archbishop Pozzo said anything about the Franciscans of the Immaculate Heart? This organization which had switched to the TLM would have been under the ambit of Pozzo's Ecclesia Dei Commission which handles such Indult groups. Why the silence all around the Trad circles on the suppression of this pro old rite group?

Incredulous · « **Reply #9 on:** August 14, 2016, 11:18:33 AM »

Silence you see... because Msgr. Fellay doesn't want to overthrow Francis with the Truth, rather, he just wants to be elevated by him.

miniPope Fellay... the head of "neo-tradtion".

Dogged Action Against the Order and the "Plans" to Overthrow Pope Francis

Commissar Volpi with Pope Francis (7 November 2014)
This exacerbates the issues that have already found no satisfactory answer: "Why this harshness up to this day, that neither the reasons for the provisional administration were explained about this blooming Order in the Summer of 2013, nor a time frame for the provisional government."

The official internet site which is controlled by the Commissioner of the Order offers no help to find answers to the open questions. Helpful on the other hand, is a blog that says of himself, is close to Commissioner Volpi. The blog describes itself "in accordance with the provisional administration of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate" and published an arid invective against the article by Matteo Matzuzzi.

In another entry from November 17, however, the anonymous blogger explained why Commissioner Volpi is so "concerned" that no Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate be incardinated in dioceses: "The very purpose of seeking incardination seems clear: it is about the creation of a platform, perhaps off shore, like the Archdiocese of Lipa in the Philippines and a Catholic minority diocese as in England, for the consecrated priests and former seminarians of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate to newly gather in the hope of a revolution against the current management of the universal Church."

To this Cascioli's response to Commissioner Volpi was: "In other words, the blog says, you would act in concert with whom you were invited to the meeting of the Episcopal Conference to Assisi, because a plot to overthrow Pope Francis was in progress, whom the clerics and former seminarians of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, were together with some bishops, who were to include in their dioceses. However, this would be really laughable, if it were not someone close to you who has spread an unofficial declaration of your whole approach. I hope, therefore, that you will want to clarify this account and also the blog that speaks on your behalf ". Signed, Riccardo Cascioli.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: MiL / CR / Chiesa e Postconcilio / Osservatore Romano