Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lefebrivists demand (2nd Vatican) Council be “corrected,” not interpreted
CNA ^ | October 30, 2007

Posted on 10/31/2007 11:23:29 AM PDT by NYer

Rome, Oct 30, 2007 / 01:05 pm (CNA).- In an interview with Italian journalist Paolo Luigi Rodari, the author of the blog “Palazzo Apostolico,” Bernard Fellay, the superior general of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X, said the schismatic movement demands not only a “correct interpretation” of Vatican II, but that the Council documents actually be changed.

Fellay defended his fellow excommunicated bishop, Ricard Williamson, identified by some in the media as leader of the “intransigent wing” of the fraternity.  Fellay said, “Williamson and I are in agreement that it would be difficult to re-enter to the Church as it currently is.”

“The reasons are simple,” Fellay said, because “Benedict XVI has liberalized the ancient rite,” yet he has been criticized “by the majority of the bishops.”  “What should we do? Re-enter the Church just to be insulted by these people?” he said.

“In addition to the ancient rite,” he continued, “the problem for us is the words Pope Benedict has dedicated to Vatican II,” because “the rupture with the past is directly related, unfortunately, to some texts of Vatican II and these texts, in some way, should be revised.”

“Ratzinger should prepare for a direct revision of the Council texts and not just denounce their incorrect hermeneutic (interpretation),” Fellay went on.  He cited as an example the declaration on religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae.  According to Fellay, the document subjects the Church to the authority of the State. “In my opinion it should be the opposite: the State should submit to the Catholic faith and recognize that it is the religion of the State.”

Fellay said he has maintained ongoing correspondence with Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, president of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, “but no common working document exists yet.”  “I remain confident, however, because all of our contact up to this point has been excellent,” he said.



TOPICS: Catholic
KEYWORDS: lefebvre; sspx; vatican; vcii

1 posted on 10/31/2007 11:23:31 AM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...

This time, it’s not me saying it but Bernard Fellay.


2 posted on 10/31/2007 11:24:29 AM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
“What should we do? Re-enter the Church just to be insulted by these people?”

Fascinating choice of words, there.

3 posted on 10/31/2007 11:29:52 AM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Fellay and Williamson are clowns, pure and simple.

They think that they can dictate rules for a Church to which they do not belong.

4 posted on 10/31/2007 11:30:27 AM PDT by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Fellay defended his fellow excommunicated bishop, Ricard Williamson, identified by some in the media as leader of the “intransigent wing” of the fraternity. Fellay said, “Williamson and I are in agreement that it would be difficult to re-enter to the Church as it currently is.”

Bye!

Various Councils of the Church have been enormous successes and others have been flops. Some have been implemented fully and others have died in the breach. The Church will have to wait 200 years before the fruit borne by Vatican II is fully known. The Holy Spirit is leading the way. Whither He goeth, we must follow.

5 posted on 10/31/2007 11:30:40 AM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

There has been speculation on whether the word he used was “re-enter.” If it was, isn’t it an admission on his part that they’re at least not entirely in union with the Catholic Church?


6 posted on 10/31/2007 11:30:46 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Ummmmmmm, yup!


7 posted on 10/31/2007 11:33:36 AM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer
...he has been criticized “by the majority of the bishops.”

I haven't seen a shred of evidence that a "majority" of bishops have criticized the Motu Proprio. A few have, and a few seem to be misinterpreting it, based on Fr. Zuhlsdorf's site, but I see no evidence that a majority are critical or are even opposed to its implementation. Boy, these people are whiners. Get a "stable group" together and petition a priest in full communion with the successor of Peter. Take advantage of the Motu Proprio rather than forever whining about the duly constituted authorities in the Church (the Pope has supreme governance of the Church under Vatican I, which these people apparently dissent from as much as Vatican II).

According to Fellay, the [Vatican II] document subjects the Church to the authority of the State.

