Translation by unbrandable on cor-marie
http://cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/fr-chautard-and-the-redlight-position.4317/#post-7566http://www.francefidele.org/Communiqué of the USML
September 8, 2016
"The members of the Union Sacerdotale Marcel Lefebvre met on Wednesday, August 31, 2016, at the hermitage of Saint Agobard in the Basque Country. The following were present: H.E. Bishop Faure; Fr. Bruno, coordinator; Fathers Pivert, Trincado, Pinaud, Rioult, Salenave. They make known that:
They welcome a new member in the Union Sacerdotale Marcel Lefebvre, Father Zendejas, ordained in 1988. He left the Society of St. Pius X on September 15, 2014 and currently exercises his ministry in the USA, in the state of New York.
They have found that, due to the efficiency of the Union Sacerdotale Marcel Lefebvre, the task of coordination was no longer necessary. They would like to thank Fr. Bruno for his services in this office which he held for two years.
As in the past, decisions are taken by mutual agreement between the members of the Union Sacerdotale Marcel Lefebvre.
The France Fidele website is the official website of the Union.
To contact the Union Sacerdotale Marcel Lefebvre, the faithful can contact one of its members or the secretary through the France Fidele website.
The Union Sacerdotale Marcel Lefebvre reminds the Catholic faithful that they cannot in good conscience attend a Mass by a priest who has rallied with modernist Rome and that the distinction between the Society of St. Pius X and a rallied society has almost disappeared, as evidenced by the statements of Mgr. Pozzo and Bishop Fellay.
They entrust their apostolate to Divine Providence through the hands of the Blessed Virgin Mary. "
HERE ARE SOME CLARIFICATIONS, from Fr. Trincado:About the declaration of the Priestly Union Marcel Lefebvre, which states:
“The Priestly Union Marcel Lefebvre reminds the Catholic faithful that in conscience they cannot attend the mass of a priest rallié to the modernist Rome, and that the distinction between the SSPX and the other rallié societies practically no longer exists, as evidenced by the statements of Bishop Pozzo and Bishop Fellay”.
"Red light"? No, but the constant position of our three Bishops and de priests of the USML. This means that we can’t attend the masses of a rallié priest of the SSPX, but we can attend the mass of a priest not rallié of the SSPX, however, the SSPX practically no longer distinguishes itself from the ralliés Societies.
Today I have clarified several doubts and objections to an American parishioner. I think this may interest you.
Dear....
I will try to clarify some of the your doubts and objections.
First very important point: "reconciled" is a mistranslation of "rallié".
1) It would seem with this announcement, that the USML has become a "red light" association;
But think that's a mistake.
2) Why now? What precipitated this abrupt announcement?
The idea to say something about that comes from French priests. For what I remember, nobody thought about Fr. Pfeiffer and the “red light”. This discussion has been rather in USA and between English speakers, not in France, Asia and Latin America.
3) Why is this announcement coming from the USML, rather than the SAJM?
Very simple: because the meeting of August 31 was a meeting of the USML, not SAJM.
Very simple: Frs. Bruno, Pivert, Salenave, Rioult, and Pinaud are not members of SAJM.
4) Why is Fr. Zendejas joining the USML, rather than the SAJM?
Fr. Zendejas joined to the SAJM before he joined the USML.
5) Does this announcement represent a "walking back" on the SAJM, and the heirarchical structure it would provide?
Absolutely not. Nobody in the meeting thought of something like that.
6) The reference to the "recent comments of Archbishop Pozzo and Bishop Fellay" is misconstrued (deliberately?): The recent announcement did NOT say that Bishop Fellay had accepted the offer of a personal prelature, but rather that Bishop Fellay accepted that when a deal is reached, it will be under the form of a personal prelature.
The text refers to the set of the latest statements of Bp. Pozzo and Bp. Fellay, which are directed to the acceptance of the regularization of the SSPX.
7) How then can this comment serve as a legitimate pretext for adopting this position?
I seem that this doubt has been clarified.
8) How could it not have been foreseen that this abrupt announcement would further divide the faithful?
I seem that this doubt has been clarified.
9) One gets the impression that there was a "hard-liner" among you who agitated for this announcement, and that you consented to placate him?
It is a false impression.
10) Or was it thought that a tougher stance would appeal to the faithful (even as the announcement comes from the weaker USML, instead of the stronger SAJM)?
I seem that this doubt has been clarified: the meeting of August 31 was a meeting of the USML, not of the SAJM.
