SSPX: Bishop Fellay says SSPX canno accept all of Vatican II reforms.

[Yours_Truly]

Reuters India
2/11/09

PARIS (Reuters) - An ultra-traditionalist bishop seeking rehabilitation from the Vatican said in an interview on Wednesday that his breakaway movement could not fully accept landmark 20th century church reforms, as his critics demand.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, whose excommunication was lifted last month along with those of three other bishops, said his Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) did not agree with a key document of the Second Vatican Council on respecting other religions.

He also told the French weekly Famille Chretienne he did not reject the 1962-1965 Council completely but only “a dangerous spirit that runs through the whole Council” that caused what he saw as a break with centuries of Roman Catholic tradition.

In a debate that broke out after SSPX Bishop Richard Williamson denied the Holocaust, several leading Catholic prelates and Jewish organisations insisted the SSPX must support all Council reforms in order to be fully rehabilitated.

While the lifting of excommunications readmitted them into the Church, the four men must now negotiate with the Vatican to be officially recognised as bishops and take posts of responsibility within the Church.

Fellay said of the Council: “One cannot approach it in a dogmatic way and say ‘amen’ to everything. This approach is completely wrong. There are different domains, themes and degrees of authority.”

“In my opinion, many of the problems we point out can be resolved by distinctions and not by absolute acceptances or rejections,” he said.

Fellay said the Church had given up trying to convert people to Catholicism in recent decades because the Council stressed respect for other faiths. “The Church no longer has the will to convert. We don’t agree here. This is serious,” he said in the interview, distributed before publication next week.

Asked about the Council statement that Jews were spiritual “elder brothers” of Christians, he agreed the two faiths shared the Old Testament but said Jews rejected the New Testament.

"That is not enough for them to be saved," he said.

**As for cooperation with other Christian churches, he said it was acceptable if it led them to return to the Catholic Church they left during and after the Protestant Reformation.

“If that’s the true aim of ecumenism, we certainly don’t oppose it,” he said. “There is only one Church and there cannot be several.”**

Fellay said the modern Catholic Mass, which the SSPX rejects in favour of the traditional Latin liturgy, was valid but sometimes not reverent enough. Pope Benedict extended use of the Latin Mass in 2007 as part of his drive to win back the SSPX.

Fellay, who lives at the SSPX headquarters in Switzerland, said he hoped the negotiations with the Vatican would start soon but he had no idea when this would happen. “I love this Church even if I take some knocks from it,” he said.
in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-37968320090211?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true

 

[Extempore]

I can’t stand it when news services try to wrap the collective journalistic mind around this issue.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, whose excommunication was lifted last month along with those of three other bishops, said his Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) did not agree with a key document of the Second Vatican Council on respecting other religions.

I love how they word this stuff. “Respecting other religions”, huh?

 

[mercygate]

Fellay can’t accept all of Vatican 2. What a shock.

 

[LilyM]

And all the good work done by Benedict XVI and the good will shown by him in lifting the excommunications goes down the toilet in one fell swoop …

 

[mercygate]

And all the good work done by Benedict XVI and the good will shown by him in lifting the excommunications goes down the toilet in one fell swoop …

Nah. They’ll make a full length novel out of it.

 

[Extempore]

And all the good work done by Benedict XVI and the good will shown by him in lifting the excommunications goes down the toilet in one fell swoop …

Did people honestly think that the SSPX were going to accept, unconditionally every aspect of the council? Pope Benedict XVI’s actions did not magically erase all reservations the Society has about Vatican II.

 

[LilyM]

Did people honestly think that the SSPX were going to accept, unconditionally every aspect of the council? Pope Benedict XVI’s actions did not magically erase all reservations the Society has about Vatican II.

Were the SSPX thinking that Benedict wouldn’t require it as a condition of full reconciliation? Their overtures didn’t remove their need to submit to the Holy Father in order to be reconciled.

 

[bilop]

And all the good work done by Benedict XVI and the good will shown by him in lifting the excommunications goes down the toilet in one fell swoop …

I don’t think this is necessarily true.

All the SSPX seem to be holding out for is the idea that the goal of ecumenism is to bring all people into the Catholic Church.

This is the correct goal of ecumenism.

God Bless

 

[malphono]

I’ve been looking around and don’t seem to see this item anywhere else. Even Reuters UK doesn’t have it. Maybe I’ve just missed it. Anyone have a link other than India?

 

[Genesis315]

I honestly didn’t see anything wrong with what he said–in fact, it was quite encouraging.

Nothing proposed by Vatican II that they have a problem with is irreformable, as far as I can tell. I think this is why he said it is more about making distinctions than about outright acceptance and rejection.

The problems he stresses are one with the spirit–not necessarily the letter.

 

[CapIV]

I never understand this. Nobody complains when missionaries go to third world countries bringing food, medicine, and the Gospel. But bring it up to a Jew or a liberal Christian and you are being “intolerant”, “disrespectful” and “hateful”.

Think about this, the Catholic Church believes it is the one true Church. How would it be moral for them to be apathetic about the salvation of others? What a backwards world.

SSPX will be rehabilitated. They have already accepted all the binding parts of Vatican II. Most of it isn’t binding anyway.

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

Having respect for people and their view on religion will lead more people to the Church than an arrogant aloofness. To say the Church doesn’t care about evangelizing is absolutely wrong. That is what Vat II was all about.

