Vatican Confirms SSPX Is Being Offered Personal Prelature

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Essentially similar to what was noted in whispers. (emphasis added)
Thursday, June 14, 2012 …
At the end of this long, two-hour interview, Bishop Fellay received a draft document proposing a Personal Prelature, in the case of a possible canonical recognition of the Society of Saint Pius X.
In any case, it would seem to be important to keep in mind that this is not yet a “done deal”.
 
I can’t help but see that as a reward for disobedience.

The founds of the Priestly Faternity of Saint Peter left the SSPX and returned to communion with Rome. They were allowed to form a priestly society.

The SSPX holds out for a number of years longer and evently are given a personal prelature.

How can it not be viewed as a reward for disobedience?

I pray to God to change my heart and mind on this but as it stands I can not accept this. Yes it will happen but I am unable to support or be happy about it.
 
I can’t help but see that as a reward for disobedience.
How can it not be viewed as a reward for disobedience?
I agree.

My prayer and hope, though, is that the souls having been lead astray, will now be re-united with His Church in complete fullness (in whatever form) so that they have a better chance for salvation.

I pray that our Lord in His compassionate nature has mercy on them, and that the souls in question are aware of and seek repentance for such disobediences.
 
I don’t know if I see it as a reward for disobedience or not but I do believe that the Holy Father knows best and I trust his wisdom far more than I do my own. That said, I hope and pray that this rift will soon be ended.
 
The SSPX are simply trying to remain Catholic in a world where many people, including many Catholics, want to change what being Catholic means or think that the 60’s and Vatican II changed doctrine. Many Catholics now either have no clue about key doctrines because they have been taught by these people or are still waiting for changes that, God willing, will never come.

We’re long overdue a return to rigour which I hope the regularisation of the SSPX will help.
 
I can’t help but see that as a reward for disobedience.

The founds of the Priestly Faternity of Saint Peter left the SSPX and returned to communion with Rome. They were allowed to form a priestly society.

The SSPX holds out for a number of years longer and evently are given a personal prelature.

How can it not be viewed as a reward for disobedience?

I pray to God to change my heart and mind on this but as it stands I can not accept this. Yes it will happen but I am unable to support or be happy about it.
There will still be some holdouts who hope for something even better.

But remember: Sic erunt novissimi primi, et primi novissimi. Multi enim sunt vocati, pauci vero electi. (So shall the last be first and the first last. For many are called but few chosen.) (Matthew 20:16)
 
The differing statuses accorded the FSSP and SSPX could be explained by the fact that they are different types of organizations. See Brother JR’s comments here.
The founds of the Priestly Faternity of Saint Peter left the SSPX and returned to communion with Rome. They were allowed to form a priestly society.

The SSPX holds out for a number of years longer and evently are given a personal prelature.

How can it not be viewed as a reward for disobedience?
 
We’re long overdue a return to rigour which I hope the regularisation of the SSPX will help.
Really?

I do not think so. Even if all the SSPX priests were to come in there are only 511 of them world wide.

The United States has 39,466 priests. Worldwide there are 409,166.

So that means that the SSPX, again if all enter which I greatly doubt, amount to 0.125%.
The differing statuses accorded the FSSP and SSPX could be explained by the fact that they are different types of organizations. See Brother JR’s comments here.
Both are societies of secular priests.
 
The differing statuses accorded the FSSP and SSPX could be explained by the fact that they are different types of organizations. See Brother JR’s comments here.
At the time the founders of the FSSP left the SSPX, their intention was simply to continue the work of the SSPX. So, any differences in the “type of organization” is entirely a matter of historical development (especially regarding the limits placed on the FSSP by the Holy See which the SSPX did not have), and not a matter of the fundamental charism.
 
I do not think so. Even if all the SSPX priests were to come in there are only 511 of them world wide.

The United States has 39,466 priests. Worldwide there are 409,166.

