Recent Activity Between Rome and Society Saint Pius X (SSPX)

Diocese Report blog ^

[Polycarp]

Msgr. Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Saint Pius X Society, declared in an interview that there is a two way rapproachment of the Holy See in regard to theSociety. He indeed received a letter of March 18 from Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, where the Cardinal proposes a working group where theologists of the Vatican and Society will study the problem of the Mass. Another letter, April 5 and signed by Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, proposes to make contact with Mgr Fellay. This last he is said to be ready " to answer positively ". On the New Mass, Bishop Fellay reiterated that he regards it as valid, if there are the matter, form and intention required by the Church, but that it is " dangerous for the faith ". On the statutes of the apostolic administration that Rome proposes, Mgr Fellay declared: " It is a splendid Rolls-Royce, since we would have ordinary jurisdiction, but we hesitate because of the many bumps in the road... ". With the question of knowing if Jean-Paul II would ignore the opposition of the majority of the European bishops, who do not want an agreement to take place, Bishop Fellay answered: " the true solution is in the supernatural means, in fidelity to doctrine, the Truth which does not change ".

(Translated from Monde et Vie, April 18, 2002).

[Polycarp]

I truly hope JPII's Vatican bureaucracy can heal the only schism of his pontificate, the Lefevre schism, before JPII passes from the scene.

[Mike Fieschko]

The Pope has just appointed a coadjutor bishop for the new apostolic administration in Campos, Brazil. This according to the Vatican Information Service.

Campos was the see of Bp Castro Mayer, who assisted at the consecrations in 1988 by Lefebvre.

The Campos priests now have their own structure and a bishop to succeed Bp Rangel.

[sinkspur]

Williamson is the fly in the ointment. He doesn't want any reunion and has sabotaged everything Fellay has tried.

Don't get your hopes up.

[redhead]

"I truly hope JPII's Vatican bureaucracy can heal the only schism of his pontificate, the Lefevre schism, before JPII passes from the scene."

Amen. Let it be, Lord.

[FBDinNJ]

That's true, but we can always hope. I pray that Pope JPII can end this schism. The sticking point currently seems to be that the SSPX won't accept Rome's offers to come fully back into the church until the Pope grants all Priests the right to say the Tridentine Mass, whenever they want to, and I don't think this is currently a posibility. The best bet would be for the SSPX to accept the Pope's offer of an Apostolic Administration, and for some reason they currently don't want to do this.

Here's some recent pictures of Bishop Williamson and Bishop Fellay where they ordained a few men to the Priesthood up at their Seminary in Minnesota.

Bishop Fellay

Bishop Williamson

[american colleen]

The sticking point currently seems to be that the SSPX won't accept Rome's offers to come fully back into the church until the Pope grants all Priests the right to say the Tridentine Mass, whenever they want to, and I don't think this is currently a posibility.

How come? What would be the big deal with a priest saying the Mass in Latin if he wants to do so? I don't understand.

[Salvation]

The Campos priests now have their own structure and a bishop to succeed Bp Rangel.

What is happening here? Splitting from Rome and ordaining their own bishops?

I guess I am uninformed on all of this.

[Mike Fieschko]

Bp Rangel was consecrated in 1991 by Bernard Williamson, one of the men Lefebvre consecrated in 1988. Bp Rangel is now completely 'regularized' with the Pope.

Rangel is a bishop in full communion, for some months now.

I don't know how old Bp Rangel is, but one concern that the Campos priests and laity had, was that Bp Rangel would die and the Vatican would then appoint a man whose views, etc., would be 'inconsistent' (can't think of a better word) with Castro Mayer and with Rangel.

The Brazilian Portugese page of the Society of St John Vianney has information about the events. The Bishop of Campos attended at the Mass and I believe the nuncio to Brazil was also in attendance.

The Pope has now appointed a coadjutor bishop (I assume with right of succession), so the concern has been addressed.

[FBDinNJ]

No the Campos priests were in a state of schism, just like the SSPX, but a deal was worked out with them late last year where they have their own Apostolic Administration. The Apostolic Administration allows the Campos Priests (the Society of Saint John Vianney) to answer to the Pope and not to their local Bishop in Brazil. This allows the SSJV to setup parishes and ordain priests without having to go through Ecclesia Dei, which would require them to get the approval of their local Bishop to say their Latin mass or to ordain their own Priests.

