Skip to comments.Pope Benedict XVI meets (should read 'to meet' with) ‘rebel’ cleric
Posted on 08/28/2005 4:02:59 PM PDT by NYer
CASTELGANDOLFO, Italy: Pope Benedict XVI, who has made reconciliation among Christians a priority of his pontificate, will on Monday meet the leader of a schismatic group of ultra-traditionalists, according to a statement by the group.
The Vatican has neither confirmed nor denied that the meeting will take place, but if it does it could be the first step to bringing the defiant traditionalists back into the Catholic fold, observers said.
Bernard Fellay, the superior general of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, based in Econe, Switzerland, will meet the Pope at his country residence here, the Fraternity said in a brief communiqué August 24.
Fellay was one of four men illegally consecrated as bishops by the late leader of the ultra-traditionalists, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
That led to the excommunication in 1988 of Lefebvre, Fellay and the other three illegal bishops and anyone who follows them, meaning that the Vatican considers the breakaway traditionalists to be heretics.
Since then, Fellay has said he held a brief meeting with Pope John Paul II in December 2000 at which nothing of importance was discussed. But he has reportedly recently been in touch with Colombian Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, a pillar of conservatism at the Vatican.
Various sources said the cardinal, who in 1988 was appointed head of a commission called Ecclesia Dei with the task of ending the schism, would be present at Mondays meeting.
The Lefebvrists reject the sweeping changes introduced by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in the 1960s, and particularly the decision to abolish the old Tridentine form of the Mass and replace Latin with vernacular languages more accessible to the ordinary faithful.
Lefebvre died in 1991, since when the ultra-traditionalist movement, which sees the Vatican as too liberal, has become entrenched around the world.
In a gesture of conciliation, Castrillon Hoyos celebrated Mass in Latin according to the Tridentine rite in the Roma basilica of Saint Mary Major five years ago. But the Fraternity replied by saying it did not intend at all to modify its principles and its policy. The so abundant fruits of graces on the one hand, the conciliar disaster on the other hand, only reinforce its determination to preserve the Catholic tradition.
That position has barely altered since, with Fellay stating that if he were received by the Pope he would again insist on restoration of the Tridentine Mass and a lifting of the excommunication.
Those are the two preliminary conditions for reunion, he said recently.
The election of Benedict XVI in April was a glimmer of hope, Fellay said. As Vatican head of doctrine, the German-born Pope, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, made no secret of his attachment to traditionalism or to the use of Latin.
He was the architect of a ruling 20 years ago that allowed reintroduction of Latin in the Mass under the strict control of the bishops. Today, the Vatican could allow greater possibilities to celebrate the Mass according to the pre-Vatican Council rite, Archbishop Jean-Pierre Ricard of Bordeaux told the French Catholic daily La Croix. Ricard is a member of the Ecclesia Dei commission.
This meeting is scheduled for Monday, August 29, 2005. I ask all of you to please offer up prayers tonight for a successful outcome. May our Lord guide all involved and may the Holy Spirit inspire those present at this meeting. May our Blessed Mother, who always points to her Son, intercede on their behalf.
Hail Marys going!
In a gesture of conciliation, Castrillon Hoyos celebrated Mass in Latin according to the Tridentine rite in the Roma[n] basilica of Saint Mary Major five years ago.
It was May 2003. A little over two years ago.
He [Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger] was the architect of a ruling 20 years ago that allowed reintroduction of Latin in the Mass under the strict control of the bishops.
I'm assuming the author is referruing to Ecclesia Dei Adflicta even though it didn't address the "reintroduction of Latin in the Mass under the strict control of the bishops." Ecclesia Dei Adflicta was written 17 years ago, not 20.
Maybe the author wrote this piece three years in the future.
Having said that, I am praying hard that this meeting will go well.
A change of religion took place subsequent to Vatican II wherein the post-Vatican II religion bears no resemblance at all to the pre-Vatican II religion.
It was, in effect, a drastic change of religion.
Despite the postings of well meaning neo-catholics who have attempted to fuse the pre- and post Vatican II church (mainly by cutting and pasting documents that nobody reads or obeys) the basic and huge differences remain.
Since Vatican II offered no new dogma there is nothing for the amateur theologians to discuss, there's no dogmatically defined differences. What there is, is a huge difference in praxis, culture, a new calendar, a new Bible translation (the New American Bible), a new constantly-evolving liturgy.
I go to both the Tridentine Mass and the Novus Ordo and I cannot resolve the two.
I am in the same quandary.
The Mass that Pope Pius X decreed as one that would remain unchanged until the Second Coming, was tossed out the window by the modernists of Vatican II.
As many know, it was replaced by one that was so lacking in respect to our Creator and our Savior and Founder of the Church, Jesus Christ, as to make any recognizable worship disappear.
As an ever increasing attention garnering attraction in the main ring we have false ecumenism that has become rampant in the modern Church of Vatican II.
There are several popes that will owe an explanation to their Maker over why they permitted this to remain unchallenged and not reversed.
I've shown up at Mass and seen a few Tridentine Masses, I've read Sancrosanctum Conciliam many times and I've shown up at Mass and seen a Novus Ordo Mass countless times. The document does not explain the difference between the two.
Where does liturgical abuse begin and Novus Ordo orthodoxy end? Marty Haugen music? Tambourines in the folk band jamming the sanctuary? I can cannot claim to ever seen anything as outrageous as liturgical dancing or a clown Mass. Everything I see is just accepted by everybody but the fact remains that it does not square with the Tridentine Mass nor with the intent of the Vatican II document.
The Novus Ordo is not controllable and, besides, everybody loves it the way it is.
I've come to the conclusion that the two Masses represent different religions and, ultimately, I've gotta decide between the two.
Perhaps the Pope will provide a way out of this conundrum.
Perhaps I just need to survive on the crumbs brushed off the plate and exclusively drive the 30 miles to the Tridentine...the parish around the corner from me is lost and spiritually dangerous in some ways...The Novus Ordo Mass there depresses me.