Francis validates SSPX Confessions! What does this mean for the Society?

There have not been many times in this papacy that I have praised the actions of Pope Francis. Mostly, his careless choice of words and his name-calling have been hurtful. I am not impressed with the power he has given or permitted by evil men who have an agenda to undermine doctrine through stealth practices.

However, it behooves me, in all intellect and charity to express in an affirming way when something is said well.

This is a beautiful letter and it is what the Year of Mercy should be all about. Unfortunately, given the Synod shenanigans, one is left with trepidation that the Year of Mercy will end up being a free-for-all of dissent on doctrine due to the manipulations behind the scenes last year and even now by certain clerics, bishops and cardinals.

The two most important points, the power of the priest to grant absolution to a woman who is penitent from having an abortion. Though, I find this confusing as this past week a Monsignor indicated that in many places, my own diocese included. that authority has already been delegated to a parish priest. Perhaps this is not everywhere and perhaps not in Argentina, as we have seen, the Pope is often parochial in his approach.

The most astounding is the last paragraph. The sins confessed by the penitent to the priests and bishops of the Society of St. Pius X are forgiven when they administer the Sacrament of Penance. This is very subtle. These are not universal faculties.

This is going to be very, very controversial within the Society and particularly amongst its adherents as they now question their priests on their past Confessions and their validity. There is danger in this move by the Pope. While on one hand it seems full of mercy for the people who worship there and the priests, on the other hand, it is loaded with the potential to deeply divide the Society and its congregants. I would love to be a fly on the wall when the priests have to explain that heretofore their confessions were invalid but now the Pope is wrong because they were valid before under ecclesia supplet and now the Pope is just acknowledging it.

There will be a lot of twisting in the wind today and next Sunday on this and a lot of surprised faces in the debate - on all sides.

Perhaps though, it is just more simple -- God the Holy Spirit is still showing that He is running the show notwithstanding the mess His prelates and people make.

To My Venerable Brother

Archbishop Rino Fisichella

President of the Pontifical Council

for the Promotion of the New Evangelization

With the approach of the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy I would like to focus on several points which I believe require attention to enable the celebration of the Holy Year to be for all believers a true moment of encounter with the mercy of God. It is indeed my wish that the Jubilee be a living experience of the closeness of the Father, whose tenderness is almost tangible, so that the faith of every believer may be strengthened and thus testimony to it be ever more effective.

My thought first of all goes to all the faithful who, whether in individual Dioceses or as pilgrims to Rome, will experience the grace of the Jubilee. I wish that the Jubilee Indulgence may reach each one as a genuine experience of God’s mercy, which comes to meet each person in the Face of the Father who welcomes and forgives, forgetting completely the sin committed. To experience and obtain the Indulgence, the faithful are called to make a brief pilgrimage to the Holy Door, open in every Cathedral or in the churches designated by the Diocesan Bishop, and in the four Papal Basilicas in Rome, as a sign of the deep desire for true conversion. Likewise, I dispose that the Indulgence may be obtained in the Shrines in which the Door of Mercy is open and in the churches which traditionally are identified as Jubilee Churches. It is important that this moment be linked, first and foremost, to the Sacrament of Reconciliation and to the celebration of the Holy Eucharist with a reflection on mercy. It will be necessary to accompany these celebrations with the profession of faith and with prayer for me and for the intentions that I bear in my heart for the good of the Church and of the entire world.

Additionally, I am thinking of those for whom, for various reasons, it will be impossible to enter the Holy Door, particularly the sick and people who are elderly and alone, often confined to the home. For them it will be of great help to live their sickness and suffering as an experience of closeness to the Lord who in the mystery of his Passion, death and Resurrection indicates the royal road which gives meaning to pain and loneliness. Living with faith and joyful hope this moment of trial, receiving communion or attending Holy Mass and community prayer, even through the various means of communication, will be for them the means of obtaining the Jubilee Indulgence. My thoughts also turn to those incarcerated, whose freedom is limited. The Jubilee Year has always constituted an opportunity for great amnesty, which is intended to include the many people who, despite deserving punishment, have become conscious of the injustice they worked and sincerely wish to re-enter society and make their honest contribution to it. May they all be touched in a tangible way by the mercy of the Father who wants to be close to those who have the greatest need of his forgiveness. They may obtain the Indulgence in the chapels of the prisons. May the gesture of directing their thought and prayer to the Father each time they cross the threshold of their cell signify for them their passage through the Holy Door, because the mercy of God is able to transform hearts, and is also able to transform bars into an experience of freedom.

I have asked the Church in this Jubilee Year to rediscover the richness encompassed by the spiritual and corporal works of mercy. The experience of mercy, indeed, becomes visible in the witness of concrete signs as Jesus himself taught us. Each time that one of the faithful personally performs one or more of these actions, he or she shall surely obtain the Jubilee Indulgence. Hence the commitment to live by mercy so as to obtain the grace of complete and exhaustive forgiveness by the power of the love of the Father who excludes no one. The Jubilee Indulgence is thus full, the fruit of the very event which is to be celebrated and experienced with faith, hope and charity.