It says no such thing. I would prefer an interpretation of the Vatican II documents according to an hermeneutic of continuity by the Pope and Magisterium rather than the tendentious and bad faith interpretation of these people. And Catholic teaching has always been that a council of bishops in communion with the successor of Peter and presided over or affirmed by him is part of the Magisterium of the Church. These people simply want to pick and choose. And while a Catholic confessional state might be the ideal, to raise this to an absolute requirement of the deposit of faith is to ignore that the Church has flourished and can flourish in many different socio-political systems, and that there is a strong prudential component to how society is to be structured, so long as the freedom of the Church is ensured and the common good is served.

8 posted on 10/31/2007 11:43:05 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
“The reasons are simple,” Fellay said, because “Benedict XVI has liberalized the ancient rite,” yet he has been criticized “by the majority of the bishops.” “What should we do? Re-enter the Church just to be insulted by these people?” he said.

Wimp. He sounds like Rodney Dangerfield; "I can't get no respect".

So the goal posts have moved. Previously it was "free up the Tridentine Rite". Now it's "OK, the Tridentine Rite has been de-indulted, but quit insulting us!" Poor baby! Welcome to our world, Bishop. Those of us who've remained within the Church have had to put up with insults for nigh on 40 years. We've been fighting loony catechesis, rotten liturgies, and heretical homilies from within and getting our faces slapped in the process. Too bad you're too precious to come join us. Oh sorry, that's right, we're collaborators.

If ever there was a lame excuse for staying on the outer, this is it. Totally lacking in credibility. The real truth is that this has nothing to do with the Pope and the Catholic Church and everything to do with SSPX internal politics. Fellay and Williamson are not on the same page, despite what Fellay says. He's trying to buy time.

Sorry bishop, the saint doesn't walk off in a huff. He takes the insults gladly for love of God and the Church and offers them up to God.

I sure hope that this is a mistranslation or something.

9 posted on 10/31/2007 11:49:45 AM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow; Unam Sanctam; Pyro7480; Frank Sheed
So the goal posts have moved.

He will never be satisfied, until VCII is overturned by the Church, the NO totally abandoned and the TLM fully restored, because that is the 'world' of his Church and he believe it is the authentic one. The longer one remains in schism, the more difficult it is to return.

10 posted on 10/31/2007 11:54:13 AM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

I think we will see John Hepworth (former Catholic Priest now Archbishop of the TAC) re-enter the Church long before this guy.

He’s sounding more and more like Patricia Fessen.....and the the Bishopettes


11 posted on 10/31/2007 12:00:06 PM PDT by Cheverus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

>>Those of us who’ve remained within the Church have had to put up with insults for nigh on 40 years. <<

I’m gonna give ya a big AMEN on that!!!


12 posted on 10/31/2007 1:14:18 PM PDT by netmilsmom (To attack one section of Christianity in this day and age, is to waste time .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Councils are not overturned. They may NOT be implemented (over time), they may be second guessed through encyclicals, they may be slowly reversed, they may just drop off the chart. They are not “anathematized” to my knowledge; they can become irrelevant.

This is putting the goal post on the moon and saying we can’t get there from here (someone actually told me that once when I asked for directions!).

F


13 posted on 10/31/2007 1:24:05 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All
Fr. Z. speaks!

31 October 2007

Is Bp. Fellay saying the SSPX is “outside the Church”?

CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 9:17 am

In a CNA story we read the following:

My emphases and comments:

Lefebrivists [sic] demand Council be “corrected,” not interpreted


Rome, Oct 30, 2007 / 01:05 pm (CNA).- In an interview with Italian journalist Paolo Luigi Rodari, the author of the blog “Palazzo Apostolico,” Bernard Fellay, the superior general of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X, said the schismatic movement demands not only a “correct interpretation” of Vatican II, but that the Council documents actually be changed. [Right.  That’s gonna happen.]

Fellay defended his fellow excommunicated bishop, Ricard Williamson, identified by some in the media as leader of the “intransigent wing” of the fraternity.  Fellay said, “Williamson and I are in agreement that it would be difficult to re-enter to [sic] the Church as it currently is.”

“The reasons are simple,” Fellay said, because “Benedict XVI has liberalized the ancient rite,” yet he has been criticized “by the majority of the bishops.”  “What should we do? Re-enter the Church just to be insulted by these people?” he said.  [Because it’s all about us.]

