Catholic Online Forum

JMJ

translation of the Vatican communique thanks to Rorate Caeli http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/

CONGREGATIO PRO EPISCOPIS

By way of a letter of December 15, 2008 addressed to His Eminence Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Mons. Bernard Fellay, also in the name of the other three Bishops consecrated on June 30, 1988, requested anew the removal of the latae sententiae excommunication formally declared with the Decree of the Prefect of this Congregation on July 1, 1988. In the aforementioned letter, Mons. Fellay affirms, among other things: "We are always firmly determined in our will to remain Catholic and to place all our efforts at the service of the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is the Roman Catholic Church. We accept its teachings with filial disposition. We believe firmly in the Primacy of Peter and in its prerogatives, and for this the current situation makes us suffer so much."

His Holiness Benedict XVI - paternally sensitive to the spiritual unease manifested by the interested party due to the sanction of excommunication and trusting in the effort expressed by them in the aforementioned letter of not sparing any effort to deepen the necessary discussions with the Authority of the Holy See in the still open matters, so as to achieve shortly a full and satisfactory solution of the problem posed in the origin - decided to reconsider the canonical situation of Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta, arisen with their episcopal consecration.

With this act, it is desired to consolidate the reciprocal relations of confidence and to intensify and grant stability to the relationship of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X with this Apostolic See. This gift of peace, at the end of the Christmas celebrations, is also intended to be a sign to promote unity in the charity of the universal Church and to try to vanquish the scandal of division.

It is hoped that this step be followed by the prompt accomplishment of full communion with the Church of the entire Fraternity of Saint Pius X, thus testifying true fidelity and true recognition of the Magisterium and of the authority of the Pope with the proof of visible unity.

Based in the faculty expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, in virtue of the present Decree, I remit from Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta the censure of latae sententiae excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988, while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time.

Rome, from the Congregation for Bishops, January 21, 2009.

Card. Giovanni Battista Re
Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

Fabrizio,

This is wonderful news! Praise be to God. I am trying to understand the phrases used. Does this mean there is immediate union with SSPX?

_________________
Ian DC
Blessed Ever Virgin Mary -- Sanctuary and resting-place of the Blessed Trinity where God dwells in greater and more divine splendour than anywhere else in the universe

No, the 4 men who were consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre have had their censure removed. Hopefully they will soon reconcile with the Church.

_________________
Peace,
David Cheney

JMJ

Ian,

as said in the decree, they'll have to prve that their stated will to obey the HolY Father and life in full communion corresponds to more than words

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

Thanks, David, Fabrizio.

_________________
Ian DC
Blessed Ever Virgin Mary -- Sanctuary and resting-place of the Blessed Trinity where God dwells in greater and more divine splendour than anywhere else in the universe

It is indeed good news. It clarifies several things:

a. That they were under canonical penalty of excommunication (something some SSPX apologists sought to try to cloud).
b. That the Catholic Church is removing any canonical barriers from their full reconciliation.
c. That the onus is now on these men to take the steps necessary for full reconciliation.

It's a brilliant move on the part of the Church, IMO. It takes away any pretext that the Church is preventing full communion, but rather says, "the door is open. You need only choose to walk through it."

_________________
Kris H.

"He is Your best servant who desires not so much to hear from You what may be comfortable to his own will, but rather to conform his will to whatever he shall hear from You."--St. Augustine of Hippo

It appears to me that they were validly, but illicitly, consecrated bishops. Does this remove the illicit? Are they now a part of the teaching magisterium?

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.

I'm a pretty well educated Catholic...not fantastically well, and I have no formal training in canon law (all my classes were in theology proper), but even after reading about this for the last couple days on Father Z's blog and Jimmy Akin's blog and American Papist, I was not clear on what this actually accomplishes.

I think as this news gets out, it is critical that we emphasize the fact that this does not, itself, accomplish communion with Rome all by itself, but requires an action by the members of the SSPX to be fully reconciled to the Church. This is not something I understood in my initial reading on this topic.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff, think you are right. The kind of excommunication that ordaining bishops without Holy See approval results in is "reserved for the Holy See."

What the Holy See has done is say that the statements of fidelity, as far as they have gone, has led the Holy Father to "decided to reconsider the canonical situation," and allow the Cardinal to "remit from Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta the censure of latae sententiae excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988, while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time."

So they are no longer excommunicated, but they (and the SSPX) are not yet in full and complete communion with the Church, from what I can tell. The only thing standing in the way of that is acts of fidelity to the Magisterium and the Holy See on the part of the entire Society, as well as, I would imagine, absolution via Sacramental Confession on the part of the bishops who were excommunicated.

Joe,

I would imagine that the Holy Father would have to make a separate determination on whether to normalize their episcopal ordinations.

_________________
Kris H.

"He is Your best servant who desires not so much to hear from You what may be comfortable to his own will, but rather to conform his will to whatever he shall hear from You."--St. Augustine of Hippo

JMJ



No. The wished for "proof of visible unity" is yet to come and Rome has to figure out what to do with them once they prove they are honestly seeking full communion.

