Posted on 11/23/2003 4:22:18 PM PST by NYer
Over the past week, a number of traditionalist readers have asked me what happened with Fr. Aulagnier and the SSPX. As far as I can tell, Bishop Rifan's prediction in the May 6 issue of La Nef (a publication which, in my opinion, is the best traditional Catholic magazine on the market) has now played out. For those who read French, you can access the relevant excerpt here. I'm also providing the following unofficial loose translation of the first couple of paragraphs for those who do not read French:
With this in mind, I think more and more we're seeing that the expulsion of Fr. Aulagnier (who co-founded the SSPX with Archbishop Lefebvre) is much like the election of Vicky Gene Robinson in the Episcopal Church as Bishop of New Hampshire. It will take a while to play out, but in the end it represents a permanent break. Just as the Episcopal Church USA has decided, through their actions, to abandon the Anglican Communion, so too has the SSPX opted for a permanent break from Rome.
La Nef: How do you see the future of the SSPX and an agreement with Rome? Does it still seem possible?
Bishop Rifan: Certain priests of the the SSPX desire an agreement with Rome, but visibly not those in charge. Sadly, the SSPX sought to conserve its unity by fear. Certain priests, who approve of us, write to us, but they do so in secret because it is very dangerous to be in disagreement with the superiors of the SSPX. We can critique the pope quietly, but not the superiors of the SSPX.... And there are punishments for all those who, publicly, diverge from the official line: Fr. Aulagnier was reduced to complete silence and exiled to Canada for having approved of our Apostolic Administration and for having attended my episcopal consecration.
Opposition towards the Holy See is each time more hard and more radical. Bishop Williamson has written that we should not offer public or official veneration to St. Padre Pio, in order not to give any credit to the canonizations made by the Pope (Williamson's newletter of December 2002). And Fr. Peter Scott, the rector in Australia, in his public letter of Nov. 1st 2002, wrote to friends and benefactors about the Luminous Mysteries proposed by the Pope: "I ask of you, if you wish to remain Catholic and if you wish to have a truly supernatural interior life, to not eve think of praying these mysteries." (Pete's Note: This is my personal translation back from the French of what was likely first written in English. If someone has the original English words, please pass them along to me.)
In line with this directive, the most logical ones arrive at sedevacantism, like Fr. Basilo Meramo, prior of the SSPX in Bogota, who wrote: "The Pope, with his errors and his heresies, and with all manner of doctrinal and governing action, does not give the guarantee of being the legitimate successor of the Chair of Peter..."
Comment voyez-vous l’avenir de la FSPX et un accord avec Rome vous semble-t-il toujours possible ?
Certains prêtres de la FSPX souhaitent un accord avec Rome, mais visiblement pas ses responsables. Malheureusement la FSPX a cherché à conservé son unité par la peur.
Certains prêtres, qui nous approuvent, nous écrivent, mais ils le font en secret, car il est très dangereux d’être en désaccord avec les supérieurs de la fraternité. On peut critiquer le pape tranquillement, mais pas les supérieurs de la Fraternité… Et il y a des punitions pour tous ceux qui, publiquement, sortent de la ligne officielle : l’abbé Aulagnier a été réduit au silence complet et exilé au Canada pour avoir approuvé notre Administration apostolique et pour avoir assisté à mon sacre épiscopal.
L’opposition vis-à-vis du Saint Siège est chaque fois plus dure et plus radicale. Mgr Williamson a écrit qu’on ne devait pas rendre de culte officiel ni public à Saint Padre Pio, pour ne donner aucun crédit aux canonisations faites par le pape (lettre publique de décembre 2002). Et l’abbé Peter Scott, recteur en Australie, dans une lettre publique du 1er novembre 2002, a écrit aux amis et bienfaiteurs à propos des mystères lumineux proposés par le pape :
"Je vous demande, si vous voulez rester catholiques et si vous voulez avoir la véritable vie intérieure surnaturelle, de ne même pas penser à prier ces mystères."