“In addition to the ancient rite,” he continued, “the problem for us is the words Pope Benedict has dedicated to Vatican II,” because “the rupture with the past is directly related, unfortunately, to some texts of Vatican II and these texts, in some way, should be revised.”

“Ratzinger should prepare for a direct revision of the Council texts and not just denounce their incorrect hermeneutic (interpretation),” Fellay went on.  He cited as an example the declaration on religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae.  [I have maintained for a long time that this is the single biggest problem with them.] According to Fellay, the document subjects the Church to the authority of the State. “In my opinion it should be the opposite: the State should submit to the Catholic faith and recognize that it is the religion of the State.” 

Fellay said he has maintained ongoing correspondence with Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, president of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, “but no common working document exists yet.”  “I remain confident, however, because all of our contact up to this point has been excellent,” he said.

 

A couple cautious observations can be made… and I mean cautious.

First, if Fellay can speak about "reentering" then that suggests he thinks they are "outside" the Church in some way.  I would like to hear the French of that statement.  Still, there is some phrase involving "outside the Church… something something something something" rattling around in my memory… what could it be?

Second, Fellay does not dispute that Vatican II was a Council of the Church.  Some on the hard right do.

Third, a Pope can require changes to the documents of Councils before he ratifies and promulgates them.   Is Fellay verging on assuming to himself the prerogatives of Popes?  That is, does he think that he is the one with the charism in the Church to decided how the documents of Councils should be changed?

Fourth, what’s with the deal about being insulted?  

Finally, when the late Archbishop, a great man in his day and a great missionary, took his bat and ball and went home to Econe, he left many people still in the Church to carry out a long and difficult task of promoting from within the Church the older form of Mass and the spirituality that flows from it. 

They are the people who truly endured the insults.

If Bp. Fellay really thinks that before the SSPX can reenter the Church, the Roman Pontiff must correct Council documents, then I wonder if they really have any serious desire to "reenter the Church".  

It sounds as if he has thrown out a proposition that he knows is a non-starter.


14 posted on 10/31/2007 1:30:10 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed
If Bp. Fellay really thinks that before the SSPX can reenter the Church, the Roman Pontiff must correct Council documents, then I wonder if they really have any serious desire to "reenter the Church".

When I posited that remark recently, I was unmercifully attacked. He left the Church 40 years ago and is now comfortable with its organization. Pray for him and his followers.

15 posted on 10/31/2007 1:38:34 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“Williamson and I are in agreement that it would be difficult to re-enter to the Church as it currently is.”

These men are not Catholic.


16 posted on 10/31/2007 2:15:50 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Cardinal Castrillón: SSPX not in schism
Catholics who attend SSPX masses not schismatic

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mershon/070410


17 posted on 10/31/2007 2:24:21 PM PDT by Ozone34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed

I think the SSPX is way on the self-indulgent side, personally, and I do not think they were as heroic as the people who stayed in the Church and kept pushing for the Old Rite and the True Faith - and suffered greviously as a result.

However, as for VatII, while earlier councils may have been slow and chaotic in implementation, I don’t think any of them led to a collapse on the scale of the VII collapse. It may not be purely a situation of post hoc, propter hoc (since many other disruptive things were happening in the world at that time), but on the other hand, one cannot deny the fact that VII has been invoked by all the people in the last 40 years who have wanted or tried to destroy the Faith.

VatII, however, was a pastoral council and not a doctrinal council. This means that the documents were, to some extent, advisory. I’m not sure to what extent they were officially promulgated, because they weren’t meant to legislate. Even the Novus Ordo was not mandated by them, but came into existence after the Council. The documents are very vague and fuzzy and I think they actually could stand a review. So I don’t think this is a bad point.

However, Fellay certainly doesn’t have the right to demand anything on this level, nor does he have the right to impose the conditions. From what I’ve read about him, I’m actually a little surprised that his statement would be this extreme.


18 posted on 10/31/2007 3:05:19 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NYer
When I posited that remark recently, I was unmercifully attacked.

So was Jesus, NYer. He only told the Truth and you will find Him on the intersection of two wooden beams. Flannery O'Connor, a great Catholic novelist, had it right: "“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you odd.” That is the opinion of most people about someone who speaks real Truth...that they are odd or out of sync with the rest of humanity.

