Letter of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos to Mgr. Fellay

Letter of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos to Mgr. Fellay (English translation by Mr. Ken Jones, Una Voce St. Louis)

Since the beginning of our fraternal contacts to find a way toward full communion, I believe that we have experienced the solicitude of our merciful Lord: truly he has not spared us His aide and His support, to gather together all the good things that unite us and overcome what still divides us.

I read at the time attentively, in prayer and not without suffering, your letter of last June 22. I have also studied certain documents concerning our conversations, written by members of the Fraternity of St. Pius X, published on the Internet and disseminated by other means of communication. I have also reread the letters of the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, the interviews granted by Your Excellency and the letters that you have sent me.

Until today, for my part, I have never agreed to grant interviews on the subject, in order to maintain the privacy of the details of our dialogue: for me they have always had a provisional and discreet character, because of the great responsibility that I feel in conscience for this matter. It now seems to me opportune, for the love of truth, to clarify here several aspects of the development of this reconciliation, with the intention of imparting a new impetus, to be frank, to move beyond possible suspicions and misunderstandings that compromise the outcome that, I have no doubt, Your Excellency also desires.

The subject that we are considering will have, in fact, particularly important historical consequences, because it touches the unity, the truth and the holiness of the Church, and it is necessary therefore to treat it with charity but also with objectivity and truth. Our sole judge is Christ the Lord.

First of all, I must reiterate a historical truth, at the root of everything. My first initiative was not the result of a Pontifical mandate and was not the fruit of an agreement or project of some other person from the Apostolic See, contrary to what has been written and rumored, as if it was a matter of a definite strategy. As I have already had the occasion to say several times, the dialogue was completely my own personal initiative.

In the second week of August 2000, on returning from Colombia, I learned through the media that was available on the airplane, and only through it, that the Society of St. Pius X was participating in the Jubilee. On my own initiative, and without speaking to anyone about it, I decided to invite the four bishops of the Fraternity to a private dinner with me. The meeting with brother bishops would be a gesture of fraternal love, the occasion of a reciprocal exchange. I therefore had the joy of meeting Your Excellency, as well as Their Excellencies Tissier and Williamson. As you will recall, we did not discuss any subject thoroughly, even if, naturally, we did speak about the liturgical rites, and I was able to become familiar with several aspects of the current life of your Fraternity. I manifested publicly the good impression that the aforementioned Prelates made on me.

I subsequently gave an account of this meeting to the Holy Father, and I received from him words of encouragement. I expressed a desire to maintain contacts to explore the possibilities of this much hoped for unity. The Sovereign Pontiff asked me to continue, and he manifested his clear will to accommodate the Society of St. Pius X, by promoting the conditions necessary for this accommodation. Some time later I read, with a private satisfaction, the interview granted by Your Excellency to the magazine 30 Days. The journalist put these words on your lips: "If the Holy Father calls me I come, or rather I run." I had occasion to speak with the Holy Father about this interview, in which Your Excellency expressed freely and spontaneously his thought: the Holy Father indicated to me, one more time, his generous will to accommodate your Fraternity.

As a result, I contacted Cardinals Angelo Sodano, Secretary of State for His Holiness, Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Jorge Medina Estevez, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, as well as with His Excellency Mgr. Julian Herranz, President of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. All manifested their satisfaction with a view to an eventual solution of the difficulties. I also consulted Cardinals Paul Augustin Mayer and Alfons Marie Stickler, who were of the same opinion. It is thus that we studied the fundamental theological problems, already present in 1988 when an accord with His Excellency Mgr. Lefebvre was prepared. It did not seem to us that there have been any new problems. Then we began studying several juridical forms that would make a reintegration possible; this appeared very much desirable. Throughout history, the desire for unity has always been a constant for the See of Peter.

To all it seemed appropriate, if Your Excellency agreed, that the undersigned could proceed to a new dialogue of a provisional character. It was not a matter of discussing theological problems in depth, but preparing the way for reconciliation.

I therefore invited Your Excellency by letter; you amiably accepted the invitation and the meeting took place on Dec. 29, 2000.

As Your Excellency knows well, we then studied the possibility of reconciliation and of the return to full communion, as a very concrete and special fruit of the Jubilee. We concluded with a dinner at my residence, attended also by the Rev. Michel Simoulin, in a very cordial and fraternal climate.

Informed of this new reunion, and despite the amount of work he had in the last days of the great Jubilee, the Holy Father received you with the Abbe Simoulin on Dec. 30, 2000 in his private chapel. After a few minutes of silent prayer, the Holy Father said the Our Father, followed by those present, then he wished them a Holy Christmas. He blessed them by offering several rosaries and encouraged them to continue the dialogue undertaken.

In the same Apostolic Palace and in the presence of the personal secretaries of the Holy Father, I read to Your Excellency a Protocol regarding the dialogue of the preceding day, which would be sent to the Sovereign Pontiff. You have expressed your agreement by specifying two points: 1) the prayer for the Pope in the Canon of the Mass was not your decision but was a prior provision of Mgr. Lefebvre; 2) reservation about Vatican II especially regarding religious liberty, since the rights of God over the public order could not be limited. The secretary took notes in order to make a report to the Holy Father.

I do not think, dear Antoninus, that you are talking about the Crisis magazine article.

Oops! I was thinking about the Culture Wars article back in June. My bad.

Personally, I feel that the public reaction to Goodbye, Good Men is a good litmus test to see which periodicals, groups, and individuals "get it" and which either don't want to or are (covertly) part of the problem. So far, the Wanderer, which I subscribe to, has given the book a good review. The National Catholic Register and Culture Wars, both of which I do not subscribe to since I have had some doubts about them in the past, have given bad reviews. I'm waiting to see what New Oxford Review says.

You need only to visit http://www.goodbyegoodmen.com and read some of the testimonials posted there to know that Goodbye, Good Men has only scratched the surface of this problem. I just thank God I live in one of the "good" dioceses with a "good" seminary.

As for my "credibility," lambs do not expect credibility in the wolf den, but they hope against hope.

Please. You've used just about every rhetorical device in the book to make yourself look like the suffering paragon of Apostolic virtue and everyone who dares to disagree with you the idiotic schismatic oppressors. You're not fooling anyone here. Knock it off and get real.

Antonius, see my earlier reply about "demands" made to the pope being impertinent by those trying to get out from under excommunication. It is rather like the poor insane condemned killer demanding to be let off the gallows. You will fin an answer implicit there.

Yet still a non-answer. One more time, this time with multiple choice answers:

If the Vatican and SSPX were to reconcile on exactly the terms the SSPX has demanded, would you:

A.) Denounce the decision as a mistake and capitulation, and spend time aggitating against SSPX priests coming into your diocese.

B.) Leave the Church in disgust.

C.) Shut your trap and accept the decision of the Vatican.

patent, I apologize for any offense or pain I have caused you. It is quite apparent to me that we are speaking different "languages." The meaning that I try to communicate it vastly different than the meaning that you receive.

You are looking for physical proof of a spiritual problem. I cannot give that to you. I am heartbroken by what has happened to our beautiful Church. I have read too many details of shocking, horrifying and depressing goings on. Perhaps you and sitetest are right and the situation re: the Eucharist isn't as bad as the survey made it out to be. OTOH, given the rampant dissent and heresy that have been allowed to flourish, it doesn't seem that incredible, either.

If the Vatican and SSPX were to reconcile on exactly the terms the SSPX has demanded, would you:

You keep asking this question as if it were going to happen.

The SSPX's demands are the same demands it has made for years. The Vatican will not accept those demands, especially that one which the SSPX would like to use to supplant the Novus Ordo by allowing priests to, willy-nilly, use the Tridentine Mass whenever they want.