Fr. Z's take on this aspect MISCONCEPTIONS: What the lifting of the SSPX excom’s means for people

other Z-comments on the remission of the 4 excommunications:

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/01/sspx-lea ... -petition/

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/01/some-tho ... and-unity/

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/01/a-french ... r-finigan/

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/01/lifted/

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/01/fr-z-agr ... interview/

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

This is a wonderful step in reconciliation. Let us pray the SSPX returns to full communion soon.


A word of caution: I do not recommend reading the comments on the stories at Commonweal or NCR, at the risk of losing your peace (and possibly your lunch.)

_________________
@-->----- Agnes Bradford

JMJ

moderator's warning and note

ALL: be careful with what you write. Some insulting posts, after careful consideration, had to be removed. If you can't control your venom and THINK before posting, just don't post. If what the Church does "sickens" you, maybe it's time to stop remodelling its face in your image and to try to understand what's happening here, iwhether being Catholic and not having the Church serve your ideology is the goal.

We have discussed SSPX before. While COL Forum is fully and enthusiastcally Catholic and thus sympathetic to ALL tradition, we have addressed the grave errors of the Lefebvrian community repeatedly (a member of a "traditional" parish myself, I have never spared SSPX my harsh criticism for the positions of some of its leaders, I don't even have to explain where COL stands on this - see Fr. Sotelo's brief essay in the Library).

THAT SAID, it is fully understandable that papers and TVs are now full of howling liberationistas, orphans of the follies of the 70's and heresiarcs (overt or in disguise) who call for vengeance from Heaven. For decades, the Church has been more than acceptably tolerant of all sorts of theologically (and at times psychologically) borderline kooks who have inflicted grave damages to the life of the Church. All they have done when just criticism of theit excesses was raised was to call for "inclusiveness" and "openmindedness" and to whine about the "integralism" of Rome. Now, I am of the opinion that we can't be inclusive and openminded with errors that cost souls, no matter on what side of the road the ditch they'll try to drag you to is found.

HOWEVER, those who'll rather buy a book of Hans Kung and attack Humanae Vitae sooner than being caught defending Magisterium and the Church will now have to show that "charity", openmindedness and inclusiveness they have for so long demanded for themselves and accept the will of the Holy Father, who even when he's asleep knows what he's doing better than you and me in our best moments of consciousness.

COL Forum, through its moderators and its qualified and loyal Catholic members, will not cease to criticise ANYONE acting or talking in defiance of sound Catholic doctrine as handed down by the Apostles and guarded by the Pope and the bishops in communion with him. Because Catholic faith is necessary for salvation (yes, and we won't have to explain that to the usual suspects here), we understand how important faith seeking understanding is for our eternal destiny and what is meant by saying that the Eucharist is the fons et culmen of the life of the Church.

Instead of panicking for no reason, go read the decree. SSPX still has to give a "proof of visible unity " and the remission of the canonical penalties does not, of itself, solve all the problems and restore full communion (read Fr. Z articles linked above). It is still recommended that Catholics avoid partaking in SSPX activities as long as this full communion is restored (and Rome says it is restored) unless strictly necessary.

The problems some SSPXers have with certain documents of Vatican II are - albeit from apparently opposite points of view - the same modernists have: both think that they represent a doctrinal "change" from the past, a past idolized by SSPX, loathed by modernists, misunderstood and misrepresented by both. THAT is the main problem - as said by the Pope - that "hermeneutic of rupture" poisoning the life of today's Church and percolating from ALL erroneous positions as you can see from their Ecclesiology, Christology and Theology of Sacraments - for instance- all subjects of J. Ratzinger's reflections and actions of 60-plus years of religious life.

The Church didn't change her doctrine and her teachings when for decades apologists of criminal socialists regimes or/and abortion, contraception and sodomy where left with their canonical status unprejudiced, and the stupid words of an individual were not taken as representative of entire groups and religious families, it won't change anything now. Dissent on the unchangebale and binding teachings summarized by Humanae Vitae has been tolerated in our seminaries, faculties and dioceses far beyond tolerability, but the Church keeps teaching Humanae Vitae (and will slowly but surely win each one of these battles eventually).

Some here are speaking as if they knew this situation and the problems involved better than the Pope himself. Who do they think they are? As if the Pope - a bit like what some seem to be doing when they post to COL - woke up yesterday and without no careful consideration, out of pure lack of things to do in his day - and maybe because of his national origin (!!!) - decided and wrote about a very dangerous situation with obvious worngheadedness and and irresponsibility. As if he wasn't the man who fought all his life for the restoration of sanity in the Church, as if he wasn't the guy who was there - as head of CDF and JPII's most trusted and loyal Cardinal and friend - when it became obvious that SSPXers were impossible to reconcile at the time, as if he hadn't lived to preserve the Catholic faith every single minute of his life, Joseph Ratzinger, the greatest living theologian, the Prefect of CDF, the Successor of Peter.

Don't you think the Pope might know what he's doing? Don't you think there might have been talks and clarifications and careful examinations of things? Don't you think that the Pope cares for souls at least as much as you do? Maybe he knows a thing or two of the Church that might excape your superior intellect?

Now, we are going to discuss this issue in a civilized way. I have my worries about this situation myself, but I see nothing but reasons to rejoice for the possible healing of a deep wound in the Mystic Body of Christ (possible one of the worst wounds in recent times, with the worst consequences for the life of the Church, one for which SSPX bears grave - although not exclusive - responsibilities).