11) The private explanation I received (i.e., That the announcement means we cannot attend an SSPX Mass said by a priest who wants to reconcile with unconverted Rome, but we can attend an SSPX Mass by a priest who does not want to reconcile with unconverted Rome) does not suffice, since the public words say otherwise.
That explanation is the exact literal meaning of the text of the USML.
12) The Pfeifferians are already publishing that your announcement has adopted the "red light" position, yet you will notice they are no closer to joining you because of it (while conversely, some of the faithful will move away from you because of it). The effect is already bad.
They do not understand well. The original text in French and the translation to Spanish are sufficiently clear. The translation to English that you put is faulty. If there is not a correct translation to English, is inevitable that there are misinterpretations.
God bless you.
PRTC
(...)
Yesterday, the USML announced:
"The members of the Priestly Marcel Lefebvre Union met Wednesday, August 31, 2016, at the chapel Saint Agobard the Basque Country, namely HE. Bishop Faure, Bruno R. P., Coordinator, Mr Pivert the abbots Trincado, Pinaud, Rioult, Salenave. They know that:
They welcome a new member of the Priestly Union Marcel Lefebvre, Father Zendejas, ordained in 1988. He left the SSPX September 15, 2014 and exercised his ministry is currently in the USA, in the New -York.
They found that, due to the good functioning of the Union Priestly Marcel Lefebvre, the coordination burden was no longer necessary. They would like to thank Bruno R. P. for his services in that office which he held for two years.
As before, decisions are taken by mutual agreement between the members of the Priestly Union Marcel Lefebvre.
The website France Faithful is the official website of the Union.
To contact the Priestly Union Marcel Lefebvre, the faithful can turn to one of its members or the secretariat through the website France Faithful.
The Priestly Union Marcel Lefebvre reminds Catholics that they can not conscientiously attend Mass of a priest reconciled to modernist Rome, and that the distinction between the SSPX and other reconciled groups has almost disappeared, as evidenced by the statements of Archbishop Pozzo and Bishop Fellay.
They entrust their apostolate Divine Providence through the hands of the Blessed Virgin. "
http://www.francefidele.org/ Some pertinent thoughts and questions regarding this announcement:
1) It would seem with this announcement, that the USML has become a "red light" association;
2) Why now? What precipitated this abrupt announcement?
3) Why is this announcement coming from the USML, rather than the SAJM?
4) Why is Fr. Zendejas joining the USML, rather than the SAJM?
5) Does this announcement represent a "walking back" on the SAJM, and the heirarchical structure it would provide?
6) The reference to the "recent comments of Archbishop Pozzo and Bishop Fellay" is misconstrued (deliberately?): The recent announcement did NOT say that Bishop Fellay had accepted the offer of a personal prelature, but rather that Bishop Fellay accepted that when a deal is reached, it will be under the form of a personal prelature.
7) How then can this comment serve as a legitimate pretext for adopting this position?
8) How could it not have been foreseen that this abrupt announcement would further divide the faithful?
9) One gets the impression that there was a "hard-liner" among you who agitated for this announcement, and that you consented to placate him?
10) Or was it thought that a tougher stance would appeal to the faithful (even as the announcement comes from the weaker USML, instead of the stronger SAJM)?
11) The private explanation I received (i.e., That the announcement means we cannot attend an SSPX Mass said by a priest who wants to reconcile with unconverted Rome, but we can attend an SSPX Mass by a priest who does not want to reconcile with unconverted Rome) does not suffice, since the public words say otherwise.
12) The Pfeifferians are already publishing that your announcement has adopted the "red light" position, yet you will notice they are no closer to joining you because of it (while conversely, some of the faithful will move away from you because of it). The effect is already bad.
Please understand that I address these questions to you only privately, and with respect.
Dear ....,
The USML is a group of priests friends, almost all of France. There is no superior nor obedience in the USML. The USML have not canonical existence. So the USML can not incardinate. The USML is not a congregation but is an useful means of coordination for priests of the Resistance. That is the principal purpose of the USML.
The SAJM, however, is a congregation erected according to canon law. SAJM can incardinate, and then in a few months, when the tonsure be given at the seminary of Avrillé, there will be incardination of seminarians (Can 111, CIC 1917). Any priest who will come to the Resistance and wants to be incardinated, will can ask to be incardinated in the SAJM. The congregation has a Superior General that is Bp. Faure, and members have the duty of obey him. The purpose of the SAJM is stated in the decree of erection.
No law forbids a cleric who is incardinated in a congregation also belong to an association that not incardinate. So a priest may belong to the USML and to the SAJM simultaneously.
Topic: USML now Red-light? (Read 3694 times)