Furthermore, the Jubilee Indulgence can also be obtained for the deceased. We are bound to them by the witness of faith and charity that they have left us. Thus, as we remember them in the Eucharistic celebration, thus we can, in the great mystery of the Communion of Saints, pray for them, that the merciful Face of the Father free them of every remnant of fault and strongly embrace them in the unending beatitude.

One of the serious problems of our time is clearly the changed relationship with respect to life. A widespread and insensitive mentality has led to the loss of the proper personal and social sensitivity to welcome new life. The tragedy of abortion is experienced by some with a superficial awareness, as if not realizing the extreme harm that such an act entails. Many others, on the other hand, although experiencing this moment as a defeat, believe that they have no other option. I think in particular of all the women who have resorted to abortion. I am well aware of the pressure that has led them to this decision. I know that it is an existential and moral ordeal. I have met so many women who bear in their heart the scar of this agonizing and painful decision. What has happened is profoundly unjust; yet only understanding the truth of it can enable one not to lose hope. The forgiveness of God cannot be denied to one who has repented, especially when that person approaches the Sacrament of Confession with a sincere heart in order to obtain reconciliation with the Father. For this reason too, I have decided, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, to concede to all priests for the Jubilee Year the discretion to absolve of the sin of abortion those who have procured it and who, with contrite heart, seek forgiveness for it. May priests fulfil this great task by expressing words of genuine welcome combined with a reflection that explains the gravity of the sin committed, besides indicating a path of authentic conversion by which to obtain the true and generous forgiveness of the Father who renews all with his presence.

A final consideration concerns those faithful who for various reasons choose to attend churches officiated by priests of the Fraternity of St Pius X. This Jubilee Year of Mercy excludes no one. From various quarters, several Brother Bishops have told me of their good faith and sacramental practice, combined however with an uneasy situation from the pastoral standpoint. I trust that in the near future solutions may be found to recover full communion with the priests and superiors of the Fraternity. In the meantime, motivated by the need to respond to the good of these faithful, through my own disposition, I establish that those who during the Holy Year of Mercy approach these priests of the Fraternity of St Pius X to celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation shall validly and licitly receive the absolution of their sins.

Trusting in the intercession of the Mother of Mercy, I entrust the preparations for this Extraordinary Jubilee Year to her protection.

From the Vatican, 1 September 2015

FRANCISCUS

1,000,000 Catholics don't matter

Nope. 

They just don't matter.

Not to John Allen.

One might wonder why any of this matters to the Vatican. The Society of St. Pius X claims a global following of around 1 million, which, if true, would represent .01 percent of the full Catholic population of 1.2 billion. Investing resources in trying to lure such a relative footnote back might seem disproportionate.

Not to others whom we hoped would be more pastoral towards them.

From: Thomas Rosica [mailto:rosica@saltandlighttv.org]
Sent: March 24, 2011 2:53 PM
To: david.domet@xxxxx.com
Subject: For your VOX!
Source URL: http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/april-may-be-cruel-month-relations-traditionalists
More news for you and your VOX. May the Lord grant you the peace you are seeking this Lent. No
guarantees you will find it this side of the Resurrection but keep seeking.
Fr. Rosica

April may be cruel month for relations with traditionalists
By John L Allen Jr
Created Mar 24, 2011
For anyone hoping that longstanding ruptures between Rome and the traditionalist wing of the
Catholic church are on the brink of swift resolution, it may turn out that April is indeed the cruelest
month.
Sometime in early April, ...

http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/april-may-be-cruel-month-relations-traditionalists

Indeed. Quite the email. Quite the report from John L. Allen, Jr.

Do these 1,000,000 plus Catholics matter?. As many have stated, they are a greater portion of the Church than Allen lets on. There may be 1.5 billion Catholics in the world but when you look at Europe and the Americas how many actually practice their faith.

If they are schismatics, which I content that they are not, then do they not matter? There is sure a lot of ecumenical outreach for heretics and interfaith outreach with those who deny Christ but precious little for these, our own brothers and sisters.

I am sorry for Bishop Williamson. I have great respect and sympathy for the bishops, priests and religious of the Society of St. Pius X and I understand the desires of those who worship at their chapels. I believe that one day Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre will be declared at least a Servant of God by the Church if not made Venerable. Who are we to say that the Holy Spirit was not acting through him to preserve the traditional Mass?

Father Zuhlsdorf and Father Hunwicke have some thoughts worth pondering.

As for Allen and company, they know and we know something. They have no progeny. There time is short, very short. They are working feverishly because they know it but they will not succeed.

They will fail.

This won't last much longer.

All we have to do is hold fast to the faith.

Where is the mercy?