So that means that the SSPX, again if all enter which I greatly doubt, amount to 0.125%.
However, the SSPX already has influence that far outstrips their numbers.
Furthermore, the SSPX is a growing society, many others are shrinking.
The average age of SSPX priests is less than 40.
 
Obviously, most posters here are not exactly sure what a prelature is or does. Let’s work on that, because the other stuff is going to take from days to years. By the other stuff, I mean the regularization. This is not as close to a conclusion as the press makes it sound. Remember, it said that they received a “draft”. If the press is correct, a draft is never the final offer. As to Fr. Lombardi’s statements, . . . well I wish he would not comment on this. He only confuses people. His statement “The ball is in their court now” makes it sound as if this is the pope’s final offer. If this document is a draft, then it’s not final. If it is the pope’s final offer, then don’t call it a draft. Either way, of course the ball is in their court. Even if it’s a draft, it’s now the SSPX’s turn to serve the ball. Duh!!!

Now, getting back to a prelature. A prelature is not a reward. Do you really know the circumstances of a prelature? I would rather be an FSSP than belong to a prelature.

A prelature is governed directly by the pope. The FSSP is not governed by the pope. They have their own superior general

The prelature will have statutes and constitutions handed to it by the Vatican. Prelatures do not get to write their own statutes, as do societies of apostolic life and religious communities. The statutes are written at the Vatican, given to the prelate to comment, edited, if the prelate has something good to contribute and then sent to the pope for final approval. He issues the constitution of the prelature. The FSSP writers its own statutes, votes on them and sends a copy to the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. The Sacred Congregation reviews the constitution to ensure that it meets all the requirements of Canon Law and that there is no doctrinal error in it. The Sacred Congregation does not care if the constitution says that you will dance around the altar for morning and evening prayer, since such an action does not violate canon law, dogma or morals. They sign off on it and send it back to the Superior General of the FSSP. The SSPX will be in a closer relationship with the Holy Father, but it also has to make sure to cross its tees and dot its eyes.

The FSSP gets to elect its superior general. A prelature does not get to elect the prelate. The prelate is appointed by the pope. Remember the word, “personal prelature”. The personal refers to the pope. You’re stuck with the prelate that the pope appoints. He can appoint any bishop, not just an SSPX bishop.

The FSSP does not have to own property; therefore, it does not have to raise funds to maintain and insure their property. The FSSP hires itself out to a diocese or a religious community who provide the property. If the collection plate is not enough to fix the leaky rood, the owner of the proper, usually the diocese, will bail them out with a loan or just pick up the tab. The prelature owns all of its buildings and is financially responsible for them. It gets so financial support from the diocese. If it needs to borrow from a bank, the diocese does not serve as its cosigner.

The prelature can have its own seminary. So can the FSSP. No difference there.

The FSSP has to ask for permission to enter a diocese, so does the prelature.

The FSSP does not have ordinary jurisdiction over those who attend their mass or belong to their parish. That jurisdiction belongs to the bishop where the person resides. This is a good thing. The FSSP is not responsible for the salvation of their souls. If these folks follow the wide road, because the priest suggested it, the person goes to heaven, regardless of what he did, because he was obeying. The priest may not be so lucky and neither will the bishop for allowing it to happen, provided he knows. However, the FSSP is not accountable, only the priest involved. The prelature has ordinary authority over the laity. Guess who is morally responsible for the laity . . . bingo! The prelature, not the local bishop, not the FSSP.

The FSSP is a society of Pontifical Right. This means that it has the same right of exemption as I do. Bishops cannot discipline a member of the FSSP. The laity has no right to comment or voice an opinion on anything that happens with the FSSP, unless it directly affects them. Remotely does not count. Directly we mean that the FSSP priest is being ugly to you. If the FSSP priests decide to have happy hour every day, that does not directly affect the laity, even though it may be shocked. That’s a problem for the superior of the FSSP. If the SSPX decides to have a happy hour and there are complaints, the prelate has to deal with them and he has to inform the pope. The superior general of the FSSP does not have to report to the pope, unless the pope calls him in.