[FBDinNJ]

Its all church politics. As Ecclesia Dei (the Papal Encyclical which allows the Latin Mass, according to the 1962 missal) currently works is that if a Parish priest wants to have a Latin mass said in his Parish he has to get an indult from his Bishop. The problem with this is that if you are a priest in a very liberal Diocese the Bishop often rejects any requests to allow a Latin mass to be said. What the SSPX wants in effect is a system which would allow regular Diocesan priests to say the Latin Mass, according to the 1962 Missal, without having to get the approval of their local Bishop.

[tiki]

I think it would be wonderful. One of my best friends is SSPX and I would love for this to come together. I can understand , to a degree, why they did what they did, they wanted to keep the faith pure. They couldn't bring up their children in churches which were being taught to accept so many things that they think are wrong. The liberals who hid the Tabernacle and turned Mass into a focus on the worshipers instead of Jesus. I also think that they should have stayed and worked from within to restore true Catholicism. It's easy to take your marbles and go home, it takes courage to stay and fight for what is right.

[FBDinNJ]

Here's some pictures of the ceremony where the Priests of Campos ended their schism.

That's Cardinal Hoyos on the Left and Bishop Rangel on the right. Bishop Rangel is in charge (I guess its now officially co-in charge) of the SSJV.

[sspxsteph]

I am no Theologin of the SSPX, so I can not speak on behalf of the Society of Saint PiusX. I do know that they do not reconize themselves as a schism. I know that they are in contact with the Pope and have always looked to him as the head of the Church. I think that one thing that is clear, they do not want to deal with any liberals because they know what they try to do. They just want to try to live on what the church has been. Many of my friends say, "Why change something that was so good." SSPX does not want to leave out any tradition like the importance of the Brown Scapular, concecration a family to the Most Sacred Heart, and the daily reciting of the Rosery.
I think that it would be realy awesome if the Pope would heal this schism. I have not seen the SSPX trying to do harm to souls, but try to make us live a more devout life, and reverence for the Body Blood Soul Divinity of Jesus Christ. That is one reason that I love the society so much. I also think it would be great if more churches would do the indult mass, so that others can experience
the Latin Mass.
Always pray for the spirital petitions of the Pope.
Dominus Vobiscum Et Cum Spiritu tuo

[Dajjal]

I truly hope JPII's Vatican bureaucracy can heal the only schism of his pontificate, the Lefevre schism, before JPII passes from the scene.

I pray this may come to pass.

[narses]

Have you spoken with either Bp. Fellay or Bp. Williamson?

[narses]

And they clearly have good cause for suspicion, look at the treatment of their parallel order, the FSSP, in the last year. Promised full Communion with Rome, their own Superior and eventually Bishop and freedom from the New Mass, they lost all of that (except Rome) with the replacement of Fr. Bissick and the order that all may concelebrate the New Mass without let. Moreover, the 1962 Missal is being taken away, Communion in the hand is being pushed and they are in disarray due to the betrayal from Rome that happened during the very negotiations with the SSPX to return.

[american colleen]

Thank you for your clarification on the indult Mass. It is breathtaking how the Bishops defy the Pope and the Magisterium - I am under the impression that JPII told the Bishops to make the Latin Mass available to all.

Cardinal Law (my Bishop) is supposed to be an orthodox Bishop, but we have only one Indult Mass here in Massachusetts.

[american colleen]

Can you elaborate on the FSSP story? I had not heard any of this. What happened?

[narses]

A small number of modernists in France within the FSSP started concelebrating the Novus Ordo Mass. The SG ordered them to stop. They appealed to the Vatican, they were upheld and the SG removed.

[sinkspur]

A small number of modernists in France within the FSSP started concelebrating the Novus Ordo Mass.

So one is a "modernist" if he "concelebrates" the Novus Ordo?

The FSSP is in union with Rome, so, of course, no one in it can forbid the Novus Ordo.

And no, I've never spoken to either Fellay or Williamson, but Williamson has been reported, in a news release at TCRnews.com, to be the one who is adamantly against accepting any part of Vatican II.