19 posted on 10/31/2007 3:46:05 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed; netmilsmom; maryz
Finally, when the late Archbishop, a great man in his day and a great missionary, took his bat and ball and went home to Econe, he left many people still in the Church to carry out a long and difficult task of promoting from within the Church the older form of Mass and the spirituality that flows from it. 

They are the people who truly endured the insults.

Father Z is absolutely right. Those who remained faithful to the Magisterium while supporting a restoration of the TLM through prayer and sacrifice, are the ones who endured ... and continue to do so ... the insults of those bishops and priests who have defied its restoration. Those who followed Fellay enjoyed the beauty of the Tridentine Rite outside the Catholic Church. Are they not 'protestants'?

20 posted on 10/31/2007 3:57:45 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Please let me remind everyone that this is a translation. It was an Italian paper, an informal conversation, not a position paper or even a statement nailed to the door of St. Peter’s Basilica, Fellay is French, and we read English, and so many are ready to jump to conclusions.

The SSPX has always maintained they are inside the Church; some Cardinals apparently agree. No way they are changing that stance in such an interview. That remark alone throws much doubt on the translation and on many of the points made in this thread.

The SSPX needs some pruning no doubt but I don’t understand why Catholics seem anxious to cut ties with some of their own.

I don’t see this interview as changing anything in the relations.


21 posted on 10/31/2007 4:14:59 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman (Just say no to circular firing squads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ozone34
Catholics who attend SSPX masses not schismatic

Under the following condition:

"If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin."

That said, and given the Holy Father's Motu Proprio, there should be nothing to prevent those who left, in order to attend the TLM, from returning, right? Where are they?

22 posted on 10/31/2007 4:17:16 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed

I don’t speak for them but I believe they would be concerned they could be in the Church and perhaps promptly asked to leave dioceses they are in; their pastoral work would be held hostage by modernist clergy. They see souls to be saved and they are not inclined to wait for the Archbishop of SF for example to morph into someone who would accept them. I understand the need for legalities but there is a dire need for authentic pastoral work, best divorced however from hyperbolic polemics.


23 posted on 10/31/2007 4:22:29 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman (Just say no to circular firing squads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

I would agree that making a Catholic confessional state in 2007 would be a waste of pastoral activity. Yet, the philosophy and theology that would argue for that should not be neglected by our clergy.


24 posted on 10/31/2007 4:25:48 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman (Just say no to circular firing squads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed
That is the opinion of most people about someone who speaks real Truth...that they are odd or out of sync with the rest of humanity.

You've got that right! One of the wayward relatives sent me this the other day.


Nunzilla
This fire-breathing wind-up sister trudges straight out of a Catholic-school student's nightmare like a determined disciplinary force, with green eyes blazing and sparks flying from her mouth.

Amazing the perception the relatives (for whom I pray each night) have of me.

25 posted on 10/31/2007 4:26:12 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Piers-the-Ploughman
It was an Italian paper, an informal conversation, not a position paper or even a statement nailed to the door of St. Peter’s Basilica, Fellay is French, and we read English, and so many are ready to jump to conclusions.

Fair enough. Can you post a link to the original French text and the Italian newspaper? I read both languages fluently.

26 posted on 10/31/2007 4:28:46 PM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYer

the MP has provided for many more TLMs and more will come. But I don’t think even this time next year the Catholic liturgy will be where Fr Z’s interpretation of B16 desires would expect it to be. Some see only the work their group has done and ignore work done by others; I believe that both Catholics in and out of normal status have helped bring about the MP. As time goes on and finally there is that New Spingtime, for lack of a better phrase, an irregular status will be more a burden than a help.


27 posted on 10/31/2007 4:39:26 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman (Just say no to circular firing squads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NYer

NYer, I can not because I will admit before all FR, I do not know how to post articles. There may be a link with Fr Z. But then we’d have to TRUST your translation, lol.

As an aside, I think it is great that you post articles challenging our reformed brethren.


