Bishop Fellay of the Society of St. Pius X to Meet Pope August 29

SSPX e-mail ^ | 16 August 2005 | Bishop Williamson

[Mershon]

A FEW THOUGHTS for AUGUST, 2005 By Bishop Richard Williamson

In this year’s May-June issue of the French bi-monthly magazine “Sous la Bannière”, on page 7, there is a most interesting quotation attributed to Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. It reads as follows:

“A source in Austria, preferring to remain anonymous, assures us that Cardinal Ratzinger recently made the following admission to an Austrian bishop who is a friend of his: ‘I have two problems on my conscience: Archbishop Lefebvre and Fatima. As to the latter, my hand was forced. As to the former, I failed’.”

Of course if the “source in Austria” prefers to remain anonymous, we have no means of verifying whether the Cardinal truly said these things about Archbishop Lefebvre and Fatima, but the quotation is at least true to life, so it is worth dwelling on for a few moments.

As for what the Cardinal says about Fatima, we suspected back in June of 2000, when the Vatican – with the Cardinal in the forefront – supposedly released the third Secret, that there was some trickery going on. Either Rome was still hiding the true Secret, the one kept in his room by Pius XII but never looked at, or Rome was revealing the true Secret but twisting its interpretation. Either way, we said to ourselves at that time, Rome was wanting to have done with Fatima, and we saw Cardinal Ratzinger playing a leading part in the manoeuvre. Now comes the quotation from Austria confirming that the Cardinal was indeed taking part in a manoeuvre. Who “forced his hand”? Was it John-Paul II? Some hidden power behind both Pope and Cardinal? God knows.

As for what the quotation says about Archbishop Lefebvre, there too, if the quotation is not true it is certainly true to life. In May of 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre was threatening to consecrate with or without Rome’s permission bishops for the Society of St. Pius X, it was Cardinal Ratzinger who represented the Holy See in the negotiations meant to head off the “break” that such consecrations would involve. We recall that the Cardinal almost “succeeded” on May 6 when Archbishop Lefebvre signed a draft agreement, but the Cardinal “failed” when the Archbishop after a sleepless night took his signature back on the following day. And now comes the quotation from Austria confirming that the Cardinal still sees the termination of those negotiations as a “failure”.

This confirmation is important as suggesting that the Cardinal will remain, now he is Pope, in the same frame of mind to deal with the Society of St. Pius X in the audience which this August 29 he is due to grant to Archbishop Lefebvre’s successor at the head of the Society, Bishop Bernard Fellay. In other words, it is highly likely both that the present Pope is sincerely convinced that the “break” between the Society and Rome must be brought to an end, and that he will give all the appearances of being of good will when he employs all possible means, including his long experience of Roman diplomacy and all the prestige of his now exalted rank, to bring the “break” to an end.

In fact, a Rome-SSPX agreement seems impossible. And of course if the Society rejoined Rome, the resistance of Catholic Tradition would carry on without it, and if the Pope “converted”, then instead of the gentle war now being waged on his right by Tradition, he would be faced with a savage war being waged on his left by the cabal of neo-modernists. Either way, the war goes on between the friends and the enemies of the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ.

But what is important here and now for Catholics who will be following with interest the up-coming meeting between Rome and the Society, is not to fall into any of the traps that the Devil will be setting for them.

Firstly, the fact that the Society is asking to be received in audience by the Holy Father does not mean that it is on the point of betraying. If there is no contact between Tradition and Rome, now will the truth of Tradition ever make itself heard in Rome?

Secondly, there being a contact does not mean that an agreement is possible. Let all the Catholics who dream of fitting together Catholic Tradition and the present neo-modernist authorities of the Church come back down to earth. Catholic Authority and Catholic Truth will one day re-unite, but nothing for the moment indicates that that day is tomorrow – or the day after!

Lastly – and this is the subtlest trap of them all – let nobody think that because the Pope is of good will, therefore he cannot be a neo-modernist, or that because he is a neo-modernist, therefore he cannot be of good will. The present crisis of the Church would be much less grave and would deceive far fewer people if the neo-modernists were obviously of ill will. It is characteristic of these last times that bad principles are so widespread that few people are aware of the fact, and many people do evil convinced that they are doing good. That is why the Cardinal’s quotation is true to life in which he says that his “failure” of 1988 weighs “on his conscience”.

