Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Holy See Relaunches Reconciliation Bid with St. Pius X Fraternity
Zenit ^ | 02-06-02

Posted on 06/03/2002 9:10:40 PM PDT by nickcarraway

Date: 02-06-02

Holy See Relaunches Reconciliation Bid with St. Pius X Fraternity

In Wake of Group´s Critical Remarks

VATICAN CITY, JUNE 2, 2002 (Zenit.org).- Still hopeful for a reconciliation, the Holy See says that recent statements by members of the St. Pius X Fraternity haven´t given due recognition to papal authority.

Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Clergy, sent the letter to Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the traditionalist group founded by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, in response to statements circulated on Internet and other media by fraternity representatives.

Cardinal Castrillón is also president of the pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei," created by John Paul II in 1988, following the schismatic action of illegitimate episcopal ordinations carried out by Archbishop Lefebvre in Écône, Switzerland (see Holy Father´s motu proprio "Ecclesia Dei" at zenit.org/english/archive/documents/ecclesiadei_en.htm).

The letter, dated April 25, begins with a review of relations between Cardinal Castrillón and members of the fraternity, dating back to August 2000, when members of the group made a Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome.

On that occasion, the cardinal had an impromptu meeting with three of the fraternity´s bishops (Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais and Richard Williamson). The meeting sparked hopes of a rapid solution to the conflict.

On Dec. 29, 2000, Bishop Fellay and Cardinal Castrillón had another meeting, which gave rise to discussions of a possible reconciliation.

The next day, John Paul II received the superior of the St. Pius X Fraternity in his private chapel. Then, in another meeting with Cardinal Castrillón, and in the presence of the Pope´s personal secretary, Bishop Fellay approved a protocol of agreement with the Holy See.

In the three-point protocol, Bishop Fellay expressed "his will to be fully Catholic," his recognition of John Paul II as Successor of Peter, and his willingness to be subject to the Pope´s authority. Lastly, he accepted the Second Vatican Council "although expressing difficulties on some points."

Bishop Fellay said that in returning to full communion with the Catholic Church he would maintain his struggle against modernism and the influence of Freemasonry.

In addition, he said that Paul VI´s Mass had moments of silence that open the way to "protestation," and expressed formal objections to the rite of confirmation and rejected Vatican II´s concept of "religious liberty." The bishop also expressed opposition to a form of ecumenism "which makes one lose the idea of the only Church, with the danger of a Protestant mentality."

At the end, Cardinal Castrillón suggested to the Holy Father that if the protocol was approved, the excommunication of the St. Pius X Fraternity should be lifted. He also suggested that the fraternity be recognized as a society of apostolic life with a special rite, and that the protocol be enforced that was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Archbishop Lefebvre, which the latter later rejected, proceeding with the illegal ordination of bishops.

A few days later, Bishop Fellay met again with Cardinal Castrillón to discuss the difficulties that might be created within the fraternity by the process of reconciliation. Yet, since the doctrinal issues in question did not constitute heresy, the meeting ended with Easter 2001 set as the possible date for the fraternity´s reinsertion in the Church.

However, Cardinal Castrillón´s letter explains that his openness and willingness to dialogue cannot be interpreted as "a conversion of the Church of Rome, which must now seek the ´depositum fidei´ at the heart of the St. Pius X Fraternity."

Given the degree of progress in the negotiations, John Paul II appointed Cardinals Joseph Ratzinger, Jorge A. Medina and Louis-Marie Billé and Archbishop Julián Herranz as members of the "Ecclesia Dei" panel.

A few days later, Bishop Fellay sent the fraternity´s secretary to Rome to meet with Cardinal Castrillón, to make criticisms of the present rite of the Mass, and to call for a halt in the process of reconciliation, unless the fraternity´s excommunication were first lifted and every priest allowed to celebrate Mass with St. Pius V´s rite.