But we can guarantee you that any unwarranted assertion will be addressed as it deserves and that anything short that charitable and intellectually honest reflections - as interpreted by our staff - will have its consequences and that no one will be allowed to insult the Pope and offend the feelings and hinder comprehension of what is happening, especially for those younger brethren who might ignore what happened in the Church in the last 20 (or 50) years.

If you can't rejoice or just can't contain your splenetic mood, just don't post. The same goes for SSPX fans who might be tempted to understand the reasons for the Holy Father's generous concession as a vindication for their various and grave errors of the past (hoping they're in the past, that's what the decree asks to "prove").

Now, please, let's go back to a reasonable and mature discussion about this momentous development of a situation that has meant so much pain and tears to countless decent and loyal people who just wanted to serve the Church that was, that is and that will always be.

we'll let people cool down a bit and then reopen this thread to mature - and closely watched - discussion.

In all charity but with the firm intention of serving the Church, cum Petro, sub Petro.

Fabrizio
COL Forum Staff

SSPX Bishop Fellay issued a statement following the lifting of the excommunication. I'm curious about the wording.

The excommunication of the bishops consecrated by His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, on June 30, 1988, which had been declared by the Congregation for Bishops in a decree dated July 1, 1988, and which we had always contested, has been withdrawn by another decree mandated by Benedict XVI and issued by the same Congregation on January 21, 2009.

He refers to Lefebve as "His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre" but refers to the Holy Father only as "Benedict XVI" not as "His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI."

That sounds almost as if the bishop were deliberately insulting the Pope yet why would he do that, especially at this moment? Are those two forms of address, used together as they are in the statement, proper? Am I reading too much into this?

Seminole Jim

_________________
"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged."
- - G.K. Chesterton

JMJ

Jim,

I don't think it was deliberate. He uses "Holy Father" elsewhere in the text and is known to have used the more respectful formulas in other documents and statements.

There are other passages that interest me which could be read in different ways depending on who's reading the text: the Pope (a tough cookie to outsmart though) and the SSPX hardliner. But I think this is the moment for openness and prayerful union of intents, rather than for second-guessing and suspects.

Remember, some of these people are terribly wrong on a number of issues, but some others among them are right on just as many subjects and have suffered unjustly for years and years, both because of the imprudence, blindness and and bitter zeal of some of their leaders and because of less than honest manouvres in the Curia and at the level of Bishops Conferences and local dioceses (the same treatment that was reserved to the authentic teachings of the Council and Papal Magisterium and those loyal to them, mind you).

However, a 30-year process started by John Paul II and furtherly advanced by Benedict XVI is revitalizing the Church and bringing her out of the post-conciliar tunnel. There is nothing people of good will now lack in their communities to help make the Bride of Christ shine in the eyes of the word but most important in the eyes of the lord. Hopefully SSPXers will join this gigantic effort as have many other groups (not only from the "tridentine" side) which were able to step beyond the quarrels and the prejudices of an era all men of good will hope is going to be buried forever.

If they miss this chance offered to them so generously and begin acting like they "won" and Rome "backed down" on something, tey will soon find themselves back in the same place: out of the Church, or, as we now say, in less than perfect communion with Peter. I am confident that a great part of the SSPX is now rejoicing and living this moment as it should: a moment of healing and reconciliation and an occasion for the Church. I am sure that many -especially young - hearts were touched. We now have a splendid chance for a much needed shot in the arm of solid priests and enthusiastic young men.

To say nothing of the many families and individual lay people who just wanted to have a place where to worship as their ancestors did and to ensure some sound catechesis for their kids, with no interest (or even knowledge) of the issues behind the schismatic acts of Marcel Lefebvre or of some stupid and groundless things said by some misguided representatives of SSPX.

Let us all rejoice and pray that evereything turns out for the greater glory of God and for the salvation of souls which Christ has chosen to save through His only and indefectible Church.

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

Thank you for unlocking this thread. I want deeply to understand this fully and still have some questions.
First and foremost I am not questioning our Holy Father's decision or intending to speak in a manner disrespectful of his authority. That being said I would greatly appreciate any clarification one can offer.

This is not a "waiver" for these Bishops to speak in a manner that defies Church teaching, on the contrary they are now totally and completed obliged to be in line with Rome, correct?

In lifting the excommunication, the Pope did not "endorse" the inappropriate and inaccurate statements regarding the Holocaust, correct?

What, if any, are the chances that the Pope will openly condemn these statements. Jews, Catholics and people of other faiths were killed in those gas chambers. If Bishop WIlliamson is now under the authority of Rome, it seems that it would be most appropriate and quite necessary to call him out on his statements.

One thing that I have always been most proud of, as a Catholic, was the move toward mutual tolerance and peace with people of all faiths. Which is why any attempt to reunite SSPX with the Church would seem a wonderful thing, but having read many statements and threads regarding the beliefs of some their members I am concerned about this move.

I realize that everyday Catholics all over the world sin openly and make public statements which deny the teachings of our faith and, to a certain degree, they make all Catholics look like hypocrites (particularly to those who already hate the Church).

However, in most of these situations I feel that I can respond with confidence and intelligently.
I do not know how to respond to a Catholic Bishop making these statements without some sort of reprimand or statement from Rome. Please help.

