Posted on 10/19/2006 5:57:34 PM PDT by monkapotamus
SSPX to send spiritual bouquet and encouragement to Pope
Bishop Fellay calls expected Latin Mass document "a grand gesture"
Brian Mershon
October 19, 2006
From the October 26 issue of The Wanderer.
Following an hour-plus long press conference in Paris October 14 by Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General for the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), Reuters and the French Le Figaro reported that Bishop Fellay said the expected motu proprio easing current restrictions on the celebration of the Classical Roman rite of Holy Mass (Traditional Latin Mass) would fulfill one of the two criteria established by the SSPX in 2001 for continuing discussions on the path to possible full canonical regularization. In fact, Bishop Fellay called the expected document "a grand gesture" on the part of the Church.
"Things are going in the right direction," Bishop Fellay said. "I think we'll get an agreement," he said according to the Reuters account. "Things could speed up and come faster than expected," he said. Bishop Fellay was not available for a follow-up interview for The Wanderer by deadline, but the SSPX news service, DICI, said he would be available as soon as the expected document is promulgated by the Pope.
The SSPX has 470 priests, four bishops and claims 1 million Catholics who frequent their chapels worldwide. In 1988, Pope John Paul II, in the motu proprio, Ecclesia Dei Adflicta, declared that the French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Campos, Brazil's Bishop Castro de Mayer excommunicated themselves by ordaining four bishops, including Bishop Fellay, against the express will of the Holy Father. Pope John Paul II immediately created a new Society of Apostolic Right, the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), for those bishops and priests who wanted to maintain full communion with the Holy See while continuing to administer all the sacraments according to the liturgical books in force in 1962.
Then Cardinal Ratzinger was in the heart of the discussions at the time with Archbishop Lefebvre, as well as the current Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone. Cardinal Ratzinger was also instrumental in the establishment and encouragement of the erection of the FSSP.
Road to Reconciliation?
Ever since 2000, when thousands of SSPX-sympathetic Catholics made a pilgrimage to Rome led by SSPX priests and bishops, a gradual thaw in relations between the group and the Holy See has occurred. In fact, Bishop Fellay and two other SSPX priests met with Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos on August 29, 2005, to discuss the possible path of reconciliation. Since the widely reported existence of a motu proprio relaxing restrictions on the celebration of the Traditional liturgy, it appears that communications between the SSPX and the Holy See may quicken and intensify.
Shortly after the General Chapter of the SSPX concluded in July, re-electing Msgr. Fellay to another 12-year term, the SSPX announced they would present Pope Benedict XVI a spiritual bouquet of 1 million rosaries at the end of October, customarily the month of the Holy Rosary. The SSPX previously announced they would send this spiritual bouquet to the Pope with a letter from Bishop Fellay requesting his acknowledgement that the Traditional rite has never been abolished by the Church and that every Latin rite priest has the right to offer it. "This letter, which is also a letter of support for the Pope in face of current and future adversities, should be sent before the end of the month," Fellay said.
While Fellay would not speculate on the expected contents nor the timing of the expected document on the Traditional rite, he has reportedly told U.S. audiences at SSPX chapels since earlier in the year that "the battle for the Mass is almost won."
The conservative and respected French newspaper Le Figaro reports that four months ago Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos communicated to the SSPX leadership that all that was necessary for the SSPX's return to full communion was a letter from Bishop Fellay requesting the Pope lift the decrees declaring the excommunications, with permission granted for the SSPX to interpret the documents of the Second Vatican Council according to proper theological method — "in light of Tradition." The SSPX disputes some conclusions drawn by the Le Figaro reporter in its October 16 account.
No Doctrinal Concessions Necessary
In other words, similar to the recent creation of the Institute of the Good Shepherd in Bordeaux, France, where five formerly highly placed SSPX priests were reconciled to the Holy See, there were no doctrinal retractions or corrections required by the Holy See for those priests reconciling, especially regarding the much-disputed interpretations of religious liberty, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue from the Second Vatican Council. Cardinal Hoyos has previously said in multiple public interviews within the past year that the status of the SSPX is not one of "formal schism," but of imperfect communion.
Bishop Fellay seemed to agree with that previously stated assessment at the press conference where he said that if and when the Traditional rite is freed, the next step the SSPX awaits would be the lifting of the declarations of excommunication against the four bishops. According to Fellay, a process of theological discussions regarding the intricacies and theological weight of what the SSPX considers to be the problematical documents of the Second Vatican Council then would begin.
Sacramental Communion but not Juridical
"There could be a relationship between Rome and us, but it would not yet be a juridical relationship," Bishop Fellay told reporters.
"We don't want a practical solution before these doctrinal questions are resolved," he said. "The focus should be on these discussions."
Canonist Pete Vere, a Catholic convert and former adherent of the SSPX, agreed that the process outlined by Bishop Fellay "from a canonical perspetive it makes sense."
"The reconciliation will probably come about in stages, that there will be an agreement in principle to recognize certain things, as well as a restoration of sacramental communion," Vere said, along with the juridical and canonical issues following later.
Vere noted there has been canonical precedence for this approach with how the eastern-rite Melkites were eventually reconciled, as well as many of Fr. Leonard Feeney's followers, particularly those in Still River, Massachusetts.
And following upon Bishop Fellay's comments comparing how the situation with the SSPX would be an intermediate canonical step toward regularization similar to the China Patriotic Catholic Church, Vere said, "This is also the process Rome appears to be following with certain segments of the China Patriotic Church."
Bishop Fellay also predicted that when the document freeing the Traditional rite is promulgated, it will be followed "by a war within the Church," resulting in a spiritual war being ignited "identical to that of an atomic bomb," he said. Indeed, the increasingly persistent and mounting public opposition from the French episcopate to the newly-created Institute of the Good Shepherd is perhaps just one battle that signifies the possible war that will occur within the Church at large within parishes and dioceses, including bishops, priests and laymen.
Msgr. Ignacio Barreiro, head of Human Life International in Rome, and affiliated with Una Voce America, said that he thought it to be unlikely that the excommunications would be lifted prior to the expected document easing restrictions on the celebration of the Traditional Missal. He also thinks that the sanctions will be lifted only ". . . when some sort of juridical status is granted to the SSPX."
"This is evident because if the sanctions are lifted, but the SSPX continues to function without receiving even a temporary juridical status, they would again incur canonical sanctions," Msgr. Barreiro said.
Many Modern Liturgies "Banal"; Traditional Rite Never Abolished
In the just released September e-version of 30 Days, a well-respected Italian monthly dealing with ecclesiastical news and theology, the current Secretary of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, Archbishop Albert Malcolm Ranjith, again conveys his, and presumably the Holy See's, current perspective of the liturgical reform following the Second Vatican Council. In response to a question on this very issue, Archbishop Rajinth said that the expected positive results expected to appear as a result of the liturgical reform have not appeared.
And in a theme that has been repeated multiple times recently by Archbishop Ranjith in several recent interviews, as well as Cardinal Arinze and Pope Benedict XVI in his books on the liturgy, Archbishop Ranjith decried the attempt "to lower the divine mysteries to a banal level." Indeed, Cardinal Ratzinger warned against the "banal rationalism" that typified much of the attempted liturgical reform. Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect for the Office of Divine Worship and the Sacraments, has decried the "banal music" and "banal words" that accompanies much of the current liturgical orientation.
A quick word search finds the definition of "banal" to be "hackneyed," "trite," "drearily commonplace." In other words, there is no way the consistent use of this word can be perceived by anyone as a positive or glowing assessment of what too often is offered at many churches in the rite of Pope Paul VI.
In response to a question implying that Archbishop Ranjith had "good relations with the Lefebvrist world" (SSPX), he responded that he had never met Archbishop Lefebvre, but has had some contact with "some of his followers."
While Archbishop Ranjith declared he was "not particularly passionate about the Lefebvrists," he emphasized that some of their criticisms about the liturgy were perhaps beneficial to the Church. "And for that, they are a thorn that should make us reflect on what we are doing," he said.
Archbishop Ranjith also said that the fact the Holy See recently approved the Institute of the Good Shepherd [Ed. Note: The establishment of the traditionalist Apostolic Administration of St. John Marie Vianney in Campos, Brazil, headed by Bishop Fernando Rifan is another example.] displays in a very clear and direct manner that "the Mass of Saint Pius V cannot be considered as abolished by the new Missal of Paul VI."