In this context, fraternity members, including Bishop Fellay, made public statements claiming the whole process was a trap and accusing the Holy See and the Pope of betraying the faith.

For example, according to statements of Bishop Fellay, quoted by Cardinal Castrillón, "it is undeniable that the dysfunctions in the Catholic hierarchy ..., the lacunas, the silences, the inductions, the tolerance of errors and even of destructive actions are found even in the Curia and, unfortunately, in the Vicar of Christ."

Bishop Fellay accuses the Pope of promoting certain mistaken forms of ecumenism that he says has a consequence: "The thousands and millions of Catholic faithful who are weakened in the faith are condemned because of these weaknesses of Rome. This is our concern."

To a great extent, the public statements of the fraternity´s representatives attack the Pope, criticizing the way the liturgy is celebrated today. "We reject the new liturgy because it also endangers our Catholic faith," Father Benoît de Jorna said in an interview May 15. Father Jorna is superior of the St. Pius X Seminary in Écône.

In his letter, Cardinal Castrillón noted that the statements go against the recognition of papal authority.

Cardinal Castrillón ended the letter by requesting a new meeting with Bishop Fellay, and by opening the arms of the Holy See for authentic reconciliation with the fraternity, as occurred in January when the St. John Mary Vianney Union of Campos, Brazil, returned to full union.

The traditionalist institution, present in several Latin American countries, now has the juridical status of personal apostolic administration.


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: catholic

1 posted on 06/03/2002 9:10:40 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Siobhan;Goldenstategirl;Lady in Blue
ping
2 posted on 06/03/2002 9:20:19 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Very interesting article. This is the first I've heard anything about this.
3 posted on 06/03/2002 9:26:57 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
I have my doubts as to the possibility of the SSPX ever fully rejoining the Church. They have a habit of saying or doing something stupid right before reconcilliation talks. Nothing, however, is inpossible, especially in the light of the Campos declaration, which many people doubted could have ever happened. The SSJV in Campos, Brazil are now pretty much an autonomous rite in the Catholic Church (I guess their situation would be similar to that of the Byzantines or Maronites) where they are not subject to their local Roman Rite Bishop, but instead to their own "Traditionalist" Bishop.

I think the Church's current position on the SSPX is definitely a bad one, especially because the SSPX is one of the few groups left out there that try to fully adhere to the Church's teaching on moral matters. The church's whole position of shunning schismatic groups (such as the SSPX), while fully embracing heretical groups is insane.

I have heard that one of the main motivations for reconcilliation talks with the SSPX is that of money. The SSPX, especially in France, supposedly has train-loads of money which it has at its disposle.

There's a very interesting article at Una Voce's web page, which was written by a SSPX priest, and talks about this situation whole situation of reconciliation talks: Fr. Paul Aulagnier, SSPX on SSJV Reconciliation: A Victory for the Mass of Saint Pius V

4 posted on 06/03/2002 10:00:32 PM PDT by FBDinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FBDinNJ
Home Page of the SSPX USA District
5 posted on 06/03/2002 10:04:41 PM PDT by FBDinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FBDinNJ
Thanks for the link (which I will read) and your thought provoking comments. I can't comment much on this issue because I don't know much about it other than the SSPX does not recognize any Pope after Pius X. That certainly is a problem! That said, it does seem that we could use some "straight and narrow" Catholic teachers of the Faith right now. Isn't the timing of this "reconcilliation" meeting rather ironic?
6 posted on 06/03/2002 10:09:09 PM PDT by american colleen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
Oh no they do recognize all the Popes after Pius X including Pope John Paul II, they just named their organization after Pius X because he is a Saint (and probably also because he wrote an encyclical against Modernism, I believe) like the Benedictines named their order after Saint Benedict. Their position is just that they don't believe they are required to listen to the Pope because they think they are doing the right thing by only saying the Tridentine mass and following the practices of the Pre-Vatican II church. They even accept Vatican II, with some hesitation, just understand that the SSPX aren't sedvecantists, who say that there was no real Pope ordained after Pope Pius XII's death in 1958 (because then they would have to accept the teachings of the Second Vatican Council). I believe the SSPX only went into schism in the late 1980's (1988 or '89) when Lefebvre ordained four Bishops to succed him, which the Pope said he could not do, because he was dying and wanted Bishops to carry on the work of his order by ordaining Priests.
7 posted on 06/03/2002 10:19:25 PM PDT by FBDinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FBDinNJ
I found the date. It was June 30, 1988 that the Society of Saint Pius X went in schism. I don't even think there was an official proclomation of schism, because they automatically encured it by Archbishop Lefebvre ordaining four Bishops. Shortly after that Pope JP II issued Ecclesia Dei which allowed the Latin mass to be said with an indult from a local Bishop. As a result of Ecclesia Dei organizations like the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) which say only the latin mass and are not in schism, were formed.

