You probably know used car salesmen who are more honest than these guys Monday, June 19, 2017"AS WE ARE" OR "AS WE ARE NOW"? FROM A PRIEST OF THE FSSPX
"You can say everything you want: on January 18, 2002 in Campos there was not only a unilateral recognition of Campos by Rome, as some pretend, but there was a counterpart: the complicity of silence . How can it be otherwise? " (Mons Fellay ... in other times). SOURCE (extract) In his last editorial in the Fideliter magazine published in La Porte Latine, Fr. Bouchacourt takes up the famous phrase of Monsignor Lefebvre delivered in his sermon on June 29, 1980: "Rome must treat us as we are ...".
On this subject, we give the floor to a member of the SSPX.
FSSPX: "As we are"? ("Or as we are now"?)
Perhaps you have heard this rumor circulating today, and that you want Rome to recognize us "just as we are." This is what Monsignor Lefebvre tried to ask, but the facts showed that Rome did not understand this in the same way ... Another expression is equivalent to the first one: it is the "unilateral recognition". But once again, there Rome is not wrong. Read what I found in the Letter to Monsignor Fellay's friends and benefactors n ° 63 of January 2003. I'm sorry, it's about Campos, but your case looks a lot like ours ...
You can say everything you want: on January 18, 2002 in Campos there was not only a unilateral recognition of Campos by Rome, as some pretend, but there was a counterpart: the complicity of silence . And on the other hand, how can it be otherwise?
To explain this last sentence, we must return a little in the text. Fourteen years away, the situation has not changed at all. Judge yourselves:
We see in the Vatican offices a certain questioning of the way things have gone these past decades, a willingness in some to correct this drift .
That said for all the Burke and Schneider of yesterday and today.
But it is still evident that the principles governing present-day Rome remain those of the actualization of the council as we have experienced it for the last forty years. In the official documents and the general line, we do not see a fundamental questioning of these principles; On the contrary, they repeat to us that the movement initiated by Vatican II would be irreversible, which forces us to ask ourselves where the change of attitude comes from us. The answer lies, first of all, without excluding other explanations, in the pluralistic and ecumenical view that now prevails in the world of catholicity. This vision has ended by mixing the whole world without requiring any conversion, as Card. Kasper with respect to the Orthodox and even of the Jews. It is increasingly evident that in this perspective there will also be a small place for Tradition, but ... this view can not be accepted, just as the schoolteacher could not accept pluralism in mathematics .
Read again the sermon of Puy of 2016, or also the interview with Terres de mission (January 29, 2017), where Bishop Fellay explains the attitude of Rome towards the Fraternity as "a concern of the Holy Father for the excluded of all kinds". Understand the divorced women who have been remarried, etc.
But let's continue.
One day will come, we are absolutely sure, that Rome will return to His Tradition, restoring it in its place of honor, and we yearn with all our heart that blessed day.But for the moment we are not so advanced, and all illusion would be deadly for our society . We can verify this by examining the evolution of the events in Campos ... Campos, through his leader, Bishop Rifán, affirms to the four winds that nothing has changed, that the priests of the Apostolic Administration remain as traditional as before, which is The essence of what was agreed to them, and the reason for their adherence to the Roman proposition: the ratification of the traditional position .
And a little lower, this phrase that makes me think so much in the new information site of the Fraternity:
This attitude of implicit duplicity has become the norm in the new situation in which they are: underline the points of the present pontificate that seem favorable, are omitted under a reverential silence what is wrong ...
And here is the phrase quoted in the headline:
You can say everything you want: on January 18, 2002 in Campos there was not only a unilateral recognition of Campos by Rome, as some pretend, but there was a counterpart: the complicity of silence. And on the other hand, how can it be otherwise? It is clear that now Campos has something to lose and they fear losing that something , and that the path of commitment that they chose is not to lose it."We Brazilians are men of peace. You Frenchmen always fight . " To have peace with Rome, we must stop fighting. No longer look at the global situation of the Church, they are satisfied with the Roman gesture towards a small group of 25 priests to say that the situation of need no longer exists in the Church, because with the granting of a traditional bishop, a new Law situation has been created ... For a tree they forget the forest.
The following also applies very well to our situation:
Thus, little by little, the combat is attenuated and is finished by adjusting to the situation. In Campos everything that is positively traditional is preserved, certainly, so that the faithful do not see the change, except the most sagacious, who observe the tendency to speak more and more respectfully of the present Roman declarations and events, omitting the warnings of On the deviations of today ; The great danger is then to settle for the situation and no longer try to remedy it. For us, before casting ourselves, we want the certainty of Rome's will to sustain the Tradition, the signs of a conversion ... To sum up, we must affirm that Campos, despite the fact that they say the opposite, slowly, under the guidance of his new Bishop are being molded to the conciliar spirit. Rome does not ask for more at the moment .
But you exaggerate, you will tell me ... Our situation is not at this point! We are strong! (And humble?)
Now read the following:
It will be objected perhaps that our arguments are very weak, subtle and have no weight in the Roman offer to regularize our situation. We reply that the abstract consideration, in abstract, of the proposition of the Apostolic Administration is as magnificent as the plan of a beautiful mansion proposed by an architect. The real question and the real problem do not lie in the concrete: On what ground will the mansion be built? On the shifting sands of Vatican II or on this stone of Tradition that goes back to the first of the Apostles? To ensure our future, we are obliged to ask today's Rome for clarity about its adherence to Rome yesterday.When the authorities have clearly reaffirmed the facts and have effectively returned to the "Nihil novi nisi quod traditum est", then "we" will not constitute a problem. And we implore God to hasten that day where the whole Church will flourish, having rediscovered the secret of her past strength, freed from this mentality of which Paul VI said "that it is of a non-Catholic nature. It may prevail.She will never be the Church. It is necessary that there be a small flock, no matter how small . "
In this state of mind, it is at least reckless to speak of "the seal" (cf. Interview from January 29 to Terres de mission), and in any case it is dishonest to say that "everything can happen" (interview with Father Nély In Présent). Unless we have changed ... Rome is not afraid to treat us as we are "as we are" ... nowadays.
A priest of the Fraternity Saint Pius X