Either the Holy Spirit guides the Church or we need to look for salvation elsewhere. Obedience to the Chair of Moses was important to Jesus even though the chair was occupied by those who sought worldly acclaim. Is this what SSPX thinks the Chair of Peter has come to? They are wrong if they do.

 

[CapIV]

Having respect for people and their view on religion will lead more people to the Church than an arrogant aloofness. To say the Church doesn’t care about evangelizing is absolutely wrong. That is what Vat II was all about.

No one is saying that there is no respect for others. And Vatican II caused the greatest exodus the Church has ever seen!!

The Church standing up for Truth and once again becoming a unified voice is what will rehabilitate the Church. Not “being sensitive” to heresy all in the name of “respect”.

 

[LilyM]

No one is saying that there is no respect for others. And Vatican II caused the greatest exodus the Church has ever seen!!

The Church standing up for Truth and once again becoming a unified voice is what will rehabilitate the Church. Not “being sensitive” to heresy all in the name of “respect”.

Wow, you must hate Paul’s idea of ‘being all things to all men’, acting as a Jew when among Jews, a Greek when among Greeks etc. You must also hate how he put it into practice by praising the men of Athens fulsomely for their devoutness and taking care to make use of their own belief in the ‘unknown God’, relating that belief to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Not to mention having Timothy circumcised out of a mistaken notion of ‘being sensitive’ to the Judaising ‘heresy’ in the name of ‘respect’.

 

[Paradox2080]

I actually find this rather encouraging.

I believe SSPX will be in full communion with Rome within the next 6 months. Time will tell…

 

[maurin]

Think about this, the Catholic Church believes it is the one true Church.

No, this is not correct. The One True Church is the Church founded by Christ. According to Vatican II, the Church of Jesus Christ is not the Catholic Church, the Church of Jesus Christ SUBSISTS IN the Catholic Church. There is a difference.

And no wonder, mercygate, Fellay can’t accept all of Vatican II. What a shock.

 

[CapIV]

Wow, you must hate Paul’s idea of ‘being all things to all men’, acting as a Jew when among Jews, a Greek when among Greeks etc. You must also hate how he put it into practice by praising the men of Athens fulsomely for their devoutness and taking care to make use of their own belief in the ‘unknown God’, relating that belief to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Not to mention having Timothy circumcised out of a mistaken notion of ‘being sensitive’ to the Judaising ‘heresy’ in the name of ‘respect’.

Go take communion at a Protestant church and act like a Protestant among Protestants and see how the Holy Father feels about it.

 

[palmas85]

Wow, you must hate Paul’s idea of ‘being all things to all men’, acting as a Jew when among Jews, a Greek when among Greeks etc. You must also hate how he put it into practice by praising the men of Athens fulsomely for their devoutness and taking care to make use of their own belief in the ‘unknown God’, relating that belief to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Not to mention having Timothy circumcised out of a mistaken notion of ‘being sensitive’ to the Judaising ‘heresy’ in the name of ‘respect’.

If I remember correctly almost all of Pauls letters had to do with combating error and erroneous teaching that had infiltrated the Churches he founded. far from accepting and praising differences Paul condemned these teachings and erroneous ideas.

If Paul was as accomodating as you seem to believe, why write his letters in the first place to correct the errors? Why not just accept them as examples of differences in worship patterns? In fact, why did he try to correct these things at all? Actually, why did he even bother to try to convert people to Christianity in the first place? Obviously it is not necessary in the schame of things that people believe in or follow Christ.

 

[guedry7]

Having respect for people and their view on religion will lead more people to the Church than an arrogant aloofness. To say the Church doesn’t care about evangelizing is absolutely wrong. That is what Vat II was all about.

I agree. I have always thought that the dialog between those who are separated and Catholic Church was to bring unity not concessions. As understand it, the thaught isThose who are separated ultimately can go to Heaven, but the Church hasen’t said they **will **go to Heaven.

 

[Yours_Truly]

Having respect for people and their view on religion will lead more people to the Church than an arrogant aloofness. To say the Church doesn’t care about evangelizing is absolutely wrong. That is what Vat II was all about.

That’s not what Cardinal Kasper thinks, and he should know. Cardinal Kasper has been the point man for ecumenism under two Popes. This is what he had to say about the subject.

Cardinal Walter Kasper, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity: **“The decision of Vatican II, to which the Pope [John Paul II] adheres and spreads, is absolutely clear: Today we no longer understand ecumenism in the sense of the ecumenism of a return, by which the others would ‘be converted’ and return to being ‘Catholics.’ This was expressly abandoned by Vatican II. **Today ecumenism is considered as the common road: all should be converted to the following of Christ, and it is in Christ that we will find ourselves in the end… Even the Pope, among other things, describes ecumenism in Ut unum sint as an exchange of gifts. I think this is very well said: each Church has its own riches and gifts of the Spirit, and it is this exchange that unity is trying to be achieved and not the fact that we should become ‘Protestants’ or that the others should become ‘Catholics’ in the sense of accepting the confessional form of Catholicism.” (Adista, Rome, February 26, 2001, p. 9 - Emphasis mine)

The SSPX believes in bringing others into the Catholic Church, through conversion, while the authorities in Rome don’t.