A prelature is like a diocese without physical boundaries. It certainly has many other boundaries and a lot more oversight from the Vatican.

The key here is that*** if Pope Benedict truly did say that this is the only way*** to come back into the Church and the SSPX rejects it, we may be facing a schism, depending on how the Holy Father takes the rejection.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
At the time the founders of the FSSP left the SSPX, their intention was simply to continue the work of the SSPX. So, any differences in the “type of organization” is entirely a matter of historical development (especially regarding the limits placed on the FSSP by the Holy See which the SSPX did not have), and not a matter of the fundamental charism.
Actually, it is. The FSSP is a Society of Apostolic Life with Pontifical Right. It has the same legal rights and duties as I do, except that I belong to an order and we get more graces. But you can’t regulate graces. You can regulate rights.

The charism of a society of pontifical right is not determined by the Holy See, nor does the Holy See impose limits on societies of pontifical right, quite the opposite. Pontifical right gives the FSSP what Trent defined as the Right of Exemption. Normally, this is only for religious men. But Pope John Paul II granted it to the FSSP. This gives it the freedom to write its own constitution, define its mission and charism, modify its mission and charism at any time and to be free from Church control. The only person who can dictate to a institute of pontifical right, is the pope. The only time in recent history that the pope has done this is with the Legionaires of Christ. That last time before that, was Pope Leo XIII when he founded the Franciscans (OFM). That was in 1878.

The FSSP is pretty free… However its charism may have changed, it is completely under the control of the general chapter, not the Church. Only a pope can overrule a general chapter.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
Obviously, most posters here are not exactly sure what a prelature is or does. Let’s work on that, because the other stuff is going to take from days to years. By the other stuff, I mean the regularization. This is not as close to a conclusion as the press makes it sound. Remember, it said that they received a “draft”. If the press is correct, a draft is never the final offer. As to Fr. Lombardi’s statements, . . . well I wish he would not comment on this. He only confuses people. His statement “The ball is in their court now” makes it sound as if this is the pope’s final offer. If this document is a draft, then it’s not final. If it is the pope’s final offer, then don’t call it a draft. Either way, of course the ball is in their court. Even if it’s a draft, it’s now the SSPX’s turn to serve the ball. Duh!!!

Now, getting back to a prelature. A prelature is not a reward. Do you really know the circumstances of a prelature? I would rather be an FSSP than belong to a prelature.

A prelature is governed directly by the pope. The FSSP is not governed by the pope. They have their own superior general

The prelature will have statutes and constitutions handed to it by the Vatican. Prelatures do not get to write their own statutes, as do societies of apostolic life and religious communities. The statutes are written at the Vatican, given to the prelate to comment, edited, if the prelate has something good to contribute and then sent to the pope for final approval. He issues the constitution of the prelature. The FSSP writers its own statutes, votes on them and sends a copy to the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. The Sacred Congregation reviews the constitution to ensure that it meets all the requirements of Canon Law and that there is no doctrinal error in it. The Sacred Congregation does not care if the constitution says that you will dance around the altar for morning and evening prayer, since such an action does not violate canon law, dogma or morals. They sign off on it and send it back to the Superior General of the FSSP. The SSPX will be in a closer relationship with the Holy Father, but it also has to make sure to cross its tees and dot its eyes.

The FSSP gets to elect its superior general. A prelature does not get to elect the prelate. The prelate is appointed by the pope. Remember the word, “personal prelature”. The personal refers to the pope. You’re stuck with the prelate that the pope appoints. He can appoint any bishop, not just an SSPX bishop.

The FSSP does not have to own property; therefore, it does not have to raise funds to maintain and insure their property. The FSSP hires itself out to a diocese or a religious community who provide the property. If the collection plate is not enough to fix the leaky rood, the owner of the proper, usually the diocese, will bail them out with a loan or just pick up the tab. The prelature owns all of its buildings and is financially responsible for them. It gets so financial support from the diocese. If it needs to borrow from a bank, the diocese does not serve as its cosigner.