This blogger has friends that worship at the Toronto chapel of the Society of St. Pius X. I have a conflicted view of the fact that they do, but I can clearly understand it. One one hand, they attend their in a comfortable way, they do not participate in the life of the greater Archdiocese nor do they fight it out in the trenches; it would be a lot easier with them in the fight directly with those of us engaging the crisis daily. On the other hand, who am I to judge? The scandal and sorrow that they have endured on the part of priests or previous Ordinaries not sympathetic to the cause is legion. (I do not include Cardinal Collins in this as he has generally been supportive of the Toronto Traditional Mass Society's goals and the needs of the faithful. though clearly the FSSP issue is still a hard point), 

It is also repugnant that certain puerile people label them and others as madtrads or radtrads or trads-behaving-badly. It is insulting, degrading, juvenile, schizophrenic and unbecoming of any Catholic who purports to love the Our Lord Jesus Christ, and His Holy Sacrifice at the Mass and His Church. 

It is regrettable that under our dear Pope Benedict XVI, a complete reconciliation could not be realised and I long for the day in God's good time and may I live to see it, that a perfect communion is established.

Full disclosure: I have worshipped at the Toronto chapel in the past and sang in the Schola there whilst between other chant engagements. I have never gone to the Sacrament of Confession there for obvious reasons but the Mass if valid and holy.

What these two bishops, in Italy and Argentina have done, by threatening the lay faithful with excommunication when the Church has already stated that they are not excommunicated is the height of episcopal arrogance and hypocrisy. These are our brother and sisters. These are Catholic faithful living the faith as the parents of these bishops did!

There is much talk of mercy these days. Mercy for sodomites, mercy for those paying the price for murder, mercy for adulterers. Mercy. Mercy. Mercy.

Well? Where is the mercy for these 99?

INTERNATIONAL UNA VOCE FEDERATION

MEDIA RELEASE – IMMEDIATE – 4 November 2014

International Una Voce Federation: threatened SSPX excommunications may be illegal

LONDON 4 November 2014 – The International Una Voce Federation which seeks to promote the traditions, particularly the liturgical traditions, of the Roman Catholic Church, within the official structures of the Church, today questioned the legality of a “notification” dated 14 October 2014 of the Roman See of Albano, Italy, claiming to ex-communicate those who receive the sacraments from, or attend religious services of, the Society of St Pius X (SSPX).

The Federation questions the legality of a notification in similar terms of Bishop Óscar Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, issued on 3 November 2014.

The Federation, which is a lay movement independent of any priestly or religious community, believes that preservation of doctrine, law and justice, as well as good pastoral practice, within the Church, is important.

The Federation believes that these “notifications” tend to imply that anyone who has ever attended services of the SSPX is not welcome in parish churches in these dioceses.

This view is clearly in direct contrast with the emphasis of the Supreme Pontiff, Pope Francis, upon mercy and forgiveness, as well as the “openness of heart” requested by Pope Benedict XVI as a prelude to a healing of divisions “in the heart of the Church”.

The Bishop of Albano is the Rt Rev Marcello Semeraro, media spokesman of the Italian Bishops’ conference and secretary of the Papal inner Council of 9 advisers.

The Federation is asking the Holy See to advise that these notifications are defective and to require them to be modified so as to comply with the law of the Church and the decisions of the Holy See.

BACKGROUND

On 14 October 2014, the Chancery of the Diocese of Albano issued a notification to parish priests claiming that anyone who attends SSPX services, even, apparently, children, thereby “break communion with the Catholic Church” and can only be re-admitted to the Church after “an adequate personal path of reconciliation”. The notification reads:

“The Catholic faithful cannot participate at Mass, neither request and/or receive sacraments from or in the Society. Acting otherwise would mean to break communion with the Catholic Church.

Therefore, any Catholic faithful who requests and receives sacraments in the Society of Saint Pius X, will place himself de facto in the condition of no longer being in communion with the Catholic Church. A readmission to the Catholic Church must be preceded by an adequate personal path of reconciliation, according to the ecclesiastical discipline established by the Bishop.”

Bishop Óscar Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, in a letter to his diocese dated 3 November 2014, states:

“It is not licit for the Catholic faithful to take part in the celebration of Mass in these conditions, neither to request nor to receive sacraments from the priests of the aforementioned "Society of Saint Pius X", including in private places turned into places of worship, without excluding, in case of obstinacy, also the ferendae sententiae penalties that may apply, according to the ecclesial spirit and that of protection of the faithful.

In the case of the rupture of ecclesiastical communion by the above-mentioned founded motives, in order to be later readmitted to the Catholic Church, a personal path of reconciliation (and eventually of removal of the canonical censure) will be required, according to the discipline advised by the Holy See and the [diocese's] own, established by the diocesan bishop.”

CANONICAL BRIEF

The attitude of the Holy See has always been that lay faithful who receive the sacraments from priests of the SSPX are not excommunicated. Examples are as follows.

In 1991 Bishop Joseph Ferrario of Honolulu declared six lay Catholics excommunicated on grounds of schism for having procured the services of an SSPX bishop to administer confirmation. These appealed to the Holy See which, through Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, declared the decree invalid because their action, though considered blameworthy, did not constitute schism.

On 5 September 2005, the Holy See, through the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, affirmed that “the faithful who attend the masses of the aforesaid Fraternity are not excommunicate, and the priests who celebrate them are not, either—the latter are, in fact, suspended.” (Protocol n.55/2005, signed by the then Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Mgr Camille Perl).

