Posted on 03/16/2012 5:49:38 PM PDT by annalex
3/16/2012 9:33:00 AM
 Catholic News Service photo Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior of the Society of St. Pius X, addresses the crowd before a 2009 ordination ceremony in Econe, Switzerland. The Vatican has given the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X a formal "doctrinal preamble" listing several princi ples they must agree with in order to move toward full reconciliation with church. |
VATICAN CITY — The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the approval of Pope Benedict, has defined as "insufficient" the position of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius on certain basic doctrinal principles and criteria for interpreting church teaching.
U.S. Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the doctrinal congregation, met for two hours March 16 with Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior of the society, to explain the Vatican's evaluation of the position of the SSPX, said Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman.
In a formal communique published after the meeting, the Vatican said it wanted to "avoid an ecclesial rupture with painful and incalculable consequences," so Bishop Fellay and leaders of the society were asked to further clarify their response to a "doctrinal preamble" the Vatican asked them to study last September.
The text of the preamble was not made public, but the Vatican had said it "states some doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation of Catholic doctrine necessary to guarantee fidelity" to the formal teaching of the church, including the teaching of the Second Vatican Council.
Bishop Fellay delivered the society's official response in January, the Vatican said, and it was "placed under the examination of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and successively under the judgment of the Holy Father."
"In compliance with the decision of Pope Benedict," the communique said, Bishop Fellay was given a letter signed by Cardinal Levada explaining that "the position he had expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems that are at the basis of the fracture between the Holy See and the society."
Father Lombardi said Cardinal Levada told Bishop Fellay the society had a month to clarify its position in order to heal "the existing fracture."
"A further clarification from the society is expected by mid-April," said Father Lombardi. The society has been given "more time for reflection to see if some further step can be made."
The Vatican spokesman would not give examples of the points on which the Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican still differ since the original preamble was never published. He said the additional month given to the society shows "the case is not closed," although the letter to Bishop Fellay makes clear that the consequence of "a non-acceptance of that which was foreseen in the preamble" would be "a rupture, something very serious for the church."
Father Lombardi said Pope Benedict has taken many steps "to make possible a reconciliation" with the traditionalist group, including lifting the excommunications imposed on Bishop Fellay and other SSPX bishops, establishing a Vatican committee for doctrinal talks with society representatives in 2009 and drafting the "doctrinal preamble" to explain the "minimal, essential" elements on which the society would have to agree for full reconciliation.
"A response was expected, it was not sufficient and, so, now (the Vatican is saying), 'If you think there is something else you would like to clarify, if you'd like to reflect some more to clarify your position, there is another month for you to do so,'" Father Lombardi said.
In late November, Bishop Fellay had said, "This doctrinal preamble cannot receive our endorsement, although leeway has been allowed for a 'legitimate discussion' about certain points of the (Second Vatican) Council."
When the Vatican's doctrinal discussions with the society began in 2009, both sides said the key issues to be discussed included the concept of tradition in general, as well as the Second Vatican Council's teaching on the liturgy, the unity of the church, ecumenism, interreligious dialogue and religious freedom.
VATICAN CITY — The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the approval of Pope Benedict, has defined as "insufficient" the position of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius on certain basic doctrinal principles and criteria for interpreting church teaching.
U.S. Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the doctrinal congregation, met for two hours March 16 with Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior of the society, to explain the Vatican's evaluation of the position of the SSPX, said Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman.
In a formal communique published after the meeting, the Vatican said it wanted to "avoid an ecclesial rupture with painful and incalculable consequences," so Bishop Fellay and leaders of the society were asked to further clarify their response to a "doctrinal preamble" the Vatican asked them to study last September.
The text of the preamble was not made public, but the Vatican had said it "states some doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation of Catholic doctrine necessary to guarantee fidelity" to the formal teaching of the church, including the teaching of the Second Vatican Council.
Bishop Fellay delivered the society's official response in January, the Vatican said, and it was "placed under the examination of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and successively under the judgment of the Holy Father."
"In compliance with the decision of Pope Benedict," the communique said, Bishop Fellay was given a letter signed by Cardinal Levada explaining that "the position he had expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems that are at the basis of the fracture between the Holy See and the society."
Father Lombardi said Cardinal Levada told Bishop Fellay the society had a month to clarify its position in order to heal "the existing fracture."