Let us pray to the Mother of God for Benedict XVI to see, above all the need to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, and if we ourselves can see, let us pray to her that we too not go blind – “He who thinks he stands, let him take care not to fall”, says St. Paul (I Cor X, 12). The times are bad!

[Mershon]

Pray for a reconciliation and for 450 priests and their regularization, and march to Tradition within the Church.

[JohnnyZ]

These people really are nuts.

But because they're nuts they can't be held fully responsible for their actions. What a world!

[jec1ny]

I am of two minds on this post. On the one hand I am pleased by the meeting which can not hurt at this point, and may prove helpful. On the other hand I note, yet again, the pronounced mindset of the SSPX. This can be boiled down to several points. First, they continue to presume to set themselves up in judgment over the Pope. Secondly the tone of this letter clearly indicates that they have no real hope or any particularly urgent desire to restore themselves to full communion with the Holy See. And third we see the growing evidence of the effects of prolonged schism. The longer the schism remains, the more "normal" it appears in the minds of the schismatics. This has the attendant consequence of making it harder to restore communion. It is of course a long standing truism that no schismatic has ever recognized himself as such. And the longer the separation remains the more comfortable they become in their condition. In the end most schisms are a product of the sin of pride. I think this one is no exception. I once was associated with the SSPX. And although I have at times been harshly critical of their mindset on many points, I remain sympathetic to many of their concerns. The issues they have raised are often legitimate ones. It is deeply painful that they seem unable to grasp that by operating outside of the Church they greatly weaken their position, and strengthen their enemies.

[Dominick]

On the premise this is a real quote from the Pope, lets look at the three points, and see where the SSPX stands.

Firstly, the fact that the Society is asking to be received in audience by the Holy Father does not mean that it is on the point of betraying. If there is no contact between Tradition and Rome, now will the truth of Tradition ever make itself heard in Rome?

False dichotomy, the notion that Rome is opposed to Tradition is false. While many things in the outward appearances have changes, the underlying dogma, and doctrine have not. Furthermore, the Tradition of Priests and Bishops having obedience to the See, and maintaining close and frequent contact with Rome seems to be discarded by the SSPX.

Secondly, there being a contact does not mean that an agreement is possible. Let all the Catholics who dream of fitting together Catholic Tradition and the present neo-modernist authorities of the Church come back down to earth. Catholic Authority and Catholic Truth will one day re-unite, but nothing for the moment indicates that that day is tomorrow – or the day after!

Once again the thesis is that Rome is a tool of Satan, and not the Church Christ founded. This is a Lutheran tradition.

Lastly – and this is the subtlest trap of them all – let nobody think that because the Pope is of good will, therefore he cannot be a neo-modernist, or that because he is a neo-modernist, therefore he cannot be of good will. The present crisis of the Church would be much less grave and would deceive far fewer people if the neo-modernists were obviously of ill will. It is characteristic of these last times that bad principles are so widespread that few people are aware of the fact, and many people do evil convinced that they are doing good. That is why the Cardinal’s quotation is true to life in which he says that his “failure” of 1988 weighs “on his conscience”.

That is a true statement, that not all people are entirely bad, the converse is true, not all the SSPX leadership is acting entirely of good will. People make little empires, and the worst thing that could happen for the SSPX Episcopacy is they would be brought back into the Catholic Church and forced to hold regular positions like every single other Bishop.

This tragic tale needs to come to an end. Many souls shall not return to Catholicism because of this break, and that should be on the mind of every Bishop and Priests who left with the SSPX. I would be pleased to see widespread Tridentine Mass, as it is hard to find Priest willing to start Mass in new locations.

[gbcdoj]

Firstly, the fact that the Society is asking to be received in audience by the Holy Father does not mean that it is on the point of betraying. If there is no contact between Tradition and Rome, [h]ow will the truth of Tradition ever make itself heard in Rome?

With these kind of statements, one wonders whether Bishop Williamson could subscribe to the solemn profession of faith issued by Pope St. Hormisdas and confirmed by the Fathers of Constantinople IV and Vatican I.