On 27 September 2002, quoted and reaffirmed on 18 January 2003, the Holy See, through the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, stated that “In the strict sense you may fulfil your Sunday obligation by attending a mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.” (Letters signed by Mgr Camille Perl).

“To break communion with the Catholic Church”, i.e. excommunication, can only be incurred where there is both an “external violation of a law or precept” and it is “gravely imputable by reason of malice or culpability” (canon 1321) and only if the proper penalty is excommunication.

Excommunication is not the proper penalty for “participating at mass” or “requesting or receiving the Sacraments” from SSPX priests or in SSPX-administered places of worship. Thus:

It is accordingly not correct that excommunication is thereby incurred.

In any event, those under the age of sixteen cannot incur a penalty (canon 1323.1); this would apply to those under this age who received baptism or confirmation.

Even when basing a canonical argument on the assumption that the SSPX has no canonical status in the Church and that its priests are suspended, following ordination without dimissorial letters, it does not follow that to seek the sacraments at their hands is an illegal act on the part of the lay faithful.

To say otherwise also conflicts with the provision in canon law (canon 1335) for the suspension of any prohibition of the celebration of the Sacraments or sacramental, or the exercise of a power of governance, when one of the faithful requests it for “any just reason”.

Furthermore, the notifications appear to challenge the Decree of the Congregation of Bishops dated 21 January 2009 lifting the excommunications of the SSPX bishops and instead seem to wish to re-impose those excommunications, within each diocese, contrary to this decree of a Congregation of the Holy See.

Moreover, it would be incongruous for the legislator to lift the excommunication of the bishops while imposing or maintaining it on the lay faithful to whom they minister.

CONCLUSION

The Federation is thus obliged to question the notifications since they appear to undermine papal legislation and canon law.

** ends **

The International Una Voce Federation is a lay movement, initially founded in Zurich in 1967.

The International Una Voce Federation aims to foster the cultural heritage of the Latin rite of the Roman Catholic Church upon which so much of European culture, music, art, literature and architecture has been built and nourished. Beginning with the retention of the Jewish Temple worship which, under Christian tutelage, developed into plainchant, sacred music became the basis of all later classical and choral music. Similar developments took place in art, architecture, literature and all the arts, in which the Christian tradition built upon the ancient Classical world and upon the Hebrew traditions that it inherited.

The Federation’s principal aims are to ensure that the traditional Roman rite of the Church is maintained in the Church as one of the forms of liturgical celebration, and to safeguard and promote the use of Latin, Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony and all the sacred, artistic, literary and musical traditions of the Roman Church in all their beauty and integrity.

A General Assembly of the Federation is convened every two years in Rome and elections are held for the Council and Presidency.

The Federation is recognized by the Holy See, its views are received with courtesy and respect by the relevant Roman Congregations, and its representatives are received by them in the same manner.

Its first President, Dr Eric Vermehren de Saventhem, was a German anti-Nazi diplomat who, together with his wife, born Countess von Plettenberg, from a well-known anti-Nazi Catholic family, escaped via the Embassy in Istanbul to Britain. Other Presidents have included the author Michael Davies from Britain.

Over the years the Federation has made various successful interventions. It was instrumental in persuading Pope John Paul II in 1986 to convoke a special Commission of Cardinals which resulted in the issue of the decree Ecclesia Dei Adflicta in 1988 and also played a part in persuading Pope Benedict XVI to issue the motu proprio decree Summorum Pontificum in 2007.

Mr James Bogle

CCCB or Papa Ratzinger; Whom do you believe?

With a hat-tip to Kitchener-Waterloo Traditional Catholic for the good work on Jadot's boys, comes this story which I've long forgotten about:

"On January 18, 1991, Bishop Joseph Ferrario, the local Ordinary of Honolulu (now deceased), served them [six SSPX priests] a Formal Canonical Warning, threatening them with excommunication.  On May 1, 1991, they were formally declared to be excommunicated

In a letter dated June 28, 1993, the USA's Apostolic Pro-Nunico, Archbishop Cacciavillan, declared on Cardinal Ratzinger's behalf:

From the examination of the case, conducted on the basis of the Law of the Church, it did not result that the facts referred to in the above-mentioned decree are formal schismatic acts in the strict sense, as they do not constitute the offense of schism; and therefore the Congregation holds that the Decree of May 1, 1991 lacks foundation and hence validity.

This is a declaration that the automatic (ipso facto) excommunication claimed by Bishop Ferrario for the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre is in fact totally non-existent."

On January 17, commenting on the inappropriate comments by Bishop Fellay, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops the Society of Saint Pius X, to be a schismatic group not in communion with the Catholic Church.

So which is it? 

Who are we to believe?

Is the SSPX schismatic as the CCCB states or is it not as then Cardinal Ratzinger declared in 1991?