Archbishop Ranjith reaffirmed what he has said recently in at least three other interviews, that is ". . . the Tridentine Mass is not a private property of the Lefebvrists. It is a treasure of the Church and of all of us," he said.
It might be surprising for most Catholics to find out that this very point is identical to the reasoning behind the SSPX's insistence that the Classical Roman rite be acknowledged to be free for all Latin-rite priests to celebrate. Bishop Fellay has repeatedly said that it is "for the good of the Church" that the SSPX makes this request. In other words, the SSPX has repeatedly acknowledged continuously over the years that the Traditional rite is not for their exclusive use.
Vatican II in Light of Tradition
The 30 Days interview continues with the Secretary of Divine Worship saying: "As the Pope said to the Roman Curia last year [December 22, 2005: See The Wanderer's January 26 edition, "Bishop Bruskewitz says . . . Para-Council Distorted Vatican II,"] the Second Vatican Council is not a moment of rupture, but of renewal in continuity," repeating almost directly this part of the Holy Father's address.
"The past is not thrown away, but one builds upon it."
Archbishop Ranjith echoes the primary theme of Cardinal Ratzinger's 1988 Address to the Bishops of Chile in his explanation of the situation of Archbishop Lefebvre, the SSPX and its Catholic lay followers shortly after the illicit consecrations of four bishops. Cardinal Ratzinger told the Chilean bishops at the time:
"Certainly there is a mentality of narrow views that isolate Vatican II and which has provoked this opposition. There are many accounts of it which give the impression that, from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and that what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II.
"The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero. The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of superdogma which takes away the importance of all the rest.
"This idea is made stronger by things that are now happening. That which previously was considered most holy — the form in which the liturgy was handed down — suddenly appears as the most forbidden of all things, the one thing that can safely be prohibited. It is intolerable to criticize decisions which have been taken since the Council; on the other hand, if men make question of ancient rules, or even of the great truths of the Faith — for instance, the corporal virginity of Mary, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the immortality of the soul, etc. — nobody complains or only does so with the greatest moderation....
"All this leads a great number of people to ask themselves if the Church of today is really the same as that of yesterday, or if they have changed it for something else without telling people. The one way in which Vatican II can be made plausible is to present it as it is; one part of the unbroken, the unique Tradition of the Church and of her faith."
(A special word of thanks again to http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/ for its timely partial unofficial English translation of the 30 Days interview with Archbishop Rajinth.)
Ping.
Interesting persepctives.
+
If you want on (or off) this Catholic and Pro-Life ping list, let me know!
I am old enough to remember the tension and tough talk leading up to a negotiation between the US and the Soviets. As the talks wore on and they drew closer to an agreement both sides would go out of their way to find nice things to say about each other.
Watch for similar events in the coming days and weeks. It will be a sign that a reconciliation is at hand.
I'm surprised -- I didn't think it would. Good news.
*LMAO What next? Charlie Manson issuing Press releases saying the Govt has yet to meet all of his demands so he will remain in Prison?
*DICI stands for Deracinated, Insane, Chimeral, Incoherent
*lefevbre did this after giving his word and signing an agreement he would NOT go ahead with the ordinations. Of course, he reneged on his word. And many in the sspx cult think these are the sorts of actions guaranteeing he will be, someday, declared a saint
* WRONG !!!!
Pope Paul VI, 1976...Use of the old Ordo Missae is in no way left to the choice of priests or people. The Instruction of 14 June 1971 provided the celebration of Mass according to the former rite would be permitted, by faculty from the Ordinary, only for aged or sick priests offering the sacrifice without a congregation. The new Ordo Missae was promulgated in place of the old after careful deliberation and to carry out the directives of Vatican Council II. For a like reason, our predecessor St. Pius V, after the Council of Trent, commanded the use of the Roman Missal revised by his authority.
In virtue of the supreme authority granted to us by Jesus Christ we command the same ready obedience to the other laws, relating to liturgy, discipline, pastoral activity, made in these last years to put into effect the decrees of the Council
"The BEST that can be said for Fellay is he is ignorant The ignorance and the lies NEVER end. It is all agit/prop all the time. And this is the outfit guaranteeing Tradition?
It is an absolute disgrace "The Wanderer" is publishing this claptrap
*Lefevbre SIGNED EACH OF THOSE DOCUMENTS so we have the hysterically comical and insane scene played out daily whereby the schism Lefevbre started publicly opposes the very Documents he signed.
John Stewart can't write stuff this funny
THe SSPX considers the Second Vatican Council heretical in these aresas which means, it publicly takes the position, without acknowle4dghing it, that its very founder is a heretic because he signed those heretical documents.
Does this make any sense? NO.
Do the sspx cult members care? NO
*Nasty and disingenuous.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger: The Feast of Faith: Approaches to a Theology of the Liturgy
Lest there be any misunderstanding, let me add that as far as its contents in concerned (apart from a few criticisms), I am very grateful for the new Missal, for the way it has enriched the treasury of prayers and prefaces, for the new eucharistic prayers and the increased number of texts for use on weekdays, etc., quite apart from the availability of the vernacular. But I do regard it as unfortunate that we have been presented with the idea of a new book rather with that of continuity within a single liturgical history.
In my view, a new edition will need to make it quite clear that the so-called Missal of Paul VI is nothing other than a renewed form of the same Missal to which Pius X, Urban VIII, Pius V and their predecessors have contributed, right from the Church?s earliest history. It is of the very essence of the Church that she should be aware of her unbroken continuity throughout the history of faith, expressed in an ever-present unity of prayer.
*WAy to go Wanderer, spred hatred about an apporved Rite of the Catholic Church. So what is tRent teqaches that such a thing in anathema?
*So WHAT? IN additon to being nearly infallibly wrong every time he speaks about the Liturgy, he teaches the normative mass is EVIL.
From John Paul II and Benedict XVI – What Next for the Traditional Mass?
Seeking to improve the situation, in 1986 John Paul II appointed an advisory commission of cardinals. The findings of this commission have never been officially published, but the information that we have from serious sources allows us to affirm, with regards to the question if the Traditional Mass had ever been suppressed, that the opinion of the cardinals was that it had never been suppressed and that a bishop did not have the right to forbid a priest from saying the Traditional Mass. Cardinal Ratzinger in his conference of 24 October 1998 underlined that the Council never forbade the use of the previous liturgical books. In a recent interview, Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estevez emphasised this same opinion that the Missal of St Pius V had never been suppressed.
I find the modern idea there is such a thing as a "good" schism a repulsive and sickening development and I think it is a result of relativism, secularism, and feminism which has so deeply infected and poisoned this cult. The schism embodies eveything bad about the modern world. It is protestantism in Fiddlebacks. It does the work of Satan and it is praised as a preserver of Tradition.
I am going to post a reminder from better days about how to think about schism.
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans
... CHAPTER VIII.--LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP.
See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.
CHAPTER IX.--HONOUR THE BISHOP.
Moreover, it is in accordance with reason that we should return to soberness [of conduct], and, while yet we have opportunity, exercise repentance towards God. It is well to reverence both God and the bishop. He who honours the bishop has been honoured by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does [in reality] serve the devil.
THE SSPX SCHISM SERVES SATAN
*Read what you posted. You STILL need permisssion
From The Altar and the Direction of Liturgical Prayer
Admittedly, these connections were obscured or fell into total oblivion in the church buildings and liturgical practice of the modern age. This is the only explanation for the fact that the common direction of prayer of priest and people got labeled as "celebrating towards the wall" or "turning your back on the people" and came to seem absurd and totally unacceptable. And this alone explains why the meal -- even in modern pictures -- became the normative idea of liturgical celebration for Christians.
In reality what happened was that an unprecedented clericalization came on the scene. Now the priest -- the "presider", as they now prefer to call him -- becomes the real point of reference for the whole Liturgy. Everything depends on him. We have to see him, to respond to him, to be involved in what he is doing. His creativity sustains the whole thing.
Not surprisingly, people try to reduce this newly created role by assigning all kinds of liturgical functions to different individuals and entrusting the "creative" planning of the Liturgy to groups of people who like to, and are supposed to, "make a contribution of their own". Less and less is God in the picture. More and more important is what is done by the human beings who meet here and do not like to subject themselves to a "pre-determined pattern".
I read ya, brother. Any time fellay says anything I immediately respond "wrong". He is infallibly wrong on liturgy and theology. He is incapable of teaching the truth in his position as the schismatic tsar
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.