So the fathers of the fourth Council of Constantinople, following the footsteps of their predecessors, published this solemn profession of faith: "The first condition of salvation is to maintain the rule of the true faith. And since that saying of our lord Jesus Christ, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, cannot fail of its effect, the words spoken are confirmed by their consequences. For in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved unblemished, and sacred doctrine been held in honor. Since it is our earnest desire to be in no way separated from this faith and doctrine, we hope that we may deserve to remain in that one communion which the Apostolic See preaches, for in it is the whole and true strength of the christian religion." (Pastor Aeternus, 4.2)

One recalls the words of Cardinal Hoyos to Bishop Fellay: "today I am convinced that there are those in your ranks who no longer have the true faith in the authentic Tradition of the Church".

[Pio]

Williamson does not seem to be on the same sheet of music as Fellay.

If Fellay seeks and get official recognition from the Pontiff then the SSPX may split wide open.

Fellay needs to be mindful of the FSSP who had their balls cut off and handed back to them. On the flip side...the Bishop in Campos, Brazil has done well for himself and his flock.

With a new Pontiff....this is a total wildcard situation.

My opinion? The SSPX should get full recognition as a Religious Order on par with the Jesuits but the nasty backtalk needs to stop. Pope Benedict may just go way out on a limb on this one.

The Charismatics, Neo Catholics and liberals will be jumping out of buildings. At the height of their hysteria I'd love to see a major move toward re-union with the Orthodox. I want a new parish closer to my home...Greek Orthodox or a shiny new SSPX chapel will do...but the Charismatic proto Protestant bullcrap Masses around the corner from me are wearing thin.

[Salvation]

This should be interesting to watch as it unfolds. I think Pope Benedict XVI will tell them to stop being schismatics.

[JohnnyZ]

It's my understanding that Rome is holding out her hand and all that the SSPX has to do is grasp it. I pray that they do.

[BulldogCatholic]

I pray that the reconcilliation does take place, but only if the Vatican restores tradition and abides by all past church teachings and throws out this modernistic agenda and restores the TLM as the so called "Norm" and makes those who want to attend the NO mass the "indult" and because they want to stay "in communion" make them drive the 20 miles every Sunday and make them beg like dogs for a church here or there for an indult

In my opinion it is the church and Ratzinger who have lost all credibility. How can an astute scholar of history as he actually warm up to the Protestant Mass that was drafted by Protestants and a Mason?

[TaxachusettsMan]

Williamson has it backwards, of course. HE and the SSPX bishops are the excommunicated schismatics, NOT Pope Benedict XVI.

His attitude is fully in keeping with that expressed by the SSPX's "Secretary General" in "Circular Letters" which were NOT supposed to be seen "outside the Society" (like their monkeying around with annulments a few years back).

Read these and ask yourself if this is the attitude one needs to have when one is seeking reconciliation with the successor of the Supreme Pontiff who was personally and specifially disobeyed and with the Church from whom one went into schism by bestowing and receiving illicit episcopal consecration.

The Circular Letters:

Circular Letter No. 2005-04 (excerpt):
After the death of Pope John Paul II and the election of Cardinal Ratzinger, who took the name of Benedict XVI, we are in expectation of what this pontificate will be. Obviously, Cardinal Ratzinger's past is scarcely encouraging and one might indeed well be fearful. Nevertheless, one might equally entertain some hope, however faint, for the liturgy should the Pope have the courage of the convictions he expressed as a private author in his different publications over the last few years. One of the first, keenly awaited gestures which should give us a fairly significant indication will be his nomination for the prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.

It seems that, after a moment of panic, the hard-liners have begun to recuperate their position and to encircle the new pope so as to keep a free hand to continue to spread in the Church deleterious seeds. As the Anglo-Saxons say: "Wait and see . . . "

Fr. Arnaud Selegny

Circular Letter 2005-05EX

Dear Confreres,
The election of Pope Benedict XVI after the death of John Paul II is an event that must hold the attention of the Society and its superiors, even though significant changes from the course described by the preceding pontificate probably cannot be expected. The Pope's recent authorization to open the cause of beatification of his predecessor, waiving the five-year period that is supposed to elapse first, can scarcely inspire confidence.

Nevertheless, as our beloved and venerated founder Archbishop Lefebvre did upon the election of Pope John Paul II, it seems useful and necessary to contact the new pope to request an audience. This is Bishop Fellay's intention, determined in consultation with his council, and which he desires to make known to you by this letter.

Yet, so that this intention may be rightly understood, I have been charged with explaining to you his reasoning as regards this request for an audience. What is its purpose? Above all, it is a matter of making the presence of Tradition felt at Rome, of bearing witness to what we are so that the voice of Tradition may be heard at the heart of Christendom, even if we must not have any illusions about the kind of echo it will encounter. It is an episode in the combat of the faith that we are waging, and which must necessarily also be waged in Rome.

This audience will equally be the occasion to solemnly reiterate in a personal, direct manner, the call for the restoration of the Tridentine Rite of Mass in all its rights, so that the ostracism of which it is the object may cease. It will be the occasion to remind the Pope that Cardinal Ratzinger belonged to the Commission of nine Cardinals that unanimously judged in 1986 that no one could prevent a priest from celebrating this Mass. If there was unanimity, then necessarily he must have voted thus.

Will he be responsive to this argument? It is hard to say, but it is our duty to remind him of it, and to go and proclaim the inalienable right of this rite before the distant successor of St. Pius V.

Bishop Fellay considers it very important to inform you at the outset of this initiative so that it can proceed in the light of day, and so that al the members of the Society can understand its scope and meaning. Please note well that there is no intention at this time of resuming "negotiations" of any kind.

You are asked to please inform the members of the Society entrusted to your solicitude, so that all may know the reasons for this request of an audience and its goal. On the other hand, this letter is not supposed to be disclosed outside the Society, even if experience has taught us that this type of news rarely remains "intra muros" . . .

Confiding this step to Popes St. Pius V and St. Pius X, I assure you, dear Confreres, of my prayers to the united Hearts of Jesus and Mary.

+Fr. Arnaud Selegny
Secretary General.

Source: PRIESTS' BULLETIN, June 2005, #174, pp 5-7

[Mershon]

Judge not, lest ye be judged. I think the current Pope is much closer to the mindset of Bishop Fellay than you might think. Unless of course, you believe Pope Benedict XVI is nuts.

Bishop Williamson does not speak for the entire SSPX. And part of this is maneuvering and posturing.

The Russian Orthodox patriarch has said much worse things over the years, and we are on "friendly" ecumenical terms with them.

[Mershon]

and the worst thing that could happen for the SSPX Episcopacy is they would be brought back into the Catholic Church and forced to hold regular positions like every single other Bishop.


And it is a good thing that you are not the Pope. I'm certain Pope Benedict XVI will do what he believes is the right thing to do. Then those of you who hate the SSPX ,and are more holy and more Catholic than the SSPX adherents (which I am not one), will be on firm ground doing nothing but grasping at straws and being uncharitable.

[Mershon]

Or the words of Cardinal Hoyos to Bishop Fellay to him and two of the other bishops after their initial meeting:

"I find no heretical doctrines nor schismatic attitudes among you."

So, which is it?

[JohnnyZ]

Bishop Williamson does not speak for the entire SSPX. And part of this is maneuvering and posturing.

So you admit that Williamson, at least, is off his rocker?

[Mershon]

Indeed. "He must increase. I must decrease." Indeed. Great spiritual insight.

But its relevance to this post is what?

[Mershon]

Faith, HOPE and charity. And the greatest of these is...

By the way, the more I read these and other posts from NeoCon Catholics, the more I realize they have completely ignored the entire thrust of the Second Vatican Council. Read and re-read the document on ecumenism. And try applying it to the situation with the SSPX.

A deep, glaring spotlight might be cast upon the foreheads of those who are so quick to "defend" the Pope and perform apologetics in a manner that is contradictory to the Second Vatican Council itself.

Many of you are the examples of how the Second Vatican Council's key teachings (especially those of JPII) have not been incorporated into the life of the Church.

With that being said, simple respect and Christian charity requires you to a higher standard than you show in this forum.

[gbcdoj]

Or the words of Cardinal Hoyos to Bishop Fellay to him and two of the other bishops after their initial meeting:

Was Bishop Williamson one of the other bishops?

PS: What is the source of that quote? I can't find it, unless you are referring to this statement from his Letter to Bishop Fellay: "After these events, in noting your good will and based on the fact that your Fraternity certainly was not spreading any heretical doctrine and did not maintain schismatic attitudes, I had dared you to propose, without consulting anyone first, to set a possible date for reintegration."