Posted on 04/07/2005 6:54:37 AM PDT by Ebenezer
SSPX PRESS COMMUNIQUÉ
On the death of Pope John Paul II
Menzingen[, Switzerland] Easter Saturday 2 April, 2005
The Superior General of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X and his two assistants, together with all its members: bishops, priests, brothers, sisters as well as the faithful, join in the prayer of the Universal Church at the announcement of the passing of the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. We commend his soul to the mercy of God the Father and the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
There will be a Requiem Mass said in each house of the Society for the repose of the soul of the Holy Father.
The Society of Saint Pius X, founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, applauds the fight undertaken by Karol Wojtyla for the protection of life and his efforts in the moral sphere. Nonetheless, it feels it a duty to repeat that it has always disapproved of the indefatigable efforts of Pope John Paul II towards ecumenism, efforts which have led to a weakening of the Faith and of the defence of Truth.
The Society is aware of the superhuman task awaiting the future Supreme Pontiff and prays the Holy Ghost to enlighten the Cardinal Electors. It hopes the new Vicar of Christ will be able to take up the helm of the Church with a steady hand and make good the damage caused in the wake of the Second Vatican Council: liturgical unity and the unity of Faith have been dissolved and doctrinal errors have spread amongst all the clergy.
While we wait and hope for this, it is now time to pray for him who has just entered eternity.
Bishop Bernard Fellay Superior General of the SSPX
**Boy, don't they come off as petty . . .**
Bump that assessment of the schismatics. (Wonder if they will chime in on this thread? </saecasm off
OK I get that part of it (and thank you for not calling me 'ignorant' like some other loving christians here) but as long as you are praying, why not pray right to God and not to someone else to 'pray for you'.
That leads to my original question- is praying to Mary somehow better than praying right to God?
"But there's no question that the leaders of SSPX think that they are right and everybody else is wrong."
Well...yeah.
Why would a person hold a belief, if he didn't think it was correct?
Perhaps this would be an apropos time to keep the "saecasm" off, and attempt to enlighten you with a few facts. You may have more aithority than the folks quoted here. If so, congratulations, "Pope Salvation I". Is the Society of St. Pius X schismatic or excommunicated? Can the faithful fulfil their Sunday obligation by attending an SSPX Mass? Are SSPX Masses, Sacraments, and Orders valid? Much incorrect information has been circulated by individual laymen, priests, and bishops to dissuade traditional Catholics from attending the Traditional Latin Mass at SSPX chapels and even other sites not affiliated with the SSPX. Frequently, these individuals throw around technical terms like "schismatic" and "excommunicated," without even knowing the canons or the New Vatican decrees applicable. There is a growing concurrence of the most prominent Roman canonists that: 1) Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, by the terms of the canon law, did not commit a schismatic act under canon law by consecrating four bishops without explicit papal permission 2) the declaration of excommunication by the Sacred Congregation of Bishops is null and void (Abp. Lefebvre was technically not "excommunicated"; rather, the Congregation simply declared that he had "excommunicated" himself, as no ecclesiastical trial was ever held; Abp. Lefebvre disputed this contention of the Congregation, citing the provisions of the 1983 Code of Canon Law) 3) priests and faithful associated with the SSPX, let alone any other traditional Catholic priests or laymen, are under no censure at all 4) the Vatican itself admits (as it must) that traditional Catholics and traditional Catholic priests are not "schismatic," as when the traditional priests and faithful of Campos, Brazil, were received into "full communion" with the Novus Ordo on January 18, 2002, the Vatican did not pretend to absolve them from any censure for "schism," which would have been necessary, had the Vatican legally been able to hold them "schismatic" The following Roman canonists have publicly declared their finding that any purported "excommunications" in this case are null and void under canon law: * Castillo Cardinal Lara, J.C.D., President of the Pontifical Commission for Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law * Edward Idris Cardinal Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity * Alfons Cardinal Stickler, former Prefect of the Vatican Archives and Library * Fr. Gerard E. Murray, J.C.D., of the United States * Fr. Patrick Valdini, J.C.D., Dean of the Faculty of Canon Law * Fr. Rudolf Kaschewski of Germany * Count Neri Capponi, D.Cn.L., Ll.D, Professor of Canon Law * Professor Geringer, J.C.D. It should be noted that the question of excommunication does not come up under the traditional Code of Canon Law (1917), which does not provide for the penalty of excommunication for the consecration of a bishop without papal approval. THE NEW VATICAN SPEAKS The following briefly summarizes the positions of the New Vatican's chief canonists on the matter of the SSPX. LETTER OF THE SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE CLERGY Under signature of Silvio Cardinal Oddi, President (March 17, 1984) [In answer to a family attending Mass at an SSPX chapel as to whether such attendance fulfilled her obligation for Sunday Mass,] "According to the New Code of Canon Law, 