More about the SSPX talks

  • Thread starter Thread starter ibkc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

ibkc

Guest
From this, it seems that the outcome of the talks between the Holy See and the SSPX will eventually have serious repercussions for the entire Church:

dici.org/en/?p=3924
“Concretely, what are they going to talk about? Three weeks ago, in South Africa, Bishop Fellay on a visit to the Society houses there summed up the issues causing ‘difficulty”: ‘Religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality’ and ‘the influence of modern philosophy, the liturgical novelties, the spirit of the world and its influence upon the modern thinking holding sway in the Church.’ A vast program which does not frighten the Roman negotiators. On their part, they rather rejoice that ‘at long last’ — there has been no such official dealings since 1988 — they will be able to know “the official” position of the Society of St. Pius X concerning all these questions which arose from the Second Vatican Council. They will no longer have it second hand through the many viewpoints given by so and so.
Click to expand...
“From very reliable sources, it is added that three principles will guide the talks. The first deals with ‘the hermeneutic of continuity’ and not of ‘rupture’ with tradition desired by Benedict XVI for the interpretation of Vatican II. And here there is ‘a point of convergence’ regarding this will of the Church’s reconciliation with her own past. The second principle is more problematic: Rome considers the deposit of the faith ‘as a whole.’ It does not accept ‘a pick and chose’ attitude among the teachings of the last council. **The third principle will certainly be decisive: it is a matter of ‘turning back to the letter of the Second Vatican Council and not to its vulgate.’ Plainly speaking, it means working on the original texts and not on their interpretations or simplifications… Consequently, it will be a kind of rereading of the council, during which the experts would clarify the ‘meaning of the terms’ or the ‘ambiguities’ so often denounced by the Lefebvrites.” **(Le Figaro, October 20, 2009)
Click to expand...
The article also notes:
“We have to be realistic. The return, the restoration of the Church will take time. The crisis which is hitting the Church has touched every aspect of the Christian life. To get out of this situation will take more than one generation of constant effort in the right direction. Maybe a century.” It is not a matter here of the theological discussions, but of the solution of the crisis which is shaking the Church, and about which, shortly before his election, Cardinal Ratzinger acknowledged that it was like a boat taking in water from every side.”
Click to expand...
Fascinating stuff, IMO.
 
It’s good to know something positive may come out of these talks even if the SSPX bishops fail in their attempts to achieve canonical status within the Church.

However, judging by what happened with the 1988 Ecclesia Dei document, I think it will only be a continuing stab against the SSPX. They’ll never be credited for being in the right.
 
I don’t agree with the characterization of the SSPX issue as “a crisis.” Where is the crisis in one small group of Catholics deciding to go off on their own, particularly when they are now engaged in talks that will hopefully, someday, lead to their return?
 
DOShea said:
I don’t agree with the characterization of the SSPX issue as “a crisis.” Where is the crisis in one small group of Catholics deciding to go off on their own, particularly when they are now engaged in talks that will hopefully, someday, lead to their return?
Click to expand...
It’s not the SSPX issue that is being called a crisis. It’s the state of the Church in general which is being called a crisis.
 
Maybe the SSPX will agree to Vatican II if the liberal Bishops agree to all the other councils… 😉
 
From the link
The typically European model of an authoritarian Church, unyielding, anti-ecumenical and anti-modern, dominated by the figure of the holy priest in charge of all that is sacred, became an exported product.” (Le Monde, July 2, 2008)
Click to expand...
Not endorsing the FSSPX here but it sounds like a suitable model for the Church to re-adopt today. The documents of Vatican II can and fit in but the spirit shouldn’t. The spirit, not the documents are the root of today’s crisis.
 
KC91 said:
From the link

Not endorsing the FSSPX here but it sounds like a suitable model for the Church to re-adopt today. The documents of Vatican II can and fit in but the spirit shouldn’t. The spirit, not the documents are the root of today’s crisis.
Click to expand...
There are some documents which do not fit in at all with the spirit of tradition, this is most obvious in Nostra Aetate and less obvious in Dignitatis Humanae and Lumen Gentium.

Seeing as these documents were not proclaimed ex-Cathedra or through a Dogmatic Council, it is possible that these documents are in need of revision.

Consider for example:

NA #4 Iudaei tamen neque ut a Deo reprobati neque ut maledicti exhibenatur.

The Jews should not be considered rejected by God.

Council of Florence: Quoscunque ergo adversa et contraria sentientes damnat, reprobat et anathematizat et a Christi corpore, quod est ecclesia, alienos esse denuntiat.

Therefore [the Church] anathemizes, rejects, and condemns those with contrary views (of the Church) to be outside the Body of Christ, and alien to the Faith.

Disclaimer: These translations are not literal.

Here there is a direct contradiction, the Council of Florence teaches those with views contrary to the Church to be rejected [reprobat] however NA states that the Jews (who clearly hold views contrary to the Church) are not rejected [reprobat].

Why is this important? It is the same verb, but NA says the exact opposite of Florence. Florence being Dogmatic and VII being Pastoral, Florence overrides, in this case VII did teach something directly opposed to the teaching of the Church, it’s one of the few where it is plainly obvious.
 
The SSPX is hindering any dialouge with the Jewish people.

Not that this should disturb anyone here as long as they have a really great mass to go to.
 
KC91 said:
The documents of Vatican II can and fit in but the spirit shouldn’t. The spirit, not the documents are the root of today’s crisis.
Click to expand...
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that some of the documents had time-bombs in them and maybe some of the discussions are centered on what’s really relevant anymore, I don’t know.
 
Yes those controversial documents which are not against the teachings of Catholicism were introduced at the wrong time. In fact Vatican II was at the wrong time in the 1960s when there was the Sexual revolution and the student revolts. What was needed then was an iron grip. Vatican II could have waited until later in better times.
 
Depends how we define ‘crisis.’

For me if the house looks divided, there just may be a crisis to deal with.

As far as the Holy Father is concerned, what SSPX has to say is important to the Church.

It’s been over 40 years of one group saying the Church has left Christ & the Church saying to SSPX they left the Church.

I truly believe that if the Traditional Catholics and the Church were visibly one again - & happy to be so, mind - then that could do wonders for the future of the Catholic Church on earth.

I know the current situation breaks the hearts of just about every Trad Cath I’ve ever spoken to. Imagine believing that you’re totally faithful & the one who you’re fathful to, spurns you, day after day for years - or that’s how it feels. 🙂

Not saying one is right & one is wrong, just better we’re one & going to defer to the Holy father’s judgment.
 
A crisis in the Church would be reduced mass attendence, widespread disobedience by many Catholics and schism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top