Pope puts “Ecclesia Dei” under doctrinal congregation

[peregrinus_WA]

Pope puts “Ecclesia Dei” under doctrinal congregation

VATICAN CITY — Pope Benedict XVI has placed the commission responsible for relations with traditionalist Catholics under the authority of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as he announced four months ago he intended to do.

In a brief note published this morning, Pope Benedict accepted the resignation of 80-year-old Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos as president of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei,” which since 1988 has been charged with outreach to the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X as well as with assisting Catholics attached to the pre-Vatican II liturgy.

 

[Janet1983]

Pope puts “Ecclesia Dei” under doctrinal congregation

VATICAN CITY — Pope Benedict XVI has placed the commission responsible for relations with traditionalist Catholics under the authority of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as he announced four months ago he intended to do.

In a brief note published this morning, Pope Benedict accepted the resignation of 80-year-old Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos as president of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei,” which since 1988 has been charged with outreach to the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X as well as with assisting Catholics attached to the pre-Vatican II liturgy.

Is he starting to get serious with the Society of St. Pius X now?
“Pope Benedict XVI has placed the commission responsible for relations with traditionalist Catholics under the authority of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith…”
The CDF is the modern name for what used to be the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

 

[JReducation]

The name of the office has changed and they have added some additional responsibilities to it. However, it has retained many of the prior responsibilities and rights of the old office.

I would not be able to say if this means that the Holy Father is getting more serious or less serious about the SSPX. I can only say thatt the SSPX will have to deal with Levada and not directly with Pope Benedict. Whether that’s a good thing or not, is really very subjective. Some people love Levada for his open mindness. Others feel less appreciative of him because he has a reputation for not enjoying long explanations. When you speak to him he expects you to get to the bottom line ASAP and then you are to be quiet and listen to him.

I have never met the man. But I have heard it said that he is a pleasure to listen to. He is bright, friendly, engaging and most of all very transparent. They say that with him what you see is what you get. Maybe it is good for the Traditionlists of any group to deal with him. He won’t waste their time with walks around the park.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Maybe Levada’s personality as you describe it will go better, it seems at least one SSPX bishop wasn’t overly impressed about what Cardinal Castrillon did in ecclesia dei:

its at 2:25 in this video

youtube.com/watch?v=3L2bf18Hatg

 

[JReducation]

Maybe Levada’s personality as you describe it will go better, it seems at least one SSPX bishop wasn’t overly impressed about what Cardinal Castrillon did in ecclesia dei:

its at 2:25 in this video

youtube.com/watch?v=3L2bf18Hatg

I does not sound like Bishop Williamson and Cardinal Levada are going to get along.

1. Bishop Williamson talks too much and says too much. Levada is known for not liking that.
2. Rumor has it that Williamson is already on Levada’s hit list for his statement on the Shoah.
3. Bishop Williamson seems to want exact answers and Levada is of the mind that even in certain moral teachings of the Church there are still gray areas, one of them being on brith control. He wrote his doctoral thesis on Humane Vitae and he argues that there are parts of that encyclical that are not endowed with infallibility; therefore, when you read it, you must read it with this knowledge in mind to sort out what is infallible and what is authoritative teaching without the benefit of infallibility. Williamson seems to be the guy who is looking for infallibility in all teachings. Levada is the one who says, don’t look for it, because it’s not there all the time. Often we have to go on faith and obedience.

I would like to be a fly on the way in a dialogue between those two.

I’ve heard a lot about him from priests and religious who know him from his days in the USA.

Let’s wait and see.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I does not sound like Bishop Williamson and Cardinal Levada are going to get along.

1. Bishop Williamson talks too much and says too much. Levada is known for not liking that.

…]

I would like to be a fly on the way in a dialogue between those two.

Me too! In fact I think everyone should watch the video in post #4 even if just for its entertainment value

 

[Layman]

Careful. Bishop Williamson is an engaging speaker. He might win sympathy for himself and the SSPX if you post links to his lectures and sermons here.

 

[JReducation]

Careful. Bishop Williamson is an engaging speaker. He might win sympathy for himself and the SSPX if you post links to his lectures and sermons here.

Yeah, but Cardinal Levada has already made it know that Bishop Williamson is not on his good list since he had that interview on the Shoah. This is one of the reaons why the former heads Ecclesia . . . were given their walking papers. Cardinal Levada was furious that they did not know about Bishop Williamson’s remarks in a timely manner.

What people who worked with the Cardinal when he was in the USA say that he is a good man and a delight to be with, but he is also an authoritative man. He seems to have a way of letting people know that he is in charge and doing so in a very polite manner.

But you are right about one thing. Bishop Williamson is engaging and charming. I just wish he would think it before he said it. He made a comment in Toronto that go under the Sacred Congregation’s nerves. “We have them on the run.” WRONG THING TO SAY.

Again, I’ve never met him. I’ve just read his work, especially his doctoral dissertation.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Careful. Bishop Williamson is an engaging speaker. He might win sympathy for himself and the SSPX if you post links to his lectures and sermons here.

It’s true! I think he’s hypnotizing me! All of a sudden I’m feeling very suspicious of Vatican II, and I’ve been listening to all his speeches lately.

 

[JReducation]

It’s true! I think he’s hypnotizing me! All of a sudden I’m feeling very suspicious of Vatican II, and I’ve been listening to all his speeches lately.

I think that something is missing here. The one thing that the Holy Father wants is the faithful submission to Vatican II, among several other things.

Now that this is in progress, let’s not start another issue with someone else calling Vatican II into question.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Layman]

1. I don’t know what Vat. II actually promulgated, that could be put into a set of bullet points, so a Layman could understand it.
2. Having listened to a bit of one of Bishop Williamson’s other lectures on Youtube, I think his problem may be one that I had a decade or ago myself; you can get hold of paperback books that seem authoritative and plausible on subjects that excite the lunatic fringe; Nazism, Biblical archaeology, the Templars, ancient Egypt, the New Age.

But they’re not.

They’re written by journalists and hacks who have no scientific background, who conflate different periods of history, who leave out (or don’t know) evidence that contradicts their theories.

But they look scientific. They have a veneer of in-depth research. But they’re pot-boilers; written to make money and feed a lucrative market.

I read some where that there are 100,000 books on ancient Egypt published every year.

So when someone brings up the Knights Templar or New Age theories in conversation, I say (dramatic voice):
*
"Did Aliens build the Pyramids of Ancient Eqypt?"*

…

…

“Answer: No.”

Gets a laugh.

So Bishop Williamson may simply be too trusting of the written word. When anyone can publish anything these days, and scruples have gone out the window, you need to be extra discerning in what you take on board.

Having listened to him speaking, I’d be happy if he was my bishop. He seems earnest, eloquent, memorable and direct. Just maybe needs to stay off topics like Israel that would test the wisdom of Solomon to solve, and unhealthily excite uneducated people.

i.e. Don’t march or Moscow, don’t get involved in Balkan wars and if people start talking about Israel or The Knights Templar, stroke your chin, say, “Hmmm, I see …” then exit the room quickly.