Vatican new release about SSPX

[anjoh66]

Finaly the Vatican has released their point of view about the lifting of the excommunications.

Demanding that SSPX submit fully to Vatican II and accept the authority of the Pope and his predecessors.

Also Williamson must recant publicly for his views about the holocaust.

nytimes.com/2009/02/05/world/europe/05pope.html?_r=2&hp

My guess is that this will close the door again or end up in the splitting of SSPX as the church will not give in even a inch about her standings.

212.77.1.245/news_services/bulletin/news/23319.php?index=23319&lang=e

 

[Dauphin]

The SSPX has never rejected the authenticity of the Second Vatican Council or the Magisterium of the recent Popes. The SSPX will most likely return, but without Bishop Williamson exercising public ministry.

Remember that not all of the Second Vatican Council is binding. The press release itself says that there are “open questions”. This doesn’t signal a retreat on the part of the Vatican, but rather is a signal that they’re serious about reconciliation.

 

[cathguy]

The SSPX has never rejected the authenticity of the Second Vatican Council or the Magisterium of the recent Popes. The SSPX will most likely return, but without Bishop Williamson exercising public ministry.

Remember that not all of the Second Vatican Council is binding. The press release itself says that there are “open questions”. This doesn’t signal a retreat on the part of the Vatican, but rather is a signal that they’re serious about reconciliation.

I agree entirely with this post. Very cogent. Let us hope and pray you are right.

 

[anjoh66]

The SSPX has never rejected the authenticity of the Second Vatican Council or the Magisterium of the recent Popes. The SSPX will most likely return, but without Bishop Williamson exercising public ministry.

Remember that not all of the Second Vatican Council is binding. The press release itself says that there are “open questions”. This doesn’t signal a retreat on the part of the Vatican, but rather is a signal that they’re serious about reconciliation.

No not a retreat i would say its a signal that the church will not change any of her doctrines or teachings and if SSPX want to get back into the fold they must humbly subdue themselves to the church and not vice versa

 

[nbjayme]

The SSPX have already subdued themselves to the Church by serving what Her ExtraOrdinary Magisterium Taught throughout the ages. And there is no problem accepting Vatican II so long it can be reconciled with what the Church have Universally taught.

Not all of Vatican II is binding.

The SSPX never invented any new teaching — they simply continued and preserved what was taught and understood throughout the centuries.

 

[anjoh66]

The SSPX have already subdued themselves to the Church by serving what Her ExtraOrdinary Magisterium Taught throughout the ages. And there is no problem accepting Vatican II so long it can be reconciled with what the Church have Universally taught.

Not all of Vatican II is binding.

The SSPX never invented any new teaching — they simply continued and preserved what was taught and understood throughout the centuries.

So what is acctually the problem then?

Why they say this is the first step and there are issues that must be discussed?

 

[ProVobis]

My take is that the Vatican is responding more to anti-SSPX forces.

So what else is new?

 

[anjoh66]

The SSPX have already subdued themselves to the Church by serving what Her ExtraOrdinary Magisterium Taught throughout the ages. And there is no problem accepting Vatican II so long it can be reconciled with what the Church have Universally taught.

Not all of Vatican II is binding.

The SSPX never invented any new teaching — they simply continued and preserved what was taught and understood throughout the centuries.

But the decree says that they must acknowledge fully Vatican II.
I have not found it yet in english at the vatican website but its there in italian and swedish.

212.77.1.245/news_services/bulletin/news/23319.php?index=23319&lang=e

oecumene.radiovaticana.org/SV1/Articolo.asp?c=263746

And that the communication will continue so a solution can be reached

 

[Dauphin]

But the decree says that they must acknowledge fully Vatican II.

They’ll be asked to acknowledge those things which are binding, but the Council itself said that not all of its teachings are binding:

“Taking conciliar custom into consideration and also the pastoral purpose of the present Council, the sacred Council defines as binding on the Church only those things in matters of faith and morals which it shall openly declare to be binding.” - From the Appendix to Lumen Gentium

 

[anjoh66]

Well i hope it can be solved, disunity is never to any benefit for anyone.

 

[cathguy]

My take is that the Vatican is responding more to anti-SSPX forces.

So what else is new?

I do not think this is true at all; the Pope is a good man and a strong man. He obviously doesn’t surrender to outside pressure when it comes to matters of truth. Just look at his record (the real version… not the the one SSPX apologists use… I had one SSPXer tell me that Benedict XVI was a “perfect liberal.” Common!)