These guys better reconcile with JPII while he's still around. A more moderate Pope will turn his back on them.

[sinkspur]

They just want to try to live on what the church has been.

The SSPX rejects Vatican II in its entirety, at least the more radical faction within it does.

Williamson doesn't want an apostolic administration (something like a rite within the Catholic Church, which would allow the SSPX to go on as before), probably because he feels this to be some kind of second-class status.

What do they think they are now?

[narses]

When the FSSP was formed it was assured that it would be a society devoted to the Tridentine Mass and the 1962 Missal and the rules of the Order forbade the concelebration of the New Mass. Every member agreed when they joined to those rules. Rome vitiated that rule and eviscrated the leadership of the FSSP. Now they've replaced the former SG and have started changing the Tridentine Mass itself to more closely conform to the N.O. Mass. That in spite of the promises made to those who formed the FSSP at the invitation of Rome. It was and is bad faith. It was and is reason for the SSPX to procede with deliberate caution.

[sinkspur]

It was and is reason for the SSPX to procede with deliberate caution.

Only if one values the Tridentine Mass above union with the successor of Peter.

[narses]

Don't depend on one news source for your information is my advice sinkspur. Rome reached out to the SSPX, Rome is working with them, Rome gave them permission to celebrate the Tridentine Mass in Rome during the Jubillee (would Rome agree to that if they were truly in Schism?) and Rome has already agreed to remove the suspensions and the excommunications as they have with the Eastern Orthodox seperated brethern, it is now simply a question of timing. This is a major issue and the SSPX will return to Rome and when they do it will be with the removal of the Indult that appears to forbid everyone except the FSSP the Tridentine Mass except with permission. That is the biggest stumbling block, not Bp. Williamson. That plus the ability to discuss, debate and argue wrt the merits of the N.O. Mass, a block apparently removed by the news herein.

[sinkspur]

Was this ordination held in a tent? Couldn't the SSPX at least find a funeral home or something?

[sinkspur]

This is a major issue and the SSPX will return to Rome and when they do it will be with the removal of the Indult that appears to forbid everyone except the FSSP the Tridentine Mass except with permission.

Is this your opinion, or is there something definitive on this, as this is the first I've seen anywhere that Rome will lift the Indult.

Does this mean the SSPX will accept the legitimacy of Vatican II, as Lefebvre was ready to do before he died but Wiliamson said no?

[narses]

Since the SSPX has never left unity with Rome, rather choosing to remain faithful to the eternal truths of Rome against a modernist revolt that has led to heretics being appointed Cardinal, your comment is meaningless noise. If the SSPX wasn't faithful to Rome, they wouldn't come every time Rome called.

[sinkspur]

That plus the ability to discuss, debate and argue wrt the merits of the N.O. Mass, a block apparently removed by the news herein.

Well, Fellay and company can discuss, debate and argue the merits of the N.O. Mass now. Apparently, Fellay says he accepts its validity, which is progress.

[narses]

Vatican II is not and never has been the issue. If you believe that it is, you are uninformed. A.Bp. Lefevre was one of the Fathers of Vatican II.

[sinkspur]

Since the SSPX has never left unity with Rome, rather choosing to remain faithful to the eternal truths of Rome against a modernist revolt that has led to heretics being appointed Cardinal, your comment is meaningless noise.

The SSPX is schismatic, and has been declared so by JPII himself. If they're in "union" now, why the need for any kind of "rapproachment"?

[sinkspur]

A.Bp. Lefevre was one of the Fathers of Vatican II.

Please. Lefebvre rejected Vatican II shortly after its conclusion, though he was prepared to renounce his rejection shortly before his death.

[narses]

I've read his books, you misrepresent his position enormously. He said:

"...we refuse... to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which became clearly manifest during the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it."

That isn't a rejection of Vatican II, rather a rejection of the so-called "reforms" that followed. Precision is a valuable tool in written debate sinkspur.

[FBDinNJ]

I think you're being a little bit too harsh. The SSPX usually only holds these types of ceremonies in tents because of the large crowds that they attract. The SSPX has many large churches that they own, and I believe it was last year that they consecrated a church of theirs outside of Denver which they spent about two million dollars on. This is besides the point though, because from all the pictures I've seen of the ordination, it appears that the ceremony was done properly and with a sense of reverence.

Here's a picture of the altar used at the recent ordination.

This is a picture from outside of the SSPX's Seminary up in Minnesota

This picture and the next one is from inside the chapel of their seminary

This is a photo of another ordination which took place at their Seminary in Switzerland.

[sinkspur]

That last picture....I've never seen black vestments worn at an ordination. Not a good sign.

[narses]

Wow, the color of the vestments bothers you, but does honey in the Host? Or no Words of Consecration?

[sinkspur]

Wow, the color of the vestments bothers you, but does honey in the Host? Or no Words of Consecration?

Black vestments at an ordination don't bother you? They'd bother me, if I was one of the poor saps being ordained by the white-glove-wearing Fellay.

Anecdotal abuses (such as honey in the host) ought to be dealt with.

As for the "no words of Consecration," you are referring to a Vatican-approved recognition of a Church which believes in the Real Presence. I have no problem with it.

[St.Chuck]

Moreover, the 1962 Missal is being taken away, Communion in the hand is being pushed and they are in disarray due to the betrayal from Rome

I have never seen nor heard of any of these allegations. I have been to many FSSP mass communities, at least in this country, and I can assure you that nothing could be further from the truth. It sounds like SSPX propaganda to me.

[patent]

The sticking point currently seems to be that the SSPX won't accept Rome's offers to come fully back into the church until the Pope grants all Priests the right to say the Tridentine Mass, whenever they want to, and I don't think this is currently a posibility.

How come? What would be the big deal with a priest saying the Mass in Latin if he wants to do so? I don't understand.

For quite some time the Pope has been in charge of the liturgy. He determines what is the normative Roman Rite, not some schismatic bishop or priest. He determines what all the priests will say for Mass.

Now, we have a group of four illicitly consecrated Bishops and their priests who don’t like what a recent Pope did with the Mass, so they schismed. In order to return they want to dictate to the Pope that all priests should be able to say the Mass as they prefer it, not as the Pope prefers it.

Exactly who are they to dictate what Mass the Pope’s priests should say? Can anyone dictate the terms of the Mass by simply schisming, and making that a condition of returning?

Schismatics to not determine what Rite of Mass is allowed and what is not. The Pope does.

patent  +AMDG

[patent]

And they clearly have good cause for suspicion, look at the treatment of their parallel order, the FSSP, in the last year. Promised full Communion with Rome, their own Superior and eventually Bishop and freedom from the New Mass,

Care to document all that?

Moreover, the 1962 Missal is being taken away, Communion in the hand is being pushed

Care to document this as well?

Dominus Vobiscum

patent  +AMDG

[patent]

Rome gave them permission to celebrate the Tridentine Mass in Rome during the Jubillee (would Rome agree to that if they were truly in Schism?)

FYI, Rome has also allowed Orthodox priests to celebrate Mass in Rome. They are schismaic of course.

patent  +AMDG

[narses]

I wonder, at this point, what Rome thinks schism is? They embrace the heretical "Mass" without any words of consecration of the Abyssinian Church of the East, they retract the excommunications of the "schismatic" Orthodox priests, they embrace and affirm every sacramental act of the SSJV, they publish an Order of the Mass so liberal and ambiguous the Confession of Augsburg allows it's use in certain of their services and they embrace at Assisi almost every false religion known to modern man. From a juridical, legalistic perspective you may be correct, although even that is far from certain. From the perspective of the Faith itself, I don't think so. Like the times of multiple Popes, Roman authority is being questioned on every side. The SSPX is far from alone in that, where they are in a minority is that they do not question the Dogmas of the Faith or the Deposit of Faith, rather they question (and refuse to accept) the ambiguities and abuses of the Faith by the Modernists. When Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos pointed out the SSPX desire to fight modernism, HH said, "that is us!" meaning that is his fight also.

[narses]

Regards 40, I will with time. I heard that from a FSSP priest second hand. I will need to research a bit to document it.