_________________
MariaToribia
Christ said, "I am the Truth"; he did not say "I am the custom." -- St. Toribio

Thank you, "Mtorbia", for voicing so eloquently my own concerns.
I honestly do not understand the lifting of Williamson's excommunication, without some sort of statement from Rome condemning his views.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Cynthia Gee

This event, which hopefully leads to full recognition of FSSPX, was actually a God-given miracle.
At the end of October, last year, FSSPX Bishop Fellay called in Fatima to read Rosaries for the intention of lifting the excommunication. By Dec. 26th 1.7 million Rosaries were reported to be read. Only a month later arrive the good news.

I have my signature saved in my profile, but it seems not to appear.
Anyway, consider the last post signed as this:
____________________________
Fred

«How can we live in harmony? First we need to know we are all madly in love with the same God.»
St. Thomas Aquinas

Well, the bottom line of the problem is, media and the powers behind it doesn't like the idea of FSSPX being united with Vatican again. This undoubtedly gives the whole Church a great push to her traditionalist roots and takes away power from modernist Bishops. Just about ANYTHING is good enough to use as a weapon against this. And one always finds if he really looks for something. Without Williamson, it would be simply something else. If there were nothing, it were made up. Simple as that.

But as Fabrizio well pointed out, it's really not a question of Catholic faith anyway. Simply his personal opinion. So what. He doesn't approve the thing (now, that would be really horrible!), he simply doubts if it really took place. Right or wrong, besides Catholic dogmas he can doubt about anything. And this is not one of them.

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.

JMJ

Friends,

hate to play Mr. Wet Blanket every time but I don't think we need to discuss whether there is any substance to Williamson's claims. That's what the enemies of the Church want us to do. Discuss Williamson and have all the rest think that his real or reported ideas ARE the SSPX, and through that, that the Church is just that, a bunch of monsters.

Let's just go back to the main issue: Bp. Fellay released other statements, other Bishops have reacted (positively) to the remission of the excommunications.

In the meantime, good news keep pouring in. More and more Cardinals, Metropolitan Archbishops, Diocesan bishops, religious orders, parish pastors and seminaries are implementing Summorum Pontificum, and more and more Masses according to Paul VI's Missal(but it's actually John Paul II's now) are being celebrated ad orientem . It's just a beginning,but one gaining momentum fast. Had someone told me 20 years ago that I'd see what I am seeing now, I would have probably said "dream on". Shouldn't we be rather discussing this?

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

Fabrizio,



Bliss it was in that dawn to be alive, but to be middle-aged and grumpy was very heaven.
(...with apologies to Wordsworth.)

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Fabrizio,
I'm not sure what there is to say, other than "Wow!" I am watching these events unfold with great interest and excitement, but I don't see much to discuss.

_________________
Jayne
"To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbour's thoughts, words and deeds in a favourable way." CCC 2478

Does this affect the licity of attending SSPX masses?

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.

Joe,

According to the articles Fabrizio linked to, from Fr. Z's blog, that situation hasn't changed. The status of the Society is a separate issue from the status of excommunication for these four individuals.

_________________
Kris H.

"He is Your best servant who desires not so much to hear from You what may be comfortable to his own will, but rather to conform his will to whatever he shall hear from You."--St. Augustine of Hippo

This Article in Particular:

_________________
Kris H.

"He is Your best servant who desires not so much to hear from You what may be comfortable to his own will, but rather to conform his will to whatever he shall hear from You."--St. Augustine of Hippo

Hi Friends,

The common thread of all heresies and/or schisms
is consummate pride. Tĥese people will have a lot of humble pie to eat before they are once more considered full-fledged members of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Don't hold your breath.

Robert

_________________
Ma mission [est] de faire aimer le bon Dieu comme je l'aime. (Sainte Thérèse de l'Enfant-Jésus) My mission is to have God loved as I love Him.

Thanks for unlocking the thread. While the lifting of the excommunications is a step in the direction of complete reunion, and another example of the paternal love of the Holy Father, (Popes Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and our currently Gloriously Reigning, Benedict XVI) have all attempted to hand over an olive branch even while Abp. Lefebvre was still alive.

It may turn out that only a portion of the SSPX bishops, priests and laity return to full communion. But some is better than none. I do find it rather exciting that the information became public during the Octave of Chrisitan Unity on the old calendar.

_________________
Robert S. Los Angeles

The Catholic Church, teaching Christ's truth since 33AD

Kris - Thanks, and especially thanks for the quoted bit. - Joe

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.

JMJ

Ok, since there seem to be an interest on behalf of well-deserving participants in the sub-topic of Bishop Williamson's inconsiderate statements, I have split this topic so that the Williamson situation can be discussed there, as long as it will be deemed useful in light of the general purpose of the Forum.

viewtopic.php?f=85&t=54556

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

Does this mean that the four are recognized as legitimate bishops by the Church?

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

JMJ

Vatican daily explains link between lifting of excommunications and anniversary of Vatican II

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14889

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

JMJ

No, David, read the explanations in previous posts to this thread.

It only means that they are no longer under the canonical and medicinal penalty of excommunication, but they still have to prove their full communion with the Chruch. As far as the Catholic faithful are concerned, little changes until further notice from Rome.