For more on Bishop Ferrario, how about this little gem from Randy Engel's, The Rite of Sodomy:

Meanwhile, Ferrario was moving up the ecclesiastical ladder. In 1978, Pope Paul VI appointed him an Auxiliary Bishop of Honolulu, and in 1982, Pope John Paul II elevated Ferrario to Bishop of Honolulu. This despite the fact that Ferrario was engaged in sexual solicitation of seminarians at St. Stephen's and had carried on a homosexual liaison with another island priest. Word spread that the Diocese of Honolulu was now overtly "gay friendly."

KWTC refers in the same editorial to Raymond Leahy and Barry Glendinning, two homosexual pederasts, bishop and priest, who were known as expert "liturgists." How often has this been revealed; that those who those who persecute and denigrate the traditional liturgy and those who even take it upon themselves to put their personal mark on the new liturgy are themselves, homosexuals or sympathizers.

It is the height of narcissism and deceit and betrayal and disgust.

Oh, in case my enemies are reading, I'm not blogging from work - taking a vacation day.

CCCB declares its authority over the Pope!

With a hat-tip to Barona at Toronto Catholic Witness (a blog that should be referenced regularly), we find that the Canadian Confrence of Catholic Bishops has declared the Priestly Society of St. Pius X as "a schismatic group not in communion with the Catholic Church."

Really? 

When did the Pope make such a declaration? Has Benedict XVI ever, ever said such a thing? The nuanced "schismatic act" in Eccelsia Dei adflicta is not such a declaration. As Barona states, "The CCCB may be eager to create a schism, the Holy Father is not. At such times of crisis in the Church, it would be best for the CCCB to refrain from inflammatory language, and to correct the terrible abuses that exist within the various dioceses across Canada; rather then fling unhelpful accusations at the SSPX."

Bishop Fellay's recent trip to Toronto and New Hamburg have been noted worldwide. His comments and disclosure about the talks between the Society and the Holy See were, in my opinion, imprudent. Worse, his continuous deleterious remarks towards our Jewish brethren  as "enemies of the Church" is not acceptable, notwithstanding the explanation that all who oppose Christ are enemies. 

The issue here is not the SSPX it is the CCCB.

As Barona continues, "The CCCB has no canonical authority over the lay faithful." This is the fundamental issue, the ongoing exertion of authority which it does not possess over the faithful and the acquiescence of the diocesan bishop permitting this usurpation of their own authority to continue. Let us be abundantly clear, the CCCB has no right to make such a declaration  that the Holy Father himself, has not.

SSPX to wait out Rome

Father Niklaus Pfluger of the Society of St. Pius X whom I had the pleasure to meet and who permitted me to sing Tenebrae over the Triduum in Toronto a few years back, has been interviewed and published on Rorate.

You can read it all there but I found his comment here to be most revealing. 

Kirchliche Umschau: Do you think that there could be a new development?

Father Niklaus Pfluger: Not just think–I know! The facts are what they are. The Church everywhere in the world, with some rare exceptions, is undergoing a process of self-destruction, and not just in Europe. In Latin America, for example, things don’t seem to be any better. Where the economy is relatively strong, as in Germany, Swizterland, and the United States, the external structures remain. But the loss of the Faith can be seen everywhere. Now, without the Faith, there is no Church. In Germany, the bishops recently sent a clear message: the right to collect taxes from Church members is more important than 120,000 Catholics leaving the Church every year. We are witnessing a march to destruction unseen in history, a rising tide which not even the bishops can stem, using, as they do, tactics devoid of the spirit of Faith. Joseph Ratzinger, as a Council father 50 years ago, spoke of a Church, “imbued with the spirit of paganism,” which the Council did its part to usher in. I am convinced that this turn of events, on the one hand, will bring the bishops to a more sober frame of mind, and, on the other hand, will leave only the conservatives holding fast, meaning those who quite simply wish to believe as the Church has always believed, and to persevere in their Catholic Faith. With those holding fast, we will no longer need to argue. Agreement in the Faith will soon follow.

Kirchliche Umschau: You are insinuating that the tide of self-destruction will engulf liberal Catholics. But the liberals see things differently. They want even more reforms to assure the survival of the living Church.

Father Niklaus Pfluger: I am inventing nothing. I see events and where they lead. Which religious order or diocese has younger members to ensure its future growth, and which ones are dying out? We can observe that decline and dissolution are most apparent in those places where the so-called conciliar reforms are most eagerly followed. I don’t deny that, in the arena of public opinion–and on the parish level–the liberal approach is more acceptable. But the Church does not live by social acceptance or by human applause. She derives her energy from men and women who believe and practice their Faith, who are prepared to renounce worldly pleasures to become priests, monks, or nuns. These latter are conspicuously absent among the liberals, and that is why they now want to receive priestly ordination, but of course without celibacy, without any self-denial. And they naively expect to increase their vocations by lowering the standards!

Bishop Fellay: "It is the will of the Pope"

There is not one thing in the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI that will be more controversial than that which is now before him. He will decide. What he will decide will shape the Church for decades to come. Do not doubt how big this is.

There are enemies on both sides trying to prevent this. Those who are against this, do the work of Satan.