[narses]

7/10/00

Ecclesia Dei Deposes Fr. Bisig
Fr. Arnaud Devillers Imposed
as New Superior General of FSSP

A recent report from the Fraternity of St. Peter meeting in Wigratzbad, Germany states that Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos has replaced Fr. Josef Bisig with Fr. Arnaud Devillers as Superior General of the Fraternity of St. Peter.
There was no election, and Fr Devillers was imposed upon the Fraternity by the Cardinal. A good number of the priests walked out in protest. It is fairly certain that Father Devillers had no idea that this was going to happen.
It will be interesting to see if the Holy See explains why they removed Fr. Bisig and why the election (which would have shown a majority in support of Fr. Bisig) was forbidden.
Fr. Devillers had stated in the past that he did not desire to be the Superior General so there may be some question as to why he is now forced to be the Superior General.
Ecclesia Dei's, Msgr. Camille Perl has openly favored the action of the dissident 16 French priests.
No matter what happens, it remains certain that the traditionalist movement is not built upon personalities or the desire for popularity. The principles that have formed and guided the movement have been in place for decades (actually centuries since the apostolic age). The principles survive no matter who the leaders are. True, the principles need to be incarnated in living, traditionalist parishes, but even with adverse legislation (if it should happen) the idea stays alive among those who believe in the justice and goodness of the cause.

From http://www.latinmass.org/Untit led/articles.html

[narses]

See above, read that in light of the following post (which preceeds in time the removal of Fr. Bisig).

Rumor Three: Father Josef Bisig is about to be replaced as the Fraternity's Superior General, or an apostolic administrator is soon to be named who will take over most of Father Bisig's powers.

Not only is this not accurate, but the request of the Commission Ecclesia Dei that Father Bisig not make personnel changes until a number of administrative issues have been resolved has been rescinded. Father Bisig has the same authority as the elected head of any similar community, such as the Dominicans or Jesuits.

From http://www.latin-mass-society.org/fssp.htm

See also http://www.unavoce.org/Cardina l_Hoyos_Castrillon_letter.htm

For confirmation that the FSSP is "living through a severe crisis" and in a "conflict-ridden situation" currently (not my words, rather those of Dario Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos.

[narses]

See my last post also. It is not "propaganda", it is based on coversations with those who have been involved either first or second hand with the issues involved.

[narses]

Simply put, in Protocol 1411/99 the Vatican has ordered that any priest, even one belonging to an institute enjoying the privilege of using the 1962 Roman Missal, may freely celebrate or concelebrate Mass using the revised Missal of 1970 with no impediment whatever, the will of their superiors notwithstanding. But the Vatican went further, mandating that FSSP priests must say the new Mass or concelebrate under some conditions.

Thus in one brief statement the Vatican repudiated the agreement it had reached with the Fraternity in 1988, and Fraternity liberals, in orchestrating this, relinquished a privilege-exclusive use of the liturgical books of 1962-for which a few thousand priests around the world continue to yearn.


From http://www.latinmassmagazine.c om/semi-traditionalists.asp

[narses]

The viability of the FSSP and other traditional priestly societies is now endangered as the thousands of faithful who have given them financial support, often at the cost of considerable personal sacrifices, did so on the strict understanding that these societies were committed to the exclusive use of the liturgical books in use 1962. Such an understanding is in no way rigid or schismatic, but simply conforms to the clearly expressed wishes of the Sovereign Pontiff in Ecclesia Dei. If this is no longer the case, then many will certainly withdraw their financial support. Is it possible that there are those within the Curia who desire this? What is incontrovertible, is that once protocol 1411 appears in Notitiae, and God forbid that it does, it will appear that the only priestly society whose members are certain use the 1962 liturgical books exclusively is the Fraternity of Saint Pius X. Archbishop Lefebvre withdrew for the 1988 agreement with the Holy See because he felt that the Vatican could not be relied upon to keep its promises. It would appear that there are now powerful forces in the Curia determined to prove that he was right.

From http://www.unavoce.org/violation.htm

[ELS]

patent, there is an FSSP chapel near me and I have spoken to a few parishioners from there. They have said essentially the same thing. narses, I would be interested in any documentation you can find.

[ELS]

Oops! That's what I get for not reading the entire thread first.