SSPX Catholic rebels disappointed by Benedict

Reuters ^ | April 20, 2008 | Tom Heneghan

[NYer]

I’m not sure if the timing has anything to do with Pope Benedict’s U.S. trip, but the schismatic traditionalist Society of Saint Pius X chose this weekend to announce its disappointment in the pontiff and its decision not to seek closer ties to Rome now. SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay wrote in a “Letter to Friends and Benefactors” (here in French) that Benedict had not budged in his support for the Second Vatican Council despite his decision last year to allow wider use of the old Tridentine rite Mass in Latin.

“The time for an agreement has not yet come,” Fellay wrote. The decree on the old Latin Mass was “not accompanied by logically co-related measures in the other areas of the life of the Church … Nothing has changed in Rome’s determination to follow the council’s orientation, despite 40 years of crisis, despite the deserted convents, abandoned rectories and empty churches.”

The letter is dated April 14 but was only published on Saturday by the SSPX information service DICI. Here’s our story and here’s a partial English translation of Fellay’s statement at Rorate Caeli (hat tip to Father Z for that).

Fellay signalled his continued estrangement from Rome in February when he accused the Vatican of caving in to “foreign pressures” when it issued a new wording of the Latin prayer on Good Friday. In a FaithWorld post on that statement, I wondered out loud whether any or many SSPX parishioners would drift away from their churches to attend Latin Masses in their local parishes. From scattered comments I’ve heard since then, it seems that few if any of the people attending the (admittedly also few) old Latin Masses now seem to have defected from the Lefebvrist ranks.

Fellay isn’t the only one who might feel let down by Benedict. Michael Sean Winter had an interesting piece on Slate about “How Pope Benedict has disappointed the Right.” He recalls how conservative Catholics welcomed his election in 2005, only to find he didn’t crack down the way they hoped he would.

What do you think? Has Benedict been as conservative as you expected him to be?

[fishtank]

Thanks for the post. Although I went over to evangelical Protestantism quite a while ago, I have a soft spot in my heart for the SSPX.

[NYer]

I’m not sure I understand what they expect from the pope - any pope - do you?

[wideawake]

I’m not sure I understand what they expect from the pope - any pope - do you?

The SSPX will not reconcile with the Catholic Church unless the Catholic Church agrees to elect Richard Williamson as the next pope.

Other than that, nothing the Catholic Church does could ever be good enough for the whole SSPX.

[DarthVader]

What the pope preached when he was here is whats expected. The context of his exhortation to the seminarians in NY was magnificent as I said on your thread earlier. It does not get too much better than that. If anyone is not inspired by what he had to say and act on it they are just people of immature faith and cry babies. It is hard to top excellence.

[trisham]

Pope Benedict is doing an outstanding job, imho.

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

From my experience with Pius X people, they would probably want him to completely end all non-Tridentine Masses immediately, order all bishops and priests to be reordained in the old rite, and mandate that women be required to wear chapel veils, skirts below their kness, and 3/4 length sleeves at minimum, before entering any church.

Oh, and some of them would want him to admit that he’s got the real Pope tied up in a closet somewhere.

[NeoCaveman]

What do you think? Has Benedict been as conservative as you expected him to be?

In a way I can say no. I was sort of expecting some good old fashioned crack down on theological dissent.

With that said I'm not in the least bit disappointed with this man of deep wisdom, soft humility, and an overwhelming love of Christ. The good Lord gives us what we need so we should not complain that we don't get what we want instead.

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

Oh, and how could I forget about Vatican 2?

He would have to admit that the pope never authorized it- it was all a hoax conjured up by KGB officials pretending to be clerics.

[GovernmentShrinker]

They expect the Pope to take orders from them.

[steve86]

The SSPX will not reconcile with the Catholic Church unless the Catholic Church agrees to elect Richard Williamson as the next pope.

Other than that, nothing the Catholic Church does could ever be good enough for the whole SSPX.

Why are you choosing to engage in hyperbole and untruths? I thought one of the commandments discouraged that.

No one in the SSPX has asked for a different Pope. Many or most feel great fondness for the current Pope. What is "good enough for the SSPX" is very simple: rollback the Second Vatican Council (or at least the liberal interpretation of it).

I am sympathetic with but am not a "member" nor have ever been to an SSPX facility.

[sitetest]

“Has Benedict been as conservative as you expected him to be?”

If by “conservative,” one means “more strictly enforce Church dicipline,” the answer is no.

But maybe that’s why he’s pope and I’m not.

[wideawake]

Why are you choosing to engage in hyperbole and untruths?

I'm not. Ask a relevant question.

I thought one of the commandments discouraged that.

What does that mean for you, given the false witness you've just borne against me?

No one in the SSPX has asked for a different Pope.

I didn't say they had.

What the SSPX has made clear is that they can find no accomodaition with any Pope so far.

Many or most feel great fondness for the current Pope.

So do many evangelicals, but they don't obey him as their pastor either.

What is "good enough for the SSPX" is very simple: rollback the Second Vatican Council

You cannot "roll back" an Ecumenical Council. The utter gall of such a demand is breathtaking as it is.

"The Catholic Church is not good enough for me, unless they make alterations." Quite an exercise in humility, that.

(or at least the liberal interpretation of it).

The whole SSPX would not accept a reinterpretation of the Second Vatican Council, no matter how radical. Williamson explicitly rejects it as a false Council. Without him on board, the whole SSPX will never be on board.

I am sympathetic with but am not a "member" nor have ever been to an SSPX facility.

I am not a member of the SSPX nor have I been to their facilities. My sympathies lie with the Catholic Church, not with dissenters and schismatics.

[NYer]

Oh, and some of them would want him to admit that he’s got the real Pope tied up in a closet somewhere.

ROFL! They would probably insist that the Papal Tiara be polished and buffed and the Sedia Gestatoria be dusted off to replace the Popemobile.

[Gumdrop]

I have a problem with Catholics who think they are more Catholic than the Pope.

Leaders of huge world-wide organizations have to demonstate patience and love with their flock. They cannot come in like a bulldozer, which is what the PPX group apparently want to have PBXVI do. Naturally they are disappointed. But they were not elected Pope, P. Benedict XVI was elected and has to use some wisdom here.

You can see this sort of problem in nearly every aspect of our lives. Those who are not in charge, always have something to complain about, and choose to do it publicly.

Although I have a lot of sympathy for the traditionalist Catholics, that does not mean that we should kick everyone out of the Church because they are sinners. The church was established for sinners.

[steve86]

I'm headed out so I can only respond to your first point, not that I'd bother with the histrionics present further down the comment.

The SSPX will not reconcile with the Catholic Church unless the Catholic Church agrees to elect Richard Williamson as the next pope ==>UNTRUTH

Other than that, nothing the Catholic Church does could ever be good enough for the whole SSPX. ==>HYPERBOLE

[steve86]

Leaders of huge world-wide organizations have to demonstate patience and love with their flock. They cannot come in like a bulldozer

I agree with that and most of SSPX would as well. But a few highly selective pinpoint Papal bombs -- such as against liturgical abuses -- might be in order.

[vpintheak]

Some people will never be happy. This is why I left strict denomination and synod type churches. Everyone has their own way they say is right and best, and squable over details forgetting that we are all Christs sheep. We are supposed to be one Christian body, with Christ as our shepard.

[wideawake]

The SSPX will not reconcile with the Catholic Church unless the Catholic Church agrees to elect Richard Williamson as the next pope ==>UNTRUTH

Absolutely true.

The SSPX, in every negotiation with the Holy See, has sought to impose universal conditions on the Holy See.

In other words, they are trying to exercise executive power over the Pope.

Nothing any Pope accedes to is good enough, in the judgment of Richard Williamson.

Therefore, the only solution that would be fully satisfactory to Williamson and his supporters is to allow Williamson himself to exercise executive authority over the Church.

Who normally does that?

Other than that, nothing the Catholic Church does could ever be good enough for the whole SSPX. ==>HYPERBOLE

What else would be good enough? Erasing an entire Ecumenical Council and revoking the excommunications of persons who were legitimately excommunicated and impenitent are two demands unprecedented in the history and the scope of papal authority.