They are 4 bishops, validly consecrated, but illicitly so. Now they'll have to help Rome see that they will be worth the effort of figuring out a soultion for them and their priests who have been illicitly ordained and are still suspended a divinis

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

First the SSPX, next the Traditional Anglican Communion...after that who knows - is there any stopping BXVI??? I for one hope not - DEO GRATIAS!!

_________________
The man who has nothing can still have faith.

Fabrizio:

I have reason to believe that there is a well-founded hope this time. The reaction of Bishop Fellay and other SSPX members is not so belligerent. It seems as if this act of Benedict XVI has struck them as a true and sincere effort toward reconciliation, and not Vatican politics-as-usual which is what they have accused the Pope of playing in the past.

Of course, as they say, now there are many details to be worked out in negotiations. And the devil is in the details, so to speak. But prayer has brought us this far and "dum spiro, spero" (while I breathe I have hope). Thank you for reporting these very helpful details.

_________________
Sincerely in Christ,
Fr. Angel

The lifting of the excommunication was only about the excommunication and not about this particular man's personal views. The document stayed on topic.

Later Pope Benedict XVI spoke up about the issue of this gentleman's denial of historical fact, not by saying much about him, but by repeating the stance that the Vatican has in regards to history and current relations with the Jewish people.

By the way--the Vatican stuff up on utube is pretty cool. I never thought I'd see the Vatican using utube as a means of outreach.

_________________
K. Ann Seeton

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." --Aristotle (but the concept is found in John Paul II's books The Acting Person and Love and Responsibility as well.)

Quicksilver to Gold
http://hg2au.com

Here is an interesting prediction on how the doctrinal issues will be handled as the Church moves to reintegrate the SSPX:

This is from Robert Micken in an article in America. He makes this prediction with disapproval, perhaps disgust. I, however, think that this would be a good thing.

I also think that Micken has it backwards. Pope Benedict is not interpreting the Council to placate the SSPX. He is interpreting the Council as it ought to be and wants the SSPX back in the Church because they will help implement his correct interpretation.

The article quotes Fr Mauro Gagliardi, with whom I agree:

_________________
Jayne
"To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbour's thoughts, words and deeds in a favourable way." CCC 2478

[quote="pilgrim"]

It only means that they are no longer under the canonical and medicinal penalty of excommunication, but they still have to prove their full communion with the Chruch. As far as the Catholic faithful are concerned, little changes until further notice from Rome.

They are 4 bishops, validly consecrated, but illicitly so. Now they'll have to help Rome see that they will be worth the effort of figuring out a soultion for them and their priests who have been illicitly ordained and are still suspended [i]a divinis[/i][/quote]

They have been trying to prove their full communion with the Church all the time since 1988, saying that the act of excommunication was not valid. The problem with that for most Catholics was, the pope has the authority ta decide that. Now the pope has decided to remove excommunication and there it is. Nothing more anyone can do about it. Some may see them worthy, some may not but they are in full communion now. There are no half-communions.

The faithful in FSSPX are mostly just Catholics who have decided to attend a traditional Mass. I think, even in the eyes of Modernists, they couldn't be any less Catholics than those multitudes who live materialistic and secular lives and have not attended a Mass in many years. They are still considered Catholic.

As for the priests, there actually wasn't problems with them even before lifting the excommunication. Here, where I live one FSSPX priest (studied in an FSSPX seminar and ordained by these four Bishops) decided to leave and start saying Indult Masses in the local parish. His wish was grantes without anyone suggesting that he may be illicitly ordained. The only requiered thing was, from time to time he has to say Novus Ordo also.

The only open question still remains, is about FSSPX as an organization.

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.

There has bee opened a website where those who support the pope in his decision about lifting the excomminication can show their gratitude: http://www.soutienabenoitxvi.org/index.php?lang=uk
(The website is in no way connected to FSSPX)

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.

JMJ

Fred,

a heck of a problem if the way to prove your communion with Peter is to doubt the validity of his acts, to call him a modernist and do precisely what the guy you claim to desire communion with told you not to do! As explained by both John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the problem was deeper than just the liturgical form, and it had to do with an erroneous ecclesiology and a misunderstanding about the meaning and the value of Vatican II which SSPX has for a long time shered - ironically - with neo-modernists, albeit for apparently opposite ideological reasons.

That is not entirely accurate. The Pope has also decided to remove the excommunications of the schismatic Eastern Churches a long time ago, but they're still schismatics, no full communion yet. Not being excommunicated does not coicide with full communion.

As said in the decree, the remission of the doubtlessly valid excommunications is only a first unlateral step,an act of benevolence aimed at opening hearts, but the "proof of full unity" has still to be seen. We'll see. We are all praying that it will come and that the Pope will find it convincing.


You don't imagine how much I agree with you on this. But, two wrongs don't make a right. If you consecrate bishops against the Pope's will, you incur excommunication, regardless of what your divorced-remarried neighbor thinks about sacraments. You're even more responsible for leaving the Pope alone agaisnt many wolves in sheep's clothes who make these situations more and more common without formally breaking away.