This is a picture of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre ordaining four Bishops which caused his group, the SSPX, to become schismatic.

8 posted on 06/03/2002 10:29:32 PM PDT by FBDinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway;FBDinNJ
Look at how young these Bishops are! Certainly not old men clinging to a dying tradition!
9 posted on 06/03/2002 10:44:44 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldenstategirl
Well that's one of the characteristics of any "traditional" Catholic group whether it be the FSSP or the SSPX, that they attract a lot of vocations. The SSPX's web site in this country says that it only has 43 priests and 98 chapels, but they also currently have 60 seminarians. The FSSP, in the USA, has gotten so many seminarians lately that they had to build an entirely new Seminary building to house all the candidates they are getting. Now my diocese currently has around 111 Churches which would make it roughly the size of the SSPX in the ammount of churches that it has, and this doesn't even take into account that many of the "chapels," in the SSPX are extremely small. Of course my diocese has no where near that ammount of seminarians that groups like the FSSP and SSPX have, even some of the larger dioceses in the country (Boston, New York, Chicago) usually only have a few men enter the seminary each year.
10 posted on 06/03/2002 11:14:45 PM PDT by FBDinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
Isn't the timing of this "reconcilliation" meeting rather ironic?

Talks have been going on for a while now. The SSPX were allowed to say the old Mass in Rome during Jubilee pilgrimages (though not in St Peter's), and if I recall correctly, talks began around that time or shortly thereafter.
11 posted on 06/04/2002 3:21:08 AM PDT by Mike Fieschko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goldenstategirl
Look at how young these Bishops are! Certainly not old men clinging to a dying tradition!

Please smack me..You looked and saw how young they are. I was looking to see if any of them looked like queens-thinking, if they're ordaining manly men, let's get them over here.

My Priest used to say the old Mass, and his Latin is flawless, but the Archbishop pulled the indult. I understand many of those my Priest was trying to accomodate, went to the SSPX chapel after the indult was pulled.

12 posted on 06/04/2002 5:58:57 AM PDT by sockmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey
That is the problem with the indult, that you have to get your local bishop to approve of it. Of course if you have a fairly heterodox Bishop there's a very slim chance that you'll ever have an indult in your diocese. Luckily my local Bishop has been fairly generous with Ecclesia Dei and has allowed the FSSP to set up their own chapel in the diocese and probably as a result of this we have not had any SSPX chapels spring up.
13 posted on 06/04/2002 8:37:11 AM PDT by FBDinNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey;FBDinNJ
Some have gotten permission to say the old Mass outside lof their bishop. A priest in this diocese says it twice on Sunday through permission granted by some papal commission.
14 posted on 06/04/2002 10:12:26 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FBDinNJ;goldenstategirl
What struck me is the enormous step these religious young men were making-leaving the Church.
15 posted on 06/04/2002 10:13:50 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
One, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Bump.

B-chan

16 posted on 06/04/2002 1:35:10 PM PDT by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson