Posted on 06/15/2012 7:32:59 AM PDT by marshmallow
On the heels of the Vatican’s confirmation today that a personal prelature has been offered to the Society of St. Pius X should they sign on to the Holy See’s doctrinal preamble, the SSPX has released the following statement:
SSPX General House Communiqué
6-14-2012
On Wednesday, June 13, 2012, Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, accompanied by the First Assistant General, Father Niklaus Pfluger, was received by Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who delivered to him [Bishop Fellay] his dicastery’s evaluation of the Doctrinal Declaration sent in by the Society on April 15, 2012, in response to the Doctrinal Preamble submitted on September 14, 2011, by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
During this meeting, Bishop Fellay listened to explanations and further details from Cardinal Levada, to whom he presented the situation of the Society of St. Pius X and spelled out the doctrinal difficulties posed by the Second Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo Missae. The desire for additional clarifications could result in a new phase of discussions. [CWR: emphasis added]
At the end of this long, two-hour interview, Bishop Fellay received a draft document proposing a Personal Prelature, in the case of a possible canonical recognition of the Society of St. Pius X. During the meeting the situation of the three other bishops of the Society was not discussed.
At the conclusion of that meeting, it was hoped that the dialogue might continue so as to allow the parties to arrive at a solution for the good of the Church and of souls.
Menzingen, June 14, 2012
During the meeting, Fellay explained that his own humility was so great that he would refrain from stating publicly his own belief that he is more Catholic than Pope Benedict XVI.
Fish or cut bait, Fellay, before the Church does it for you.
Are the Anglicans converting to the Catholic Church being required to sign a doctrinal preamble in regards to the Second Vatican Council?
The Anglicans' disagreements with the Church are different from the problems the Lefebvrites have with respect to the Church.
Dear ebb tide,
As I recall, what kicked the whole Anglicans ordinariate stuff into high gear was when a bunch of them delivered a Catechism of the Catholic Church to the pope, signed by a bunch of their bishops, symbolizing their submission to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church as defined by ROME, not by themselves, or the SSPX, or any other idiosyncratic group.
sitetest
It is most certainly within a Pope’s power to dictate how Mass will be said. If Benedict XVI wanted to, he could mandate that the old Mass be used around the world to the exclusion of all other Masses.
Clearly Benedict XVI likes the old Mass and values it as a treasure and a vital part of our patrimony. But apparently rather than a closet SSPXer, he is in fact a bold and professing Catholic who chooses to respect the will of the Council Fathers, and believes they were guided by the Holy Spirit.
Sure, he could mandate it. Whether the mandate would be obeyed is an entirely different matter. Few current priests have even a working knowledge of Latin, much less any appreciation of traditionalism. That's what I meant by practical problems. BTW, with respect to your comment re: the "Council fathers", I believe they were directed directly by Lucifer, with willing human cooperation. As we were warned : "It will become clearer about 1960". I advise you to reject Satan's progress in this area.
Thanks for your summary but you didn’t answer my question.
In that the incoming former Anglicans never expressed any doubts about the Second Vatican Council, why would he specifically ask? And since the Catechism of the Catholic Church specifically draws on many documents of the Second Vatican Council, it would seem that submission to the Magisterium of the Church as represented in the Catechism would include acceptance of the Second Vatican Council.
I hadn't heard that their signatures were asterisked with the caveat, “except for all the stuff from VatII.”
sitetest
Is there some sort of point you’re trying to make?
Your question might make more sense if you had included Vatican I and all other councils that were held after Henry VIII broke with Rome.
Yet, I don't see how one could sign complete agreement with and submission to both the First and Second Vatican Councils without seeing conflicts between the two of them.
I reference this book:
Ecumenical Vatican Council II: A Much Needed Discussion By Msgr. Brunero Gherardini
I understand the requested doctrinal preamble to be signed by the SSPX is a secret at this time; and I wonder why that is so.
In the past, people formally admitted to the Catholic Church make a public profession of faith, not a secret one to be revealed after the fact.
A secret? Really?
Private negotiations are private - and rightly so. This is a private negotiation.
Why do you cloak this in language of “secret” doctrinal formula?
OT contradicts NT, Matthew contradicts Luke, V1 contradicts V2, etc.
Just because you CAN choose to find contradiction does not mean that the contents cannot all be reconciled.
Why is your approach one that focuses on seeing contradiction when the Church herself demands by her authority that we see that V1 and V2 are NOT contradictory (and such an interpretation is rational)?
It's a "doctrinal preamble" that must be signed. Two points:
1) How do you negotiate doctrine?
2) Why is Vatican II involved since it professed no new doctrine?
The contents of a draft document are private. The final executed document would be public. It is how things are prudently done.
No doctrine is being negotiated - what is being negotiated is how the apostates will express the fealty and obedience to the papacy and how the council fathers in our time chose - with the Holy Spirit’s guidance - to express the Church’s wisdom of the ages.
It is Lefebre and Fellay who make V2 the sine qua non (as in “you can’t be Catholic if you accept V2”). That is the only reason V2 is at issue - you should ask Fellay why he has made V2 so central to his apostasy.
Every Catholic must accept the validity of the novus ordo Mass, even if they choose to never celebrate one. Every Catholic must accept the validity of the election of Paul VI, JPI, JPII and B16. Every Catholic must accept the Catechism promulgated by JPII.
The contents of a draft document are private. The final executed document would be public. It is how things are prudently done.
No doctrine is being negotiated - what is being negotiated is how the apostates will express the fealty and obedience to the papacy and acceptance of the validity of how the council fathers in our time chose - with the Holy Spirit’s guidance - to express the Church’s wisdom of the ages.
It is Lefebre and Fellay who make V2 the sine qua non (as in “you can’t be Catholic if you accept V2”). That is the only reason V2 is at issue - you should ask Fellay why he has made V2 so central to his apostasy.
Every Catholic must accept the validity of the novus ordo Mass, even if they choose to never celebrate one. Every Catholic must accept the validity of the election of Paul VI, JPI, JPII and B16. Every Catholic must accept the Catechism promulgated by JPII.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
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.