Vatican on Society of St. Pius X: Position Insufficient to Restore Full Unity With Church at Present

[sw85]

Fr. Z. has the English translation of a recent papal communique concerning the SSPX and Rome (see the original here):

COMMUNIQUE CONCERNING THE SOCIETY OF ST. PIUS X

Vatican City, 16 March 2012 (VIS) – Given below is the text of a communique relating to the Society of St. Pius X, released this morning by the Holy See Press Office.

“During the meeting of 14 September 2011 between Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and president of the Pontifical Commission ‘Ecclesia Dei’, and Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X, the latter was presented with a