I think every person attached to the SSPX owes the Holy Father more than they can possibly ever repay. (No, I am not saying that they should repay. Fatherly mercy is just like that) Just look at what the Holy Father has suffered because of his mercy and ardor in seeking out his sheep.

There is much good in the SSPX, but they are far from perfect, and despite the stances those attached to them take on forums such as this one, and in their writings, those in the SSPX have much to learn about Catholic Tradition from this wise and holy Pope.

To be honest with you, I find your comment more than a little problematic. It would seem you think nothing is wrong with the SSPX, but everybody else is wrong, and the Pope has been weak. Is this what you are saying, or am I misreading you?

 

[cathguy]

Well i hope it can be solved, disunity is never to any benefit for anyone.

Right on.

 

[Paradox2080]

The SSPX has never rejected the authenticity of the Second Vatican Council or the Magisterium of the recent Popes. The SSPX will most likely return, but without Bishop Williamson exercising public ministry.

Remember that not all of the Second Vatican Council is binding. The press release itself says that there are “open questions”. This doesn’t signal a retreat on the part of the Vatican, but rather is a signal that they’re serious about reconciliation.

I also agree with this however i’m curious; why do you believe Bishop Williamson will not be allowed to exercise public ministry?

 

[rien]

But the decree says that they must acknowledge fully Vatican II.
I have not found it yet in english at the vatican website but its there in italian and swedish.

212.77.1.245/news_services/bulletin/news/23319.php?index=23319&lang=e

oecumene.radiovaticana.org/SV1/Articolo.asp?c=263746

And that the communication will continue so a solution can be reached

Well up to now it was Rome that seemed to be giving the SPPX way too much leeway. IMO the excommunications should not have been lifted until the society fully accepted Vatican 2.

Some might see the work of the Holy Spirit in this event. As in was it really good or rigth for Rome to allow the SPPX to reconcile w/o full submission to Vatican 2? If this derails the process then what is the Spirit saying?

 

[Dauphin]

I also agree with this however i’m curious; why do you believe Bishop Williamson will not be allowed to exercise public ministry?

He’ll never reverse himself on the Holocaust. So, the Church won’t give him faculties to act as a Bishop. His Excellency will have to be content as rector at the SSPX’s Argentinean seminary.

 

[Dauphin]

Well up to now it was Rome that seemed to be giving the SPPX way too much leeway. IMO the excommunications should not have been lifted until the society fully accepted Vatican 2.

The SSPX had said it was unwilling to have doctrinal talks without a lifting of the excommuncations. This was a necessary first step.

 

[cathguy]

He’ll never reverse himself on the Holocaust. So, the Church won’t give him faculties to act as a Bishop. His Excellency will have to be content as rector at the SSPX’s Argentinean seminary.

Oh boy.

I have to ask the question.

Why would the SSPX want Williamson, who you just admitted will never reverse himself on the Holocaust, as rector at their seminary?

I would liken the level of scandal to Fr. Maciel of the Legion. He was silenced and invited to a life of silent penance. Putting a Holocaust denier in charge of seminarians doesn’t seem wise at all.

 

[Dauphin]

Oh boy.

I have to ask the question.

Why would the SSPX want Williamson, who you just admitted will never reverse himself on the Holocaust, as rector at their seminary?

I would liken the level of scandal to Fr. Maciel of the Legion. He was silenced and invited to a life of silent penance. Putting a Holocaust denier in charge of seminarians doesn’t seem wise at all.

He already is in charge of them. I doubt he’d be removed. He just won’t have the public ministry of a Bishop.

 

[Paradox2080]

I can’t believe how much attention this subject has had in the secular news. I really hope this doesn’t damage the Vatican’s negotiations with SSPX.

 

[Extempore]

Well up to now it was Rome that seemed to be giving the SPPX way too much leeway. IMO the excommunications should not have been lifted until the society fully accepted Vatican 2.

Then, with all due respect, I’m awfully happy that you are not, in fact, the Pope.

Some might see the work of the Holy Spirit in this event. As in was it really good or rigth for Rome to allow the SPPX to reconcile w/o full submission to Vatican 2? If this derails the process then what is the Spirit saying?

Why should acceptance of EVERY aspect of a non-dogmatic council be the linchpin upon which one defines “communion” with the Catholic Church?

Examples of teaching upon which a Catholic may NOT disagree:
The hypostatic union, The virginity of Mary, the Trinity…

(I don’t see “pastoral councils” on that list…)