From Rorate and Gloria TV:

"You have surely heard that, in the last few months, Rome has offered us a solution - we could rather say, a recognition.

"This structure that is being offered to the Society is in fact entirely appropriate. That is, if it actually takes place, you will feel absolutely no difference between now and afterwards. We will remain as we are, so to speak. The problem is the [existence of] safeguards: will it actually happen this way? The fear is great that we will be transformed. ...

"It is quite clear that this offer is also very, very controversial in the Church at large. I can assure you: It is the will of the Pope. This must not be doubted. But it is certainly not the will of everyone in the Church.

"Whether this will come to fruition depends on terms that are not yet clear terms. There are still points that remain unclear. It could happen that, in the upcoming days, weeks - it is very hard to ascertain this - the Pope will decide directly. It could be that he takes the case back to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. There is a lot of pressure in Rome. Which is why I couldn't say more than this. That is the current status.

"One must not think that things will be easy afterwards. To use the words of the Pope that describe the situation quite well: 'I know,' he said, 'that it would be easier both for the Society and for myself to leave the situation as it currently is.' This describes very well the situation, and also that the Pope himself knows that he, when he does it, will be attacked. And also that the situation will not be easy for us. That which will arise out of this situation will be with Rome or against it. Both of which will be difficult.

"Yet we have trust in the good God. He has guided us very well so far. We must not think that, praying so much, He would abandon us in the moment of greatest danger. That would be [a thought] against hope. We are counting on God's assistance. His will be done.

SSPX Canada District Superior -- "Let us trust in the leadership"

In the past year, the SSPX District Superior moved from Toronto to their new St. Joseph Centre at St-Césaire, Quebec Father Jürgen Wegner. I came to know Father Wegner a little while he was in Toronto as I sang Tenebrae with them one Triduum a few years ago. He is a fine priest and has issued an extensive letter dealing exclusively with the current situation between the Holy See and the SSPX.

Let us remember today, those Catholics in Canada who attend Mass at the SSPX Mass Centres and that those who have doubts and do not trust the Holy Father and have in fact, developed a "schismatic mentality," some of whom I know, will humble themselves to the words of Father Wegner, the former District Superior now in the United States, Father Rostand and of course, to Bishop Fellay. Let us also not fall victim to rumour mongering or spread unfortunate misinformation.
Here is the introduction but please go to Rorate Caeli to read it in its entirely.

Dear friends and benefactors,

There has been, during the past few weeks, a veritable flood of articles and opinions concerning the relations between Rome and the SSPX. The information provided by these texts may seem alarming and even contradictory, threatening to trouble our peace of mind and obscure our judgment. I would like, during these confusing times, to outline clearly the purpose of the Society, its common and unwavering aim to promote the Catholic faith, and the importance of unity.

Reason #1,988 why the SSPX needs to come home!

Le Figaro - "Rome and Écône on the verge of reaching an agreement"

Breaking: From Rorate Caeli:

I am scheduled to have dinner with a priest of the SSPX in two weeks; may it be a joyous celebration. Vox.

   

Rome and Écône on the verge of reaching an agreement

by Jean-Marie Guénois

The signing of a document establishing the relations between the Holy See and the disciples of Abp. Lefebvre is a matter of days.

Officially, the Vatican awaits the response of Bp. Bernard Fellay, the chief of the Lefebvrists. As soon as it is received in Rome - "it is a matter of days, and no longer of weeks", - it will be immediately examined. If it conforms to expectations, the Holy See will very quickly announce a historic agreement with this group of faithful, known under the name of "integrists".

But unofficially, and with the greatest discretion, emissaries have worked, from both sides, to "reach an agreement". In the past few weeks, the final adjustments have been concluded between Rome and Écône in order to better respond to the demands of "clarifications" asked for by the Vatican last March 16.

A very delicate negotiation 

It is thus that the final response of Bp. Fellay, very well pondered and well prepared, should settle - this time, for good - a very delicate negotiation which was relaunched by Benedict XVI following his election, in 2005. 

The "Ecclesia Dei" commission, sheltered within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the most important ministry in the Vatican, is in charge of this dossier. But it is also, at this point, personally followed by Benedict XVI. And he wants an agreement. 

Which allows for the consideration, by well informed persons, that a positive outcome will truly come into being. Even at the cost of the permanence of profound disagreements regarding the Second Vatican Council.

Disagreements completely accepted, besides, by the Pope. He has placed his pontificate under this line of reinterpretation of the Vatican II Council. Following two axes: emptying the spirit of "rupture" of '68 and avoiding opposition between the highest tradition of the Church and modernity.

Fifty years of opposition

On Monday, Benedict XVI will reach 85. He is tired. His entourage do not hide this. He has had to rest this week in Castel Gandolfo from his exhausting voyage to Mexico and Cuba, then from the long services of Holy Week. He should be back in the Vatican on Friday evening. As a priority on his bureau: this decision on the Lefebvrist affair. It will be one of the weightiest of the pontificate.