Fellay and company had best accept what JPII is offering; they're not going to get a more conservative Pope on this issue. There are those in the Vatican who would walk away from the SSPX and leave it in its schism.

The SSPX is not going to bend. An idiot like Williamson, with his fascination with the Unabomber, will heel to no one, least of all the Pope.

You are far from infallible Sinkspur, further there are those in the Curia that agree with the SSPX issues vis-a-vis the liturgy. Card. Ratzinger has approached Mgr. Fellay with a commission to look into the liturgical issues with SSPX and Vatican theologians. Frankly the Campos resolution and the offer on the table are so close to the "asking price" of the SSPX that your protestations seem a bit shrill. As for Bp. Williamson, he may end up in the SSPV if your claims about him are correct. That will be sad, but it isn't the core issue.

How do you answer the question? (Stipulating that the offer is accepted with the Tridentine Indult requirement deleted and that Rite universally available.)

How do you answer the question? (Stipulating that the offer is accepted with the Tridentine Indult requirement deleted and that Rite universally available.)

The Indult requirement will not be deleted. Period. The normative Mass is the Novus Ordo, and, even a Pope as acquiescent to the Tridentine Liturgy as JPII recognizes that it would be undermined by establishing another pseudo-normative mass.

The Campos resolution established another fraternity, the SSJV, which is not what the SSPX wants universally. If Rome were going to grant a blanket recognition for any priest to say the Tridentine Liturgy publicly whenver he chose, it would have granted that to Campos(since Campos wanted the same thing).

I won't leave the Church under any circumstances.

Sinkspur is in touch with the real world and the real battles and knows where the real enemies are and where to point his sword. Antonius and narses, even after the latest Hoyos warning, is living in some quiet delusion, a utopia of his, theirs, and best not be disturbed.

The storms are great and the mutinous and the sad nervous ones are tempted to shut their eyes, run and live in dreamland of yesteryears.

The cross is a disturbing darkness for all, especially for those who prefer times when the lake was calm. But those who remain steadfast with Peter in Christ will, by grace, endure to the end and save their souls. Meanwhile, we pray for these others who attack Peter in his hour of need and countless persecutions. How tragically unlike the Saints! See Hoyos' quote from St. Catherine of Siena who would scorn any attempt to even suggest the Pope could break with the "substance" of Tadition (as opposed to the passing accidents of other traditions--like burnings at the stake---which the Church rejected as not being part of her substance, the Deposit of Faith which only Rome can interpret and pass on.

Antonius and narses, even after the latest Hoyos warning, is living in some quiet delusion, a utopia of his, theirs, and best not be disturbed.

I wouldn't be that hard on our compatriots. They are Tridentine advocates, which is fine, but the dispute with the SSPX is about more than the Tridentine Mass.

JPII earnestly wants to bring the SSPX back, and, it appears, Fellay is in dialogue with the Vatican.

But the hair-on-fire types, like Williamson, will simply not concur, and they will never concur.

I look for a partial reunion, with the diehards following Williamson off into the weeds.

I agree with you that Williamson won't return to the Church, but I would refrain from calling him an idiot. He is very clever (and I don't mean that as a compliment). He has the charisma to gather together all of the sedevacantists and have himself elected Pope/anti-pope.

He is very clever (and I don't mean that as a compliment). He has the charisma to gather together all of the sedevacantists and have himself elected Pope/anti-pope.

I suspect this is what he wants and, frankly, I hope he does it.

Like the "Old Catholics," he and his followers will then slink into insignificance.

ELS,

Thanks for the reply.

I am heartbroken by what has happened to our beautiful Church.

I am too, far too many times.

God bless,

patent +AMDG

He has the charisma to gather together all of the sedevacantists and have himself elected Pope/anti-pope

He will have lots of company. There are already a half dozen sedevacantist types claiming to be Pope.

patent +AMDG

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.