28 posted on 10/31/2007 4:43:51 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman (Just say no to circular firing squads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Piers-the-Ploughman

I haven’t seen either version (French or Italian) but someone who had seen the French said that the phrasing was more suggestive of “coming back into the structure,” that is, the juridical control of the Church. That seems like a more logical option.

I notice nobody has taken up the more important thing he said, however, which was about the documents of VatII.

Personally, I think they suffered from so much vagueness that you could find whatever you wanted in them. And many evil people did just that, and have invoked VatII as their reason for doing everything from clown masses to women’s “ordination.”

I think there would be nothing wrong in seriously reexamining the documents and seeing if there are some clarifications that should be made. VatII was not a doctrinal council and did not mandate the things that were later done in its name. But the fact that it is cited by so many evil people as a pretext for their bizarre actions makes me think that it wouldn’t be a bad idea to reexamine and perhaps officially interpret some of its documents.


29 posted on 10/31/2007 4:51:55 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All

I think the first paragraph may explain some of the translation:

the term “schismatic” was used in first paragraph. It could easily explain a bias in the report. Don’t we see this all the time in US media? Is is possible the CNA, whatever that is, wants to paint the SSPX negatively? As much as I like Fox, it is not perfectly fair and balanced either.

Nothing much as changed; they’re closer, but how close, we can not and do not need to know, except that unity is another cause for joy.


30 posted on 10/31/2007 4:59:32 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman (Just say no to circular firing squads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed

Way to go, Frank!


31 posted on 10/31/2007 6:04:53 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Piers-the-Ploughman
The SSPX schismatics and excommunicati are NOT our own as ruled by Pope John Paul II. They were excommunicated and expelled from the Roman Catholic Church. That this or that cardinal either does not get the picture or refuses reality (including Dario Cardinal Castrillon de Hoyos) does not give any cardinal the authority to overrule papal judgements. The Church too has a rule of law, even as a papal monarchy. The pontiff may act in spite of Canon Law of which He alone is the legislator. Cardinals, schismatics and excommunicati are not given that authority by anyone and most certainly not by God.

The "conclusions" were those of the judgment of Pope John Paul II in Ecclesia Dei and not of posters here. SSPX, its excommunicated and schismatic leaders and its adherents remain defiant, disobedient, disrespectfulof papal authority, and revolutionaries against Holy Mother the Church to this day with few noted exceptions.

32 posted on 10/31/2007 6:15:00 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

“You do me great honor!” says Salieri to Mozart.

;-o)


33 posted on 10/31/2007 6:19:57 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I pray for those nuns each and every day, NYer. They kept me from the ‘easy path.’

My aunt was a Sister for 53 years. She was a cardiac nurse and when she died, she had only one small box of possessions no bigger than an egg box. My greatest treasure is the crucifix that was blessed and hers alone. It hangs on my bedroom wall.

F


34 posted on 10/31/2007 6:23:53 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

I hate to say it but it doesn’t matter how the Vatican tries to placate them they will just ask for more.


35 posted on 10/31/2007 6:35:02 PM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I think this is it but not positive:

Il Motu Proprio non basta
I lefebvriani restano fuori

«Perché il Papa consente ai vescovi di disobbedire?»

Econe. È qui, nel piccolo villaggio della valle del Rodano, sul versante svizzero delle Alpi Pennine, che nel 1969 Marcel Lefebvre si ritirò con un manipolo di seminaristi e fondò la Fraternità Sacerdotale San Pio X.

Lo scopo dichiarato era fuggire da Roma, la città che aveva aperto le sue porte al Concilio Vaticano II, la città dove, come disse lui stesso, «non era più possibile trovare un seminario che desse ai giovani aspiranti al sacerdozio la formazione che la Chiesa ha sempre dato loro e che sola può farne degli autentici sacerdoti cattolici». Parole lapidarie e che, negli anni, portarono il vescovo francese a una sempre più netta presa di distanza da Roma. Fino a quel 30 giugno 1988 quando il vescovo francese ordinò autonomamente quattro vescovi e si poneva, ipso facto , nella scomunica latae sententiae . Una scomunica ancora oggi in vigore.
A Econe, la sede della Fraternità ha mura alte e spesse. Dentro, non soltanto il vento dello Spirito del Concilio, ma lo stesso Concilio pare non sia mai riuscito a entrare. I battenti, qui, sono sempre rimasti chiusi per gli spifferi giudicati malsani. Fumo di Satana, li chiamava Paolo VI, e qui, a Econe, sono pronti a giurare che Montini si riferisse alla riforma della Chiesa inaugurata dal Vaticano II. E, infatti, il tempo, sulla valle del Rodano, sembra essere fermo a Eugenio Pacelli, all’ultimo Pontefice prima dello sbarco a Roma dei padri conciliari, prima dell’apertura della sacra assise, prima dell’arrivo nella Chiesa della “nefasta” brezza riformatrice.

Ma oggi alla guida della Chiesa di Roma c’è Joseph Ratzinger. Ed è su questa brezza, o meglio, sull’ermeneutica di questo anelito di novità, che egli ha deciso di giocare una buona fetta del proprio pontificato. Per lui, non esiste uno “spirito” del Concilio ma esiste il Concilio e basta. Esiste esclusivamente un avvenimento che ha voluto portare una riforma nella Chiesa in piena continuità col passato. La rottura, se c’è stata, è menzogna di una certa esegesi intra ecclesiale.

E, come ha ricordato più volte Ratzinger ai tempi del cardinalato, al centro di questo rinnovamento i padri conciliari vollero mettere innanzitutto quello che è il cuore della vita dei credenti, ovvero la liturgia. Non fu un caso, infatti, che il primo documento vergato nell’assise 1962-1965 fu la costituzione Sacrosanctum Concilium sulla sacra liturgia. Come a dire: è necessario prima d’ogni altra cosa riportare nel mezzo della vita di fede l’incontro col mistero espletato nella liturgia. Il resto, viene di conseguenza.

E oggi, parecchi anni dopo il Vaticano II, è il Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum il biglietto da visita col quale Benedetto XVI vuole mettere nero su bianco la volontà di non tradire il passato, soprattutto in campo liturgico. Perché la liturgia è la Chiesa, e da come essa prega traspare ciò in cui crede.

Bernard Fellay è dal 1994 (e lo sarà ancora fino al 2018) superiore generale della Fraternità San Pio X. Consacrato vescovo da Lefebvre nel 1988, ascese in pochi anni ai vertici della Fraternità. Lui, Lefebvre, lo ha visto morire dopo una settimana di coma incosciente. «Morì sereno - dice al Riformista - e mai, nonostante alcune voci leggendarie intorno agli ultimi giorni della sua vita terrena, si pentì di quanto aveva in precedenza fatto. La scomunica nei suoi confronti, insomma, rimase tale fino all’ultimo né lui fece nulla perché gli venisse ritirata».

Fellay, a torto, è stato più volte definito come il capofila dell’anima più moderata dei lefebvriani. Il contrario di monsignor Richard Williamson che invece, della Fraternità, rappresenterebbe l’ala più intransigente, quella insomma del “mai e poi mai” un compromesso con Roma.

«Niente di più falso - spiega in merito Fellay - io e Williamson siamo sulla stessa linea, quella che ritiene che in una Chiesa siffatta noi difficilmente potremo rientrare. E i motivi sono molto semplici. Benedetto XVI ha sì liberalizzato l’antico rito, ma non mi spiego per quale motivo ha fatto una scelta del genere se poi permette alla maggioranza dei vescovi di criticarlo e di disobbedire a quanto egli ha stabilito. Cosa dovremmo fare noi? Rientrare nella Chiesa e poi farci insultare da tutta questa gente?».

E ancora: «Al di là dell’antico rito, il problema per noi risiede nelle parole che Benedetto XVI dedica al Vaticano II. Abbiamo letto la sua volontà di porre in essere un’esegesi della continuità. Ma a questa volontà mi sembra non seguano azioni concrete. Perché la rottura col passato, purtroppo, riguarda direttamente alcuni testi del Vaticano II ed è questi testi che, in qualche modo, bisognerebbe rivedere. Egli, nell’intervista che apre il libro del cardinale Leo Scheffczyk, Il mondo della fede cattolica. Verità e Forma , dichiara che dopo il Concilio fu troppo timoroso coi colleghi votati a una linea decisa di apertura al mondo. Va bene, ma concretamente quale azione egli intende porre in essere per riparare?». Cioè a dire: Ratzinger dovrebbe adoperarsi per una revisione diretta dei testi conciliari e non soltanto per denunciare una loro scorretta ermeneutica. «Prendiamo, ad esempio - dice Fellay -, la dichiarazione Dignitatis Humanae dedicata alla libertà religiosa. In essa la Chiesa si pone in uno stato di sudditanza rispetto a un’autorità civile che le deve garantire il diritto della libera espressione. Ma a mio avviso dovrebbe essere il contrario: è lo Stato che deve sottomettersi alla fede cattolica e riconoscerla come religione di Stato». Se la liturgia è il cuore del dissenso dei lefebvriani nei confronti di Roma, le divergenze sembrano avere un respiro più ampio che il Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum non può da solo risolvere. «Io - conclude Fellay - ho incontrato Benedetto XVI una sola volta, nell’estate del 2005. Da quel giorno ho avuto un intenso scambio di lettere con il cardinale Darío Castrillón Hoyos, presidente dell’Ecclesia Dei. Ma ancora non c’è un documento di lavoro comune. Sono però fiducioso perché nonostante tutto i nostri rapporti sono ottimi». Scambio di lettere. Rapporti comunque ottimi. Conclude lasciando un filo di speranza, monsignor Fellay, anche se il giorno del rientro dei lefebvriani nella Roma di Benedetto XVI, il Pontefice che parecchio si sta spendendo per ridare alle conquiste della Chiesa il loro corretto valore, sembra ancora di là da venire. Se la cosa accadesse Fellay riporterebbe a casa un gruppo di 200 seminaristi e 450 preti. E in un periodo di magra vocazionale, non sarebbe poca roba.

© Copyright Il Riformista, 25 ottobre 2007

Le ragioni del dissenso fra i Lefebvriani ed il Vaticano sono moltissime e non riguardano solo la liturgia.
Per questo e’ FONDAMENTALE che i vescovi non ostacolino la corretta applicazione del Summorum Pontificum.
Mi aspetto molto dalle linee guida che verranno dalla Commissione Ecclesia Dei.
R.


36 posted on 10/31/2007 6:36:34 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: NYer

He’ll never be satisfied”

That would have been a sufficient answer. God willing the Spirit will move in him but until he gets over his own pride he will remain outside of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.


38 posted on 10/31/2007 6:38:18 PM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

To: sandyeggo

East coast vs. west coast thing!


40 posted on 10/31/2007 6:46:52 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Fr. V. R. Capodanno, Lt, USN, Catholic Chaplain. 3rd/5th, 1st Marine Div., FMF. MOH, posthumously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
Fascinating choice of words, there.

Yes indeed. I wonder who chose them, French speaking Bishop Fellay speaking Italian in the original interview, the person who translated it from Italian to English, or the "journalists" of the CNA articles who seem to try to fit the words "schismatic" and "excommunicated" in as many sentences as possible in any article about the SSPX. Hmmm.

CNS is editorially independent and a financially self-sustaining division of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

41 posted on 10/31/2007 7:21:31 PM PDT by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

“its adherents remain defiant, disobedient, disrespectful of papal authority, and revolutionaries against Holy Mother the Church to this day”

Sounds like you are talking about some of the “in communion” parishes at which I have attended Mass.
I can only hope that the Holy Father and the SSPX folks find a way to fix this breakdown so that the rest of the church can focus on the loss of reverence and faith that is so apparent in such a great number of our “in communion” parishes and dioceses.


42 posted on 10/31/2007 8:00:50 PM PDT by rogator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: livius
I think there would be nothing wrong in seriously reexamining the documents and seeing if there are some clarifications that should be made.

I agree -- but considering the weeping and gnashing of teeth and general caterwauling over the MP "rolling back the reforms [sic] of Vatican II," the Anvil Chorus greeting something like that would be deafening! (Popcorn time?)

43 posted on 11/01/2007 5:56:09 AM PDT by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson