Posted on 06/26/2008 2:51:31 PM PDT by annalex
PARIS (Reuters) - The leader of a breakaway traditionalist Catholic group has rejected a Vatican offer to rejoin Rome, accusing Pope Benedict of trying to silence dissenting voices.
Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) that broke with Rome 20 years ago, said conditions set by the Vatican amounted to muzzling the traditionalists who claim to be the only true Catholics since Church reforms in the 1960s.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Keen to end this schism, Benedict agreed last year to their demand to restore the old Latin Mass. But he insists they must accept the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) before he can lift excommunication decrees against them.
He has put forth a very generous offer.
Fellay said the pope must restore other Church traditions besides the old Latin Mass before the SSPX could return. It is particularly critical of the Vatican Council’s reconciliation with Judaism and call to cooperation with other Christians.
This is quite telling. He is neglecting John 17:21-3 - "that all may be one".
Vatican watchers say the ultimatum could split SSPX into a hard core of rebels and a larger group ready to return to Rome now that it has allowed wider use of the old Latin Mass.
A painful decision, I'm sure, for those who migrated to the SSPX Chapels in order to worship God in what they considered a proper manner. Many of them have looked forward to the day when either Rome would concede to the demands of the SSPX or vv. That day is now at hand. Over the course of these past 40 years, entire families have worshiped, been educated and raised in the SSPX Chapels. What a painful burden to place on their shoulders - CHOOSE. We need to remember Fellay, the priests and those Catholics who have chosen to follow this route, in our prayers.
You wrote:
“As more and more Catholic parishes adopt the TLM, expect that the SSPX priests will swim towards the Barque of Peter.”
I think you’re right. The pope has done everything the SSPX DEMANDED. They are simply schismatics.
It doesn’t follow. The Pope is the vicar of Christ, but so is every priest. It does not make the pope identical to Christ; popes throughout history erred. The traditionalists would say that the form of ecumenism promulgated after Vatican II is at odds with the authentic Catholic teaching, and therefore the Pope lacks authority to enforce it.
Their presumption is questionable, but the logic is correct: if — theoretically speaking — a pope would teach something that would negate the Holy Tradition, — for example, allow for woman “priests” — then the pope would not have authority to teach that.
Very much so; and no matter what happens now, we should be grateful for their resistance to modernizers in the Church.
It's a matter of perspective. I would expect points #3 ("avoid the claim to a Magisterium superior to the Holy Father") and #4 ("respect for the authority of the Vicar of Christ") are tantamount to muzzling from the POV of an SSPXer.
They'd consider #3 "muzzling" because AFAIK the SSPX believe in some standard outside of/beyond the current/unbroken Magisterium held by Rome. #4 is "muzzling" because the SSPX believe the current Pope lacks authority, due to their fundamental disagreements over the issue of an unbroken chain of authority from earlier popes.
SSPX is NOT sedevacantist; what on earth (or in heaven) are you talking about?
A MESSAGE FROM BISHOP FELLAY
Superior General of the SSPXJuly 2006
At the end of October, the Month of the Rosary, the Society intends to present the Holy Father with a spiritual bouquet of a million Rosaries.
The Rosaries will be offered for the following intentions:
- To obtain from Heaven for Pope Benedict XVI the strength necessary for him to completely liberate the Mass of all Time, called the Mass of St. Pius V.
- The restoration of the Social Kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ.
- The triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
We are calling you to a veritable Rosary Crusade. This prayer, so often recommended by the most Blessed Virgin Mary herself, has been presented as the great means of support, protection, and salvation for Christians in this time of crisis. For centuries, ever since the antagonism between the world and the Church began to grow more intense, this prayer has appeared as the weapon given us by Heaven by which we may defend and sanctify ourselves, and conquer.
We thus earnestly recommend that you begin without delay to bring spiritual roses to our bouquet.
We also desire to manifest to both the Roman authorities and Heaven, by this obviously symbolic quantity, our will and determination "to pay the price."
Link.
You may be thinking of sedevacantists, a different stratum altogether.
I stand corrected - I had confused the two groups.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
News media spin. The actual response is not due until Monday. This has nothing new in it.
This sums it up in a nutshell. The pope acted in a spirit of charity and communion towards the SSPX and they have angrily rejected his offer with their usual lack of charity and grace. How much more evidence is needed to show that this group really is not Catholic in any sense of the word?
So, in your view, as long as a proposal is offered in a polite way, by any group in any circumstance on any issue, it should be accepted with "charity and grace" (and lack of discernment)? Myself, I have this bias toward content over packaging when evaluating an offer.
How much more evidence is needed to show that this group really is not Catholic in any sense of the word?
The SSPX preserves the tradition of the Catholic Church. So, in your view, during the hundreds of years prior to Vatican II the Catholic Church was not Catholic?
I don't think you can say that. This is a homily out of which we have excerpts, done by a mainstream media outlet not known for accuracy or sympathy toward things Catholic. As a sign, it is a troubling one, but that is all that it is.
I wish Fellay would have talked more with Pope Benedict and changed his mind.
Entirely beside the point, but I just noticed that Thinkin’ Gal was banned last year. She was one of my favorites. What one earth could that have been about?
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.