For fifty years, the Lefebrvists have stood in opposition to the Holy See regarding Vatican II. And in formal juridical rupture since June 1988, when Abp. Marcel Lefebvre ordained four bishops despite the Pope's interdict.

Joseph Ratzinger was placed at the time by John Paul II in charge of the negotiations with the rebellious bishop. He has never accepted that failure. Nor, once having become the Pope, the prospect of an enduring schism in the Church.

Benedict XVI compels the Church to reconcile with herself

One after the other, Benedict XVI has demolished, with all his papal authority, the obstacles that prevented a full reconciliation with the disciples of Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.

And, if a final agreement is announced in the upcoming days, the essential part of the work was already put in place by this pope:

-The reestablishment in 2007 - as an "extraordinary" rite of the Catholic Church -- of the Mass celebrated in Latin, that is, according to the Missal of John XXIII in force before the Council.

-The removal, in 2009, of the excommunications which fell on the four bishops ordained by Abp. Lefebvre.

-The launch of the doctrinal discussions between the Holy See and the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, in that same year, regarding the Second Vatican Council

The apparent failure of the latter, one year ago, had given the impression of a complete failure of the negotiation. 

The doctrinal disagreement between the Lefebvrists and Rome regarding the Second Vatican Council was effectively abyssal. But it had been forgotten that the object of those conversations was not finding an agreement, but establishing the list of divergences and of their reasons.

It is therefore knowingly and, thus, without any ambiguity, that Rome intends to seal this unity found once again with Écône, stronghold of the Lefebvrists in Switzerland.

It will probably be done with the creation of a special statute - a "personal prelature" - already experienced by Opus Dei. This structure grants a true autonomy of action at the same time as the Catholic faith is shared. Its superior answers directly to the pope, and not to the bishops.

But the true "revolution" that Benedict XVI intends to leave before the eyes of the history of the Catholic Church is elsewhere. It is not related to peripheral aspects of the Catholic Church. These have already enraged the groups opposed to this reconciliation. The so-called "Progressives" of the Conciliar Church who see the "gains" of Vatican II questioned. The "ultras" within the Lefebvrist ranks who see in this a betrayal and a compromise with Modernist Rome.

This revolution aims for an enlarged vision of the Catholic Church. Benedict XVI, the theologian, has never accepted that in 1962 the bimillennial Catholic Church would have cut herself from the culture and strength of her past. More than a reconciliation with the Lefebvrists, he aims, with this gesture, for a reconciliation of the Catholic Church with herself.

SSPX Assessment of "Doctrinal Preamble"

I don't often post on matters of the SSPX, but I do think that this is important and I have lifted it here from Rorate Caeli blog. No doubt, for those who have been following the issues for the last while can pretty well confirm that the difficult point is indeed what Bishop Fellay says below; “Yes, you can criticize the Council, but on one condition: it is necessary to accept it first.”

If you read this blog, you probably tend to agree that there are issues with the implementation and interpretation of the documents of the Second Vatican Council, at least as a minimum. The Holy Father has worked unceasingly to ensure the correct "hermeneuitic of continuity." Bishop Fellay and the SSPX are actually doing all of us a favour because they are forcing the Vatican to address the matters. On the other hand, they are also displaying a prideful and strident stance that is also disconcerting. Who is right? Can we blindly say that the SSPX is wrong because we follow Rome? Can the Vatican be right on all of this and the SSPX is in fact, schismatic and disobedient? Where does the truth lay?

Clearly, the Holy Father wants this matter solved and formal unity established and he has gone a long way towards this. Summorum Pontificum, the lifting of the Excommunications, and the Doctrinal Talks and this latest Preamble prove this. What has the SSPX given?

Will the Pope go one step further, or maybe two? Can he, will he simply lift all priestly suspensions and recognise all marriages and jurisdictional matter of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, or as some would prefer, Penance. What if he grants them a Personal Prelature and global diocese?

This whole matter is frustrating and going on far too long. It must be solved and soon, positions are hardening. If these talks to do not succeed, if there is not suitable good will and charity around all parties then the risk is that nothing further will happen and eventually, they will Consecrate another priest as bishop. If that happens, then it would seem that at this point, the Pope would be deeply hurt and left with no alternative but to declare that it is in fact, a formal schism.

Let us hope and pray that pride is reduced and charity abounds and that truth prevails.

From the sermon delivered by the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bp. Bernard Fellay, on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception. These are the latest words of that Fraternity on the ongoing discussions with the Apostolic See.

You have all heard that there was a proposal from Rome, a proposal that said, “We are ready to recognize you [canonically].” The problem is that there is always a condition. This condition may have varied a bit in its formulation, but basically it is always the same. This condition is: you must accept the Council. One could sum up the current situation by saying: “Yes, you can criticize the Council, but on one condition: it is necessary to accept it first.” Which leaves us saying, “What can we criticize afterwards?”

I think that this is an honest summary of the present situation. And it is not difficult to describe for you our response.

Obviously, the formulas are more and more interesting, closer and closer to what we say. We have arrived by now at a point that clearly shows the depth of the problem. In that famous proposal this is what they tell us: “You commit yourselves to acknowledging that with regard to points from the Council that cause difficulties, the only way to understand those points is to understand them in light of the continuous, perpetual Tradition, in light of the preceding Magisterium.” The light of Tradition is the only way by which one can understand the dubious points. They even go further: “Any proposition and any interpretation of the dubious texts that was opposed to that perpetual Magisterium, that continual Magisterium of the Church must be rejected.” That is what we have always said. But there is a tiny little incidental clause that adds, “as the New Catechism says”. Now the New Catechism adopts the Council.

In other words, concerning the principle we can only agree. As for the application, it is completely the opposite. They claim that they are applying the principle by saying: everything that was done at the Council is faithful to Tradition, is consistent with Tradition, whether it be ecumenism or religious liberty. That shows you the seriousness of the problem. There is a problem somewhere. It is not possible otherwise. The problem is based on the understanding of certain words. And these words are of course “Tradition” and “Magisterium”. Their way of understanding these words is subjective. Certainly there are cases in which one can understand “tradition” in the sense of “transmit”: the act of transmitting is a transmission. But the usual way of understanding this word has bearing on its content. What is transmitted? What is transmitted from generation to generation? The classical definition of Tradition is “that which has always been believed by all, everywhere and at all times” (Commonitorium by St. Vincent of Lerins). Here the expression “That which” designates the object. But nowadays, it is as though we went from the object to the subject, so as to consider only the one who transmits.

That is why they talk to you about “living tradition”, because the one who transmits, when he transmits, is alive. Now life moves, it changes. The popes change… and therefore tradition changes, but it remains tradition. It is the same tradition, but one that changes. The Church has also taken this sense into consideration, but in an altogether secondary way. That is not what she is talking about when she talks about Tradition; what we call the deposit of the faith, the set of truths that the Good Lord has entrusted to the Church so that she might transmit it from generation to generation, so that souls might be saved. This content is what she means. And this is the reason why, with the definition of infallibility at the First Vatican Council, the Church teaches that the Holy Ghost has effectively been promised to St. Peter and to his successors, therefore to the popes. But He was not promised in such a way that the popes might teach something new by a new revelation. He was promised so that, with the help of the Holy Ghost, Saint Peter and the popes might preserve holily and transmit faithfully that which does not change, the revealed deposit.

That is where we are. That is what we are trying to do, since there is in fact a gesture made by Rome toward us, we must recognize it, a surprising gesture after these doctrinal discussions in which we determined that we were not in agreement. In effect it is a situation similar to that of two persons who meet, discuss something and arrive at the conclusion that they do not agree. What do you do then? Rome tells us: “You accept nevertheless!” And we reply: “It is not possible.” And so what we decide to do, besides answering that it is not possible, is to tell them: Wouldn’t you like to look at things a bit differently? Wouldn’t you like to try to understand that the Society is not the one that is a problem. There is indeed a problem in the Church, but it is not the Society; we are not a problem because we are saying that there is a problem. Then we ask them to deal with the real problem. We are ready; we want only one thing and it is precisely to attack the real problem.

You understand very well that humanly speaking there is no great hope that they will agree to change such a position. Maybe the disappointments that the Church has experienced will move them? The fact that currently the disaster, the sterility is more clearly evident: there are no more vocations. It is frightening. I saw, a few moments ago, the statistics for the Sisters of Charity, the nuns who used to be everywhere in France: between thirty and forty years of age I think that there are still three left in all of France. Between the ages of 40 and 50, likewise three. The majority, in other words almost 200, are between 70 and 80 or between 80 and 90. Some of them are more than 100 years old, and they are more numerous than those who are 20, 30, 40 or 50 years old. If you take the ones from 20 to 50 years of age, you have one more than the group of those who are 100 years old or more: 9 as opposed to 8. Those nuns who used to do all sorts of charitable works in all the rural areas!

And it is over. That is one example among thousands. Take the priests. Take instances from whatever area you want: it is a Church that is dying, disappearing. Nevertheless that ought to make people reflect. We think, we hope that some are beginning to reflect. People do get the impression that that is just not enough. Of course, grace is needed. It is necessary to pray.

Pray! Pray that the Good Lord will truly deliver the Church, that the Blessed Virgin will do something. She is the one who promised that her Immaculate Heart would triumph at the end to get the Church out of this disaster. For us who are involved in this great battle for the Church, it is an extraordinary honor to be able to be members of this Society today. And so let us ask the Most Blessed Virgin Mary that we might be worthy members of this Society. Let us live faithfully according to its statutes. Follow the seminary rules, as it is expected of you, with all your heart, while practicing the great charity that the Statutes of the Society require of us. Let us request it from the Most Blessed Virgin Mary so that really, every day, we might please God, that we might sanctify ourselves and thereby might be able to win souls for the Good Lord, those souls that are entrusted to us, for the greater glory of God, for the honor of the Most Blessed Virgin and that of the Church. Amen.

[Source & translation: DICI, Dec. 15, 2011]