The prelature can have its own seminary. So can the FSSP. No difference there.

The FSSP has to ask for permission to enter a diocese, so does the prelature.

The FSSP does not have ordinary jurisdiction over those who attend their mass or belong to their parish. That jurisdiction belongs to the bishop where the person resides. This is a good thing. The FSSP is not responsible for the salvation of their souls. If these folks follow the wide road, because the priest suggested it, the person goes to heaven, regardless of what he did, because he was obeying. The priest may not be so lucky and neither will the bishop for allowing it to happen, provided he knows. However, the FSSP is not accountable, only the priest involved. The prelature has ordinary authority over the laity. Guess who is morally responsible for the laity . . . bingo! The prelature, not the local bishop, not the FSSP.

The FSSP is a society of Pontifical Right. This means that it has the same right of exemption as I do. Bishops cannot discipline a member of the FSSP. The laity has no right to comment or voice an opinion on anything that happens with the FSSP, unless it directly affects them. Remotely does not count. Directly we mean that the FSSP priest is being ugly to you. If the FSSP priests decide to have happy hour every day, that does not directly affect the laity, even though it may be shocked. That’s a problem for the superior of the FSSP. If the SSPX decides to have a happy hour and there are complaints, the prelate has to deal with them and he has to inform the pope. The superior general of the FSSP does not have to report to the pope, unless the pope calls him in.

A prelature is like a diocese without physical boundaries. It certainly has many other boundaries and a lot more oversight from the Vatican.

The key here is that*** if Pope Benedict truly did say that this is the only way*** to come back into the Church and the SSPX rejects it, we may be facing a schism, depending on how the Holy Father takes the rejection.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
I don’t see that I agree with you on this one.

When the FSSP was founded they had to be invited, and still have to be invited, by the local bishop to work within a diocese. The SSPX will get to keep a presence in every diocese where they have a current chapel. Yes most likely the pope will force the closure of some of the newer ones but a majority will get to stay open.

Also, it is not like the pope has no control over Societies like the FSSP. He did act against the FSSP when they tried to insert a statue into their constitutiions saying that an FSSP could not celebrate or concelebrate the OF. I also believe that he replaced the superior at that time.

Yes religious who are of pontifical right get to write their own constitutions and elect their superior yet both of those need the approval of the pope to go into effect.

I feel sorry for the FSSP and the other religious communities that are for the celebration of the EF in cities where the SSPX have a presence. One of the two chapels in those cities are going to loose membership.
 
I feel sorry for the FSSP and the other religious communities that are for the celebration of the EF in cities where the SSPX have a presence. One of the two chapels in those cities are going to loose membership.
That’s not really an issue.
Most SSPX chapels are already stuffed to the gills as it is.
In cities where there are both SSPX and FSSP chapels, some FSSP attendees may switch over to the SSPX chapel after regularization, if it is a matter of convenience.

Otherwise I don’t think there will be much of an effect.
 
The SSPX are simply trying to remain Catholic in a world where many people, including many Catholics, want to change what being Catholic means or think that the 60’s and Vatican II changed doctrine. Many Catholics now either have no clue about key doctrines because they have been taught by these people or are still waiting for changes that, God willing, will never come.

We’re long overdue a return to rigour which I hope the regularisation of the SSPX will help.
My thoughts exactly!
 
I don’t see that I agree with you on this one.
There are some misunderstandings here that have been spread about.
When the FSSP was founded they had to be invited, and still have to be invited, by the local bishop to work within a diocese.
The is canon law. Every religious community, secular order, secular institute, monastery and society of apostolic life can only enter a diocese if it is invited by the bishop. Here is where the misunderstanding among the people in the pew comes in.

In Church lingo, invitation can come in one of two ways.
  1. The bishop literally invites you.
  2. You ask the bishop to invite you. In reality, you’re requesting permission to enter his diocese and setup house.
The SSPX will get to keep a presence in every diocese where they have a current chapel. Yes most likely the pope will force the closure of some of the newer ones but a majority will get to stay open.
There is a rumor going around that says this. We don’t know.
Also, it is not like the pope has no control over Societies like the FSSP. He did act against the FSSP when they tried to insert a statue into their constitutiions saying that an FSSP could not celebrate or concelebrate the OF.
This is another misunderstanding. No community is allowed to refuse its members permission to celebrate the OF in principle. This was not just for the FSSP. The Franciscans of the Immaculate wanted to insert the same thing into their constitution and were told that it was unlawful to do so. The logic is that no community has the authority to command what the Church requires or prohibit what the Church allows in spiritual and sacramental matters. Even orders that have their own rite: Carmelite, Dominican, Carthusian and orders that have their own forms of the Latin Rite: Franciscan, Augustinian, Benedictine, Jesuit cannot prohibit the OF in the way that it is prescribed in the GIRM. What we are allowed to do is to decide that we will use this or that form for our conventual mass, not we cannot tell our priests that they cannot celebrate the OF. The conventual mass does not apply to the FSSP, because they are secular Catholics.

In the case of the EF, religious superiors and superiors of societies of apostolic life can prohibit it. Constitutions can prohibit it, because the EF is not the norm for the Latin Church as long as the pope says that it is extraordinary. The Pauline mass is the normal form of worship. Therefore, it cannot be prohibited. They can agree not to celebrate it. They cannot make it proper law. None of us can do that.

It was not the pope who intervened. It was the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. All constitutions are reviewed by the Sacred Congregation to make sure that they do not violate law or doctrine. Many times, when people say, “The pope. . .” it’s really a prefect acting in the name of the pope. Prefects have that authority.
I also believe that he replaced the superior at that time.
He did not. It was just the opposite. They had a superior who wanted to push the celebration of the OF and EF. They elected a new superior at the first possible opportunity. The pope does not replace superiors. This is a myth. It has never happened in the history of the Church. A superior can be asked to step down and an apostolic administrator can be appointed by the pope until such time as an electoral chapter can be held.
Yes religious who are of pontifical right get to write their own constitutions and elect their superior yet** both of those need the approval of the pope to go into effect.**
Not quite. I’m a superior general and I know. The constitutions are reviewed by the Sacred Congregation for the reasons that I stated above. The Holy Father does not see them. When the Sacred Congregation agrees to approve the constitution, it sends a letter to the pope asking for his endorsement. All the letter says it that it has reviewed the constitution and found no doctrinal errors or canonical violations and it asks to pope to kindly promulgate the constitution. The pope signs the paper and sends it back. We get that paper sent back to us. Popes do not have time to read constitutions of religious communities or societies nor are they interested in doing so.
I feel sorry for the FSSP and the other religious communities that are for the celebration of the EF in cities where the SSPX have a presence. One of the two chapels in those cities are going to loose membership.
Not necessarily. Some people may not want to travel across town to go to mass. It’s like opening a new parish. Look at how it’s done. A sector is carved out of two existing parishes or more. It stands to reason that if you’ve been driving 20 miles to attend mass at the FSSP parish and you have an SSPX chapel five miles away, you attend mass there.

Also, remember, some people may like the liturgy and the message of the SSPX, but do not want to be under the jurisdiction of the prelate. They want to remain actively involved with their dioceses.

The FSSP operates within the diocese; whereas the SSPX is its own jurisdiction. This presents a problem for things like getting married or placing your child in a Catholic school. In many places you must belong to the diocese and you must prove it with a letter from your pastor. An FSSP pastor can grant such a letter. The SSPX priest can only say that you belong to his congregation. But his congregation is under the jurisdiction of the SSPX, not the local bishop. The local bishop does not run that chapel.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top