Dans cette ligne directive, les plus logiques arrivent le sédévacantisme, tel que l’abbé Basilo Meramo, prieur de la FSPX de Bogota, me l’a écrit :
« Le pape, avec ses erreurs et ses hérésies, et avec toute cette manière d’action doctrinale et de gouvernement, ne donne pas la garantie d’être le successeur légitime de la Chaire de pierre, bien au contraire… Comment est-il possible qu’il faille désobéir au pape pour rester fidèles au Christ et à notre Sainte Mère l’Eglise, quand précisément c’est le pape qui par sa charge doit nous raffermir dans notre foi ? Par conséquent l’explication qui théologiquement tombe le mieux… est celle d’un pape illégitime, d’un antipape… (lettre du 2 mai 2002)
Pour avoir une idée du climat diplomatique du dialogue ou de l’accord, il suffit de lire la lettre du 29 mai 2001 de Mgr Williamson adressée au cardinal Castrillon :
« Eminence, si je n’avais pas déclaré au début de notre dialogue que je n’avais qu’un infime sinon aucun espoir de lancer un pont sur l’abîme qui sépare nos deux planètes mentales, je pourrai et devrai vous le dire, vous êtes « par une diabolique désorientation » ( expression tirée des écrits de sœur Lucie), une victime en phase terminale du néo-modernisme, tandis que la FSPX est catholique, par la grâce de Dieu et jamais sans elle (1 Cor X, 12) .Que Dieu vous donne ses lumières… »
Pour résumer, Mgr Williamson affirme que « la fraternité ST Pie X se maintient dans la Vérité au fur et à mesure que Rome s’en écarte » (lettre aux bienfaiteurs, février 2001).
Avec ces dispositions de rupture complète, il est très improbable d’aboutir à un accord avec Rome.
Anyone in this forum surprised? Tinfoil hat alert! <|:-)
Clearly that's what's Vere is saying, the question is, "Is that true?" One could much more plausibly concoct a scenario that the SSPX has been hijacked by liberals who want to compromise with Rome based on the fact that both Williamson and Scott were sent to the farthest reaches of the planet.
You have the cause and effect reversed. He writes these pieces because he hates the SSPX, he does not hate the SSPX because he writes these pieces. He was a practicing Satanist who then reformed and joined the SSPX. Later he left the SSPX and became a canon lawyer by studying with a canadian priest who has been exposed in the latest scandals.
Peter Vere introduced Father John M. Huels to readers of The Wanderer as a canonical “expert” in support of Vere’s (and The Wanderer’s) laughable contention that the 1500-year-old traditional rite of Mass in the Roman Church was never an immemorial custom and therefore could be abrogated without specific mention by Paul VI. Two months ago Huels left his positions as vice dean and professor of canon law at St. Paul University in Ottawa and announced that he would seek laicization after being accused of sexual abuse by Michael J. Bland, a former Servite priest and a member of the U.S. bishops' National Review Board for sexual abuse cases. Huels freely admitted to his bishop, Archbishop Gervais of Canada, “that he had been guilty of inappropriate behavior with minors [how many is anyone’s guess] decades earlier” and claims to be “repentant and contrite.” (CNS report, August 8, 2002)Vere posting these sorts of articles is just like the NY Times writing articles about what the Republican party ought to do. They pretend a disinterested motive in offering advice, when the record clearly shows that they bear a great deal of personal animosity. Any advice they offer can only be looked on as "Greeks bearing gifts."
Is he lying?
Fr. Aulagnier was transferred from France to Canada at the same time that the SSPX was transferring many priests to new assignments such as sending Bishop Williamson to Argentina and Fr. Scott to Australia. Beyond this fact, the rest is just a smear job.
DSC, here is a previous thread on FR which provides more links and background. I see that you even participated on the thread, although it was a year ago, so it's not surprising that you may have forgotten some of it.
Influential Priest-Canonist is Abuser
The "influential priest canonist" is Fr. Huels, a liturgical poofter-wreckovator if there ever was one, of whom Peter Vere says, "He taught me everything I know about canon law."
Why?
I'm not sure if I have it exactly right, but I heard somewhere that the number of Hail Marys in a complete Rosary corresponded to the number of Psalms. Now with the addition of the luminous mysteries that no longer applies. It may seem silly to some, but I like that kind of parallel.
But I must say I have added the luminous mysteries to my prayer life and it seems to fit so perfectly, I find it hard to remember them not being there.
a case of the pot calling the kettle black?
| Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) |
| Schismatic group formerly headed by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who illicitly consecrated bishops against the expressed instructions of the Roman Pontiff. They refuse to submit in obedience to the Holy Father. Note: the leadership of this group seems to be working with the Vatican to end its schism. Let us all hope and pray that this comes to pass. |
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.