It would be contradictiory to accuse the Pope of abusing his supposedly limited powers for excommunicating illicitly consecrated bishops (and to call those loyal to him no less than "papolatrists") and then to demand that the Pope control directly every single parish and seminary on earth and systematically trump the hyerarchical procedures.

It is also true that SSPX was the object of unjust discrimination, calumnies and unjustice in many regards. But so were many "traditionalists" who remained in communion though, and believe me, it was no cakewalk to take heat from both sides for 20 years without yielding to the temptation of sectarianism like radical traditionalists or of "silent apostasy" like neo-modernists

I wouldn't know about that specific situation of that priest you mentioned. What I do know is that SSPX priests are still suspended a divinis and that participation in their liturgies is still ordinarily unadvisable for Catholics, to say nothing of the sacraments being administered without the necessary jusrisdiction, another problem we all hope will be fixed somehow.

I am not nitpicking. Only stating facts for what they are. Thats said, as I repeated in the other thread, I can't wait to welcome SSPX back in the Church. I promise that after 20 years I will again ring the door bell at their centre in Albano (Rome) first thing in the morning and hug the first SSPXer I run into for at least 15 minutes! If a priest, I will want to have my children blessed and Mass celebrated right away.

But first things first. I am pleased by what I am seeing/hearing from Bp. Fellay. Besides, the fact that the whole hell seems to have been unleashed to prevent this reconciliation is a sure sign that it needs to be done, the sooner, the better.

I am also afraid that there will be fractures within SSPX between hardliner whackos and reasonable guys. That is only predictable and maybe some more will come around in a later moment. But this train is leaving station soon, and I pray all will have the required tickets.

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

With the Eastern Churches the problem remains because they themselves don't want to be in full communion. Mainly because of differences in their teachings (Filioque still remains after all this whole millenia..) so they consider Rome to be heretical.




Yes, the whole Church has suffered much, while Modernists fluorished in destroying her. But I strongly do believe that both, those who remained in complete union with Rome as well as those in FSSPX were part of Gods plan to make things right again. Without FSSPX the Tridentine Mass and traditional teaching would be pretty much lost and there wouldn't be so much pressure to restore the tradition. Even those ad orientem Latin Novus Ordos would today not exist. But of course, it wouldn't have helped if all had gone over to FSSPX, leaving the Church to Modernists. Everyone had (and has) their God-given role.

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.

But you see, the same was true for SSPX, at least prior to the latest, and welcome developments. By denying that they were in fact in schism and that they and not "Roman authorities" (read: the Pope and the bishops in authentic and full communion with him) were the guardians of orthodoxy, by holding troubling when not plain wrong doctrinal postions on grave matters and by letting no occasion go without attacking the Pope, often without actually reading what he said or wrote, they themselves manifested no intention of truly wanting communion.

Don't get me wrong, the positions I think SSPX has, simply, to drop and replace with full, unconditioned, unabridged contents of the Catechism and the Magisterium of the last 30 years are NOT those modernists would like Fellay & C. to embrace. As a matter of fact there is nothing SSPX can do to deserve some of that "inclusivenss" with which the "openminded" ones often congratulate themselves and demand for the whackiest of their ravings.

I don't think they have to become ecstatic about every paragraph of minor Vatican II documents, and even of passages of major ones, but that's what the Pope thinks too, I don't think thay have to celebrate OF every sunday, but nor does the Pope, as soon as they recognize that the rite is of itself fully Catholic and not dangerous for the faith, if celebrated according to its editio typica and the rubrics of Missale Romanum and GIRM which nowhere mandate heretical homilies, the turning of altars, destruction of ancient Churches, droppping of chant, using vernacular language, ugly vestments and architecture, altar girls, stupid prayers of the faithful, guitars, lousy pop music, handshakes of peace and so forth. Even though of themselves, the above abuses and inappropriate actions do not inficiate the validity of the sacrament, but I digress.

What they need is to be able to recognize where they went wrong big time and to begin to read Papal Magisterium which in no way contradicts Tradition, even though the language is not the same of 1800's Italian thomists like Leo XIII or Bl. Pious IX besieged by the armies of secularist kings and with freemasonry attempting to kill them on a daily basis.

Insisting that the excommunications weren't valid won't help. It is not a matter of pride. The Pope was right and they were wrong. Period.

Allow me to disagree at least in part. That God can make good come from our errors is one thing, but a fundamental rule of morals summarized by St. Paul is that non sunt facienda mala ut eveniant bona, we cannot do evil that good may come of it. Schism is bad, for all involved and was based on bad theology, bad ecclesiology, bad feelings.

As someone who's fought his share of battle on this, that the so called "Tridentine" Mass would be lost without SSPX I am not so ready to believe. The merits of M. Lefebvre and SSPX prior to the schism of 1988 are without question, but mixed to many errors. In 1986, John Paul II was about to issue a Motu Proprio even more generous and more binding on bishops than Summorum Pontificum, but the already clear schismatic drift of SSPX gave more power to the snakes pressuring the Pope against it ("see? they hate you! You can't strenghten these whackos! We are loyal and obedient, they're not! I can almost hear their voices so well I know how they work). There were many within and without SSPX ready to have TLM liberalized on reasonbale conditions and fighting this battle in much less comfortable positions, and the success story of FSSP and many other proved it.

The 1988 schism was the greatest help to modernists within the Church in over a century. I know I am wrong on many things, but that I can guarantee you is correct. I know it sounds excessive. But we must put wishful thinking and personal inclinations aside when truth is at stake. From a purely sentimental point of view, with all the cranks we allow to stay in the Church, why only SSPX can't be aloowed in I wonder? But sentimantality doesn't help understanding reality. And that's reality on this point, I cna tell you that much.

From that terrible, dis-graced day onward, parish/diocese life for us TLM people became pure hell, and not just on liturgy. Whatever the issue, social doctrine, bioethics, morals, you name it, we had no right to speak because you see, we were "schismatics" undercover. I didn't go crazy because that had to be God's medicine for my hypertrophic, Texas-sized pride. Dominus dedit, Dominus tollit, benedicamus Domino. How many times have we been literally thrown out of Church for daring to question abuses, ask for a talk with the parish priest, trying to distribute papal encyclicals they didn't like - e.g. Mystici Corporis or Humanae vitae - to the faithful, or... praying the Rosary!! Communion denied, for daring to kneel, or just for the "public scandal" being attached to the ancient rite. It is exceedingly painful to recall how it was even behind the relative anonimity and indirect communication of a keyboard and a monitor. Enough.

I contend that the schism made the liberalization of the Missal of Bl. John XXIII impossible at the time, and delayed it for 20 years, only to see the light in much worse conditions in some regards, if anything for the extra 20 years from the 1970 reform.

I have a cowboy sense of honor so I won't forget the good that was done because of the mistakes that were committed, but I fail to see God's plan in disobedience. God's plan was John Paul II suffering in his body and his heart for the universal Church, to pave the way to Benedict and his further restoration and implementation of Catholic identity as preserved by all of the 21 councils of the Church, some doctrinally more important than others, and to hand down what we received, intact, pure, life-giving.

As I said in the other thread, let bygones be bygones, I don't care what happened, I don't remember (er...um...well...as they say in Sicily to deny criminal charges, "I wasn't there, and if I was there then I was asleep. And while asleep I was dreaming of being somewhere else". ). All I want is unity around Peter to bring back our Church to his splendor, to have the Bride of Christ again shining in truth and holiness before the world to attract all nations and baptize them in the name of Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. I want the Groom be happy with his Bride. I want the bitter tears to go once and for all, and the anticipation of eternal happiness which only the Church can give to bring some rest to the broken hearts and the lonely ones, to the hungry for justice and the persecuted in the name of Christ.

We should be fighting the enemy together, not among ourselves. We should be making modernists rue the day they decided to work to undermine the honor and the faith of the Church (if they just can't convert). We should be all helping Peter bring the Good News to people in need of salvific grace. We should be making sure we're not losing our souls trying to gain the world and its lures, however disguised as self-rigtheousness and piety.

I know only one way to do that: recognize I am a sinner and pray God daily that he makes me see how I can serve his Church according to my status and my abilities, and that I can always be among the sheep who recognize the voice of the Shepherd and undertsand well what he says (even if he says it with a thick German accent! )

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

Then I heard this on the radio driving to work this morning:

Criticism continues to escalate over Pope Benedict's decision to rehabilitate an ultra-traditionalist bishop who denies the Holocaust. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has called on the pope to clarify that the Vatican does not tolerate any denial of the Holocaust. Pope Benedict is from Germany, where Holocaust denial is a crime punishable with prison terms.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =100229468

_________________
"I cannot give what is mine to the other, without first giving him what pertains to him in justice."
--Benedict XVI

Benedicite,

Pete

JMJ

Pete,

we have put the side issue of the attacks on the Pope with the excuse of Williamson on hold for a while (see relevant thread in the Den). There is nothing he can do to please them. Those politicians who have nothing to say on the daily holocaust of million of innocents in the name of desire and eugenics will have the right to dare comment on our Church and the Shoah when they wake up to decency and pass laws less homicidal than Hitler's).

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

As a Catholic, I may doubt in any event in history and so does Bishop Williamson. We still go to heaven. Whereas those journalists and politicians are most probably in mortal danger, as most of them not only attack the Church, but also even doubt in existance of God. We should pray for their conversion, not give credit to what they are talking about.

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.

JMJ

UPDATE: http://212.77.1.245/news_services/bulle ... 19&lang=en

This just in, the Vatican Secretary of State has released an umpteenth note of clarification on the meaning and the sope of the remission of the excommunications of SSPX bishops and what is expected of Williamson.

the ever excellent Rorate caeli http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/ has a translation

NOTE OF THE SECRETARIAT OF STATE

Following the reactions caused by the recent Decree of the Congregation for Bishops, with which the excommunication of the four Prelates of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X was remitted, and regarding the negationist or reductionist declarations on the Shoah from Bishop Williamson, of the same Fraternity, it is considered convenient to clarify a few aspects of past events.

1. Remission of the excommunication.

As already published previously, the Decree of the Congregation for Bishops, dated January 21, 2009, was an act by which the Holy Father graciously responded to the reiterated requests by the Superior General of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X.

His Holiness desired to remove an obstacle which prevented the opening of a door to dialogue. He now expects that an equal disposition will be expressed by the four Bishops in complete adherence to the doctrine and the discipline of the Church.

The extremely grave censure of latae sententiae excommunication, in which the aforementioned Bishops had incurred on June 30, 1988, then formally declared on July 1 of the same year, was a consequence of their illegitimate ordinarion by Mons. Marcel Lefebvre.

The removal of the excommunication released the four Bishops from an extremely grave canonical censure, but has not changed the juridical position of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X which, at the current moment, does not enjoy any canonical recognition by the Catholic Church. Not even the four Bishops, though released from the excommunication, have a canonical function in the Church and they do not exercise licitly a ministry in it.

2. Tradition, doctrine, and the Second Vatican Council.

For a future recognition of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, the full recognition of the Second Vatican Council and of the Magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and of the same Benedict XVI is an indispensable condition

As it was already affirmed in the Decree of January 21, 2009, the Holy See will not avoid, in the forms judged appropriate, to deepen the the interested party the still open questions, so as to be able to reach a full and satisfactory resolution of the problems which originated this painful division.

3. Declarations on the Shoah

The positions of Mons. Williamson on the Shoah are absolutely unacceptable and firmly refuted by the Holy Father, as he himself remarked on the past January 28, when, referring to that brutal genocide, reaffirmed his full and unquestionable solidarity with our Brethren receivers of the First Covenant, and affirmed that the memory of that terrible genocide must lead "mankind to reflect on the unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the heart of man", adding that the Shoah remains "for all a warning against forgetfulness, against denial or reductionism, because the violence against a single human being is violence against all".

Bishop Williamson, for an admission to episcopal functions in the Church, will also have to declare, in an absolutely unequivocal and public manner, distance from his positions regarding the Shoah, unknown to the Holy Father in the moment of the remmission of the excommunication.

The Holy Father asks to be joined by the prayers of all the faithful, so that the Lord may enlighten the path of the Church. May the effort of the Pastors and of all the faithful grow in support of the delicate and burdensome mission of the Successor of Apostle Peter as "custodian of the unity" in the Church.

From the Vatican, February 4, 2009.

Do you think this will be enough? The only thing that could satisfy them is the Pope coming out of St. Peter and declaring that Catholicism is false and that only journalists, hypocrite politicians and traitors of the faith get to say what one is supposed to believe about anything. Let us pray. Now that what had already been said many times was repeated, let's pray that we finally get to see some positive development.

_________________
FabrizioParty like it's 1773

No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist (Pius XI)

I heard about the Secreatary of State's further clarification on a local radio station (conservative, Texas, secular) top of the hour news.

They said basically that the Vatican was now saying that Bishop Williamson (they did not name him, only referred to him by what he did) would have to recant his views on the holocaust before being fully reconciled to the church. I dont' remember the terminology they used, whether they said "before the excommunication would be lifted" or not. They further reported that the Vatican said that Pope Benedict did not know of Bishop Williamson's views when the excommunication was lifted (those were the words in that case). That was it.

Pretty accurate, as far as I can tell. No spin.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

[quote="Kardinal"]I heard about the Secreatary of State's further clarification on a local radio station (conservative, Texas, secular) top of the hour news.

They said basically that the Vatican was now saying that Bishop Williamson (they did not name him, only referred to him by what he did) would have to recant his views on the holocaust before being fully reconciled to the church. I dont' remember the terminology they used, whether they said "before the excommunication would be lifted" or not. They further reported that the Vatican said that Pope Benedict did not know of Bishop Williamson's views when the excommunication was lifted (those were the words in that case). That was it.

Pretty accurate, as far as I can tell. No spin.[/quote]

The excommunication is already lifted. Now it would only be possible to excommunicate again, only this simply cannot be done on these grounds. Holocaust is not a part of the Catholic faith.
What I think it was, they simply try to calm down the secular media.

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.

I know that. You know that. The question was whether that language was used in the news report I heard. I do not recall.


However, the statement by the Vatican indicates that ebfore Bishop Williamson can enjoy full communion with the Church, he must repudiate his views about the Holocaust. And I think the Vatican is far more concerned about its relationship with the world Jewish community than with its PR in the secular press.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Fred,

The statement said, "Bishop Williamson, for an admission to episcopal functions in the Church, will also have to declare, in an absolutely unequivocal and public manner, distance from his positions regarding the Shoah, unknown to the Holy Father in the moment of the remmission of the excommunication."

So he is no longer excommunicated, but he will need to move away from these positions on the Holocaust if he has any desire to be a bishop in the Catholic Church.

_________________
Kris H.

"He is Your best servant who desires not so much to hear from You what may be comfortable to his own will, but rather to conform his will to whatever he shall hear from You."--St. Augustine of Hippo

[quote="Kardinal"] And I think the Vatican is far more concerned about its relationship with the world Jewish community than with its PR in the secular press.[/quote]

Maybe so. Maybe both and even more are the reason. In short: earthly power. This is sad, but nothing new, of course. Throughout the entire history there have been times, when popes have had to take into consideration what those in power positions wanted.

Well, what we can do about it, is not so little. Why not pray a Rosary for the intention that Church was more indipendent and had more power over the world? Actually, we even have an obligtion to do so, considering all those billions going to hell.

_________________
Fred

Sancte Michael Archangele,
defende nos in prælio;
contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto præsidium.