The SSPX will only be satisfied if one of their number were in charge - their demands imply nothing less.

[netmilsmom]

>>But maybe that’s why he’s pope and I’m not.<<

Wise, very wise!!!!

Things like kneeling for communion, wanting only Altar Boys and disgust with Catholic handgestures in Holy Mass, are my way of life. Good thing I’m not Pope and am not more Holy than.

Different strokes for different Catholic folks!

[Aquinasfan]

I’m not sure I understand what they expect from the pope - any pope - do you?

Some people like to be permanently aggrieved, I guess.

[netmilsmom]

>>such as against liturgical abuses<<

Which Liturgical Abuses would you like to see bombed?

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

Yes, and then there would be another test, and another, etc.

Several years ago, I had a discussion with a relative, a SSPX member, after the Brazilian group, which broke from SSPX, I believe, reunited with the Church.

I think it was called Saint John Marie Vianney.

Anyway, JP2 offered full reconciliation, and allowed them to keep the old rites, the schools, and even named the head of the order as coadjutor of the diocese, and successor to the bishop when the seat was vacated.

This relative told me the people were traitors. When I asked him, “Traitors to whom? Aren’t we supposed to seek unity with the Vicar of Christ? Isn’t that what SSPX desires?” he refused to answer.

[BlackElk]

steve86: How about: The SSPX leaders and adherents are EXCOMMUNICATED schismatics!!!! See Ecclesia Dei of John Paul II. And that's neither a lie nor hyperbole. You are giving aid and comfort to excommunicated enemies of the Roman Catholic Church by giving them public support. Although I have no problems with the Novus Ordo when reverently said, I attend Tridentine Masses weekly, no thanks to the vile little schism of the excommunicated Lefebvre, de Mallerais (who makes Williamson seem sane), Williamson, Fellay and their evil comrades in rebellion against the authority of the papacy and of Holy Mother the Church.

Remember when their sympathizers in the fringe "Catholic" media were predicting that B-XVI would surrender to Fellay and company any minute? Hasn't happened in several years and hopefully never will. If the rebels could be burned at the stake, the Church would be a LOT better off. Their continued excommunication will have to suffice until SSPX surrenders to the Vatican. If they choose to continue to rebel, then they know the consequences.

[BlackElk]

steve86: Papal bombs directed down the impious throats of the SSPX leadership would really be in order. Since SSPX are NOT of the flock, no patience with them whatsoever is in order. Regrettably, our world no longer offers the opportunity for their appropriate punishment.

[Convert from ECUSA]

I recall seeing a lot of different SSPX type sites, postings, etc. at various sources when Cardinal Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI. Some were pleased, some were cautious, some were unhappy.

Maybe its just me, but I was delighted when he became Pope. It seems to me he has started cracking down and enforcing more discipline, has pushed for making the Tridentine Mass widely available, etc. In my diocese, the Diocese of Arlington, VA, the 1962 Tridentine Mass has become more widely available.

While I’d like a lot of the looney-tune rad-lib “Spirit of Vatican II” abuses and junk done away with yesterday, I’ve come to realize that the Vatican moves on its own timetable. I choose to look at the very positive accomplishments Pope Benedict XVI has already done and look forward to many more. The looney-tune rad-lib dissenters will retire/die off one day (and may it hurry up, already...like yesterday), but if people focus too much on all the things they disagree with or are unhappy with the Pope about, they may forget the good and positive things.

[Alberta's Child]

You cannot "roll back" an Ecumenical Council. The utter gall of such a demand is breathtaking as it is.

That's an excellent point.

It's important to note that the Nicene Council -- rightly regarded as one of the most important events of the early Church -- was actually a series of councils that took place over a period of more than 50 years.

These major historical events should be viewed in the proper context. Vatican II hasn't even played itself out yet.

[Alberta's Child]

But a few highly selective pinpoint Papal bombs -- such as against liturgical abuses -- might be in order.

Last summer's motu proprio was exactly that . . . though it was actually dropped by a stealth bomber and hasn't yet reached its target.

[topher]

The archbishop who was behind the split with the Roman Catholic Church -- this sect wants him made a saint.

Unfortunately, I do not know if one can expect this person (the archbishop) to be in heaven.

Some of what that archbishop was good and he tried to keep bad things out of the Catholic faith.

But he had a decision to make when the ordination of his bishops was turned down.

He could have (and should have sought) an audience with Pope John Paul II (and have been patience on convincing the Pope of his argument).

He was at that point in a position similar to Saint John of the Cross. But Saint John of the Cross chose to remain within his order (the Carmelites) and help reform that order.

The archbishop, on the other hand, took SSPX away from Rome and the Roman Catholic Church -- thus dividing the conservatives within the Catholic Church and helping the liberals by splitting conservatives.

His disobedience is a sin that makes it impossible, in my mind, for him to ever be canonized a saint and the fact that he took his flock prevented them to receive some of the graces of having Pope John Paul II as Pope.

I have a sister and brother-in-law in the sect in Saint Marys, Kansas. At one time, one of other siblings had a car blessed by the archbishop. She wondered what good it was to have a car blessed by a person who had left communion with Rome...

[baa39]

After Summorum Pontificum, there’s really no excuse for them not to be more cooperative and try to reconcile if they really wanted to. In fact, here and there some individual SSPX chapels or groups of people have approached bishops and asked to be reconciled. But one problem is the leaders of SSPX have now for so many years gone their own direction, and made so many issues with the popes, getting further into their own “religion” that they have created a separate mindset that is naturally contentious and self-righteous. They have been given an historic opportunity to reconcile, they are the tiny group that went astray, yet they say that the entire Church must bow to them first. Not the rank and file devout people, the leaders.

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

While I understand the pastoral need for authentic Catholic ministry and that is something the SSPX provides, I don’t understand the need for so many polemics coming from them. I don’t understand how it helps. And I don’t understand some histrionics from their opponents either.

On the other hand, despite the significant improvements in the Church’s liturgy with the general availability of the TLM, the SSPX has hardly been rendered moot. What was done by one pope, can be undone by another. The overall state of the Church is still not good, but SP if taken will be very good medicine, with or without the SSPX. Fr Z has said he has heard that priests leaving the SSPX for regularization are often poorly treated by the Conciliar Church.

Rome has ultimately agreed with the SSPX regarding the non-abrogation of the TLM and Rome is moving closer to the SSPX’s position on V2, though I doubt those two will ever converge.

Cardinal Castrillon has said repeatedly that the priests of the SSPX are not in schism and not excommunicated and only the bishops are excommunicated. Obviously then neither are the lay people who frequent their chapels.

[mockingbyrd]

lol!

[NYer]

They expect the Pope to take orders from them.

Indeed! I'm fairly confident that were St. Peter to return to earth tomorrow, they would find fault in him.

Perhaps Benedict had already received word of this through his aides or anticipated such a response, but he addressed it in his homily for priests and religious at St. Patrick's Cathedral.

For all of us, I think, one of the great disappointments which followed the Second Vatican Council, with its call for a greater engagement in the Church’s mission to the world, has been the experience of division between different groups, different generations, different members of the same religious family. We can only move forward if we turn our gaze together to Christ! In the light of faith, we will then discover the wisdom and strength needed to open ourselves to points of view which may not necessarily conform to our own ideas or assumptions. Thus we can value the perspectives of others, be they younger or older than ourselves, and ultimately hear “what the Spirit is saying” to us and to the Church (cf. Rev 2:7). In this way, we will move together towards that true spiritual renewal desired by the Council, a renewal which can only strengthen the Church in that holiness and unity indispensable for the effective proclamation of the Gospel in today’s world.
FULL TEXT

Raymond Arroyo replayed portions of an interview he had with (then) Cardinal Ratzinger, before his election, at different points during this visit by Pope Benedict XVI. In it he restated several excellent points:

1. For those who expected the 'springtime' to include mass conversions, they did not understand how God works.

2. It is far better to have fewer Catholics more fervent in their faith than a large number who are marginal believers.

[murphE]

SSPX Catholic rebels disappointed by Benedict

"He's a rebel and he'll never be any good..."

I'm sorry to ping you to this...stuff, but it is just too funny.

Nothing has changed in Rome’s determination to follow the council’s orientation, despite 40 years of crisis, despite the deserted convents, abandoned rectories and empty churches

Um, well that part is not funny, but let's not talk about that.

[vox_freedom]

Thanks for the ping. As much as I would like to see the SSPX situation resolved, the timing is probably not right for multiple reasons. Heaven knows that the Church could use the infusion of hundreds of good traditionalist priests and four new bishops. As Bishop Fellay has stated, the first step would be a proclamation to remove the excoms.
If only as much time were spent on reconciliation with the SSPX as is spent on ecumenical meetings with Muslims and Jews...

[Petronski]

A cordial invitation to all to take my poll and discussion.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2005031/posts

[iowamark]

If you are sympathetic to the SSPX, you should become more familiar with them. Their radical politics and anti-semitic, anti-American biases betray the real reason for their alienation.

See:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1983366/posts#comment

[Cheverus]

The beginning of Patrick Madrid’s “More Catholic than the Pope” makes the argument that the SSPX crowd still believes they are Catholic, but their children will have no such illusion.

The more I see coming from Fellay post Summorum Pontificum, the more I believe this.

[steadfastconservative]

Although I went over to evangelical Protestantism quite a while ago, I have a soft spot in my heart for the SSPX.

fishtank has unintentionally pointed out the direction that the members of the SSPX are going, i.e. towards Protestantism. . . .

[NYer]

The more I see coming from Fellay post Summorum Pontificum, the more I believe this.

That would parallel what freeper steadfastconservative noted - they are headed towards protestantism. All those who separate themselves from the Church begin with good intentions that alter and change over the course of time. Hence - 33,000+ denominations. If the SSPX does not return to the fold soon, it may well be too late.

[Scotswife]

“I’m not sure I understand what they expect from the pope - any pope - do you?”

They want the pope to concede authority to the sspx.
Not much really.

[Scotswife]

“fishtank has unintentionally pointed out the direction that the members of the SSPX are going, i.e. towards Protestantism. . . . “

good point.
In fact, the most abrasive, nasty attacks I’ve seen on JPII came from sspx’ers - not from rabid anti-catholic protestants.

[moonj]

With all the banter on this subject, I have to wonder if anyone has a clue as to what “Quo Primum” is, Church crisis since the 2nd Vatican, & the “Trademark 40 Years” of Ecumenism that has swept the church in it’s wake. Used to be that Catholics were proud to live the faith that that can be traced back to the Chair of Peter. Now all I see in this whole string is opinions slandering the faith of our fathers, complaining about the respectful traditions that bring honor to our lord in his house. Any Idea why the councils were convened?...to bring error among the clergy back into check. Anybody notice that 2nd Vatican did the opposite? Changes, Right? If the New Faith & Practices are Truth, that would make the teachings of our fathers leading back to Christ error wouldn’t it? How can truth stem from error? Any one concerned about the closing of the churches? That would be loss of the faith, if the population isn’t decreasing right? The people of Christ’s church are no longer Catholic (One). The flock has indeed scattered. The Traditionalist has never left the Truths taught by Jesus Christ, enforced through the Holy Ghost & propagated by his faithful. The Truth of the Validity of the Traditional Mass has been confirmed, still folks can’t see that there was 40 years of “Suppression” of what Pope Pius V called for “in perpetuity” from the “Chair of Peter”. The Good Popes of the Past have warned us against Bad Popes. They have warned us of Weak ones. Folks need to do their homework, look around themselves & come to a good decision. It’s not about shooting each other down; it’s about living the Truths that God has commanded, recognizing that evil still exists & being ready for it, as so not to be swayed into error...FOR THE SALVATION OF OUR SOULS, THE SOULS OF THE FAITHFUL & THE CONVERSION OF ALL MANKIND. That’s our end. May the Holy Father be Strong & continue efforts to heal the Church. .....”Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: “Praise be to the divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to it be glory and honor for ever.” Amen.