"A further clarification from the society is expected by mid-April," said Father Lombardi. The society has been given "more time for reflection to see if some further step can be made."
The Vatican spokesman would not give examples of the points on which the Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican still differ since the original preamble was never published. He said the additional month given to the society shows "the case is not closed," although the letter to Bishop Fellay makes clear that the consequence of "a non-acceptance of that which was foreseen in the preamble" would be "a rupture, something very serious for the church."
Father Lombardi said Pope Benedict has taken many steps "to make possible a reconciliation" with the traditionalist group, including lifting the excommunications imposed on Bishop Fellay and other SSPX bishops, establishing a Vatican committee for doctrinal talks with society representatives in 2009 and drafting the "doctrinal preamble" to explain the "minimal, essential" elements on which the society would have to agree for full reconciliation.
"A response was expected, it was not sufficient and, so, now (the Vatican is saying), 'If you think there is something else you would like to clarify, if you'd like to reflect some more to clarify your position, there is another month for you to do so,'" Father Lombardi said.
In late November, Bishop Fellay had said, "This doctrinal preamble cannot receive our endorsement, although leeway has been allowed for a 'legitimate discussion' about certain points of the (Second Vatican) Council."
When the Vatican's doctrinal discussions with the society began in 2009, both sides said the key issues to be discussed included the concept of tradition in general, as well as the Second Vatican Council's teaching on the liturgy, the unity of the church, ecumenism, interreligious dialogue and religious freedom.
For your pinging pleasure.
Excuse me for my ignorance but isn’t this discussion like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic while Islam is torching Christian churches all over the world, world leaders with USA in the lead trying to wipe out Israel and the freedom to observe and practice Christianity and Judism?
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 general interest.
Before you go into battle, you make sure your troops are trained. And we’ve got some serious problems with our troops. That said, it does seem that the Vatican requires perfection from the right, while tolerating the most aggrevious abuses from the Left... but that may be largely because it views the right as amenable.
Well if you use “amenable” in the sense of someone willing to be pushed around, like Christians who take all kinds of insult against their faith and symbols, but keep allowing the Pelosis and Kennedys to accept the sacrament although they press abortions on all peoples, including making it a condition of our foreign policy and aide across the world. Obama personally intervened in Kenya as a sitting US Senator to force an abortion clause into Kenya’s constitution. The Vatican and its multitude has to go on the offense. Instead they allow Holder to list them as a “money laundering operation”. Geesh!
Sir or madam, from your two comments I take it that you do not link the doctrinal issues to the practical. But they are linked. Pelosi (correctly) cites Vatican II’s teaching on religious freedom to explain her abortion votes—we do not have any right as Catholics to infringe on another faith’s teachings (many define life and ‘ensoulment’ as beginning at birth, e.g. Jewish). Homosexuality is a right; all sin apparently are seen as rights, against which we Catholics may only form consciences, not draft legislation. This is all Vatican II and it is all that SSPX is struggling against. I think you might be a person active in the struggle and perhaps do not know anyone else who is active who has made the connection between the doctrine and the action. I wish we worked together! I could show you each time we run into a brick wall how it is related to decisions made at Vatican II that hamstrung us—that hamstring us now. We should never have given up our right to a religious state; it was our tool for Truth, even if we could never have achieved a Restoration.
Unlike the Titanic, the Bark of St. Peter is not going to sink. I wish that SSPX value the communion with the Church over minor divisions that might exist as regards the meaning of Vatican II. However, there is a possibility that they will not; and then separating them is, sadly, a better course. Especially seeing that we have other battles to fight.
I don't think this is accurate. Pelosi might cite Vatican II "to explain her abortion votes", but the Church does not agree with her as a matter of legislation. So does Pelosi understand Vatican II better than the Church? The disagreement that SSPX has over religious freedom, whatever it is, cannot be illustrated by the need to battle the Left, who are in the wrong according to the loyal bishops of the Church anyway.
SSPX can do something of great value here: they can point to the quasi-Catholcism of the Left and ask that the Church should clarify Vatican II NOT to mean moral indifferentism. That would be in keeping with the steps the Church already undertook most recently on the Latin Mass, on clarifying what the Church properly is, or, earlier, on what "sister church" may or may not mean, etc.
If however SSPX insists on its right to simply dictate what the Catholic doctrine should be, then that is in itself intolerable and opens doors for a similar insubordination from the Left.
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.