'The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a Catholic rite....' I hope that settles your doubts." DECREE OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH (HOLY OFFICE) Under signature of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect Known as the "Honolulu Decision" (Protocol No. 14428, June 4, 1993) Background: The Bishop of Honolulu on May 1, 1991, declared six laymen "excommunicated on the grounds that [they] had committed the crime of schism and thus had incurred the 'latae sententiae' penalty [of automatic excommunication] as provided for in ... the Code of Canon Law. The "Honolulu Six" had (1) established a traditional chapel independent of diocesan jurisdiction, (2) invited independent priests, predominantly SSPX priests, to celebrate Mass at the chapel, and (3) invited one of the bishops named in the Vatican's excommunication decree to confer the traditional Sacrament of Confirmation at the chapel. In response to an appeal by one of the Honolulu Six against the decree of the Bishop of Honolulu, the Congregation decreed: "This Congregation has examined carefully all the available documentation and has ascertained that the activities engaged in by the Petitioner ... are not sufficient to constitute the crime of schism. Since [the Petitioner] did not, in fact, commit the crime of schism and thus did not incur the 'latae sententiae' penalty, it is clear that the Decree of the Bishop lacks the precondition on which it is founded. This Congregation, noting all of the above, is obliged to declare null and void the aforesaid Decree of the Ordinary of Honolulu." ALFONS CARDINAL STICKLER Prefect of the Vatican Archives and Library Peritus (Expert) to Four Vatican II Commissions "Pope John Paul II, in 1986, asked a commission of nine cardinals two questions. Firstly, did Pope Paul VI, or any other competent authority, legally forbid the widespread celebration of the Tridentine [Traditional Latin] Mass in the present day? The answer given by eight of the cardinals in 1986 was that, no, the Mass of Saint Pius V has never been suppressed. I can say this; I was one of the cardinals. "There was another question, very interesting. Can any bishop forbid a priest in good standing from celebrating a Tridentine Mass again? The nine cardinals unanimously agreed that no bishop may forbid a Catholic priest from saying the Tridentine Mass. We have no official publication, and I think that the Pope would never establish an official prohibition ... because of the words of [Pope St.] Pius V, who said this was a Mass forever." LETTER OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY Under signature of Edward I. Cardinal Cassidy, President (May 3,1994) "The situation of the members of this Society [SSPX] is an internal matter of the Catholic Church. The Society is not another Church or Ecclesial Community in the meaning used in the Directory. Of course, the Mass and Sacraments administered by the priests of the Society are valid. The bishops are validly ... consecrated." LETTER OF THE PONTIFICAL COMMISSION "ECCLESIA DEI" Under Signature of Rev. Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary May 28, 1996; repeated in Protocol N. 236/98 of March 6, 1998 "It is true that participation in the Mass and sacraments at the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute 'formal adherence to the schism.'" September 27, 2002 1. In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X. 2. ...If your intention is simply to participate in Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin. 3. It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified. ON THE PURPORTED "EXCOMMUNICATION" OF ABP. MARCEL LEFEBVRE ROSALIO JOSE CARDINAL CASTILLO LARA, J.C.D. (DOCTOR OF CANON LAW) President of the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law President of the Disciplinary Commission of the Roman Curia "The act of consecrating a bishop [without explicit papal permission] is not in itself a schismatic act." COUNT NERI CAPPONI, D.CN.L. - LATERAN (DOCTOR OF CANON LAW) LL.D. - FLORENCE (DOCTOR OF LAWS) Professor Emeritus of Canon Law at the University of Florence Accredited as an Advocate of the Holy Roman Rota (the Holy See's highest marriage tribunal) Accredited as an Advocate of the Apostolic Signatura (the Holy See's highest appeals tribunal) "The fact is that Msgr. Lefebvre simply said: 'I am creating bishops in order that my priestly order can continue. They do not take the place of other bishops. I am not creating a parallel church.' Therefore, this act was not, per se, schismatic." PROFESSOR GERINGER, J.C.D. Canon Lawyer at the University of Munich "With the episcopal consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre was by no means creating a schism." REV. FR. PATRICK VALDINI, J.C.D. Dean of the Faculty of Canon Law at the Catholic Institute of Paris "It is not the consecration of a bishop that creates the schism. What makes the schism is to give the bishop an apostolic mission [which Abp. Lefebvre never did]." REV. FR. GERALD E. MURRAY, J.C.D. (PONTIFICAL GREGORIAN UNIVERSITY) Title of Doctoral Thesis Accepted: "The Canonical Status of the Lay Faithful Associated with the Late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the Society of Saint Pius X: Are they Excommunicated as Schismatics?" "They're not excommunicated as schismatics, because the Vatican has never said they are.... You can ... show that Lefebvre himself was not excommunicated and therefore no one else was.... I come to the conclusion that, canonically speaking, he's not guilty of a schismatic act punishable by canon law. In the case of the Society of Saint Pius X, the Vatican never declared any priest or lay person to have become a schismatic."
This is the deeper question - what is your belief on that point?
"why not pray right to God and not to someone else to 'pray for you'"
Because I need all the help I can get. The prayers of a righteous man fly heavenward like an arrow, which means mine must sort of...I don't know, limp heavenward like a three-legged wombat, maybe?
The Bible tells us that the prayers of a righteous man are powerful. That means that the prayers of people like me are less so. If a righteous man is willing to pray for me, then, why would I tell him not to?
How powerful must the prayers of the Blessed Mother of Jesus be? "Full of Grace," the angel called her. And if, in her love, Saint Mary is willing to pray for me...well, it seems to me that I'd really have to have a lot of gall to say, "Who needs her? I can talk to the Big Guy myself."
That is not to say that Catholics do not pray directly to God in His three persons. Even the Rosary, which is distinctly oriented toward Mary, contains the Lord's Prayer, the Gloria Patri (Glory to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), the Fatima Prayer (Lord Jesus, forgive us our sins...), 5 times each. The Ave Maria itself is God-centered. "...the Lord is with thee...blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus...mother of God, pray for us..." And the Salve Regina is all about praying for Mary's help in becoming "worthy of the promises of Christ."
I like to wrap it up with the Anima Christi, which is entirely centered on Christ.
"That leads to my original question- is praying to Mary somehow better than praying right to God?"
It's not a question of "better than." It's not an "either-or" proposition. We have what Protestants have, plus we have all this other stuff, too.
To me, it seems that God is trying to give with both hands, and for some reason Protestants will only accept a fraction of what He offers.
I would say, empirically, that the SSPX is not formally schismatic but that there is an element in the SSPX which favors schism and an element which does not.
I would say that this half-consolatory/half-critical statement implies that this tension still exists in the Society.
Look at my post again - the very first sentence HAS A QUESTION MARK- the remainder of my "bigoted rant" is an expansion of what exactly I am asking.
Do not change headlines, please. Thanks.
"I would say, empirically, that the SSPX is not formally schismatic but that there is an element in the SSPX which favors schism and an element which does not."
What will happen vis a vis SSPX if the Mahoney crowd succeeds in electing a "progressive?"
A "progressive" would certainly come down hard on them, but will increasing numbers of people flee to the SSPX?
Might I add that some knowledge about the Mystical Body of Christ as described so eloquently in the Epistles of Paul the Apostle who place all the saints in the one Body would be helpful.
In that Body the saints live in unity even in death for the Body of Christ, now Risen, can never die.
The unity comes from the Love of God and is effected by the Holy Spirit. Living thusly in Charity which according to St. Paul never dies, all pray to the Father thru Christ and with the Holy Spirit, even in death, for each other and the whole Church. Calling upon each other in prayer even upon those who 'live in death' is not only useful, it is in complete conformity with the theology of St. Paul.
I don't think the "progressives" would come down hard, but simply ignore them and hope for them to go away. All talks of reconciliation would be at an end, but only a segment of the SSPX really cared about them in the first place.
It depends on what the "progressive" did or said. I think any "progressive" will ignore matters of faith or personal morals and simply issue clouds of statements and initiatives on "social justice" etc.
Yikes! You drop one little paragraph break, and all heck breaks loose. Sorry about that!:-)
There is no faction in the SSPX that favors schism, if you mean a formal breaking of ties with the Church. Certainly, there is some "tension" involved in respecting the office of the Pope while believing that he has taken positions that are contrary to Catholic teachings. The SSPX does a pretty good job of addressing the positions without disrespecting their source, IMO.
No. But getting Mary, or St Aloysius Gonzago, or Frank at the store to pray for you as well means that more persons are involved. Getting more than one person involved in each prayer is better (when two or three are gathered ... ), and also tends to act as a check on bizarre or selfish prayer. Christianity is corporate: it is The Church, not a billion micro-churches. We are saved or damned on our own responsibility, but we come to God as the Body of Christ, and best prayer practices reflect this. Heaven is not a lonely place.
Hope this is helpful. I haven't thought about this for years
No schismatic believes he is ever breaking ties with the Church. He always believes that the Church is breaking ties with him.
My point was that there is a faction that simply does not care if the SSPX ever fully reconciles with the Holy See.
Fellay is scared to death. The new Pope may cut the SSPX loose and let it go the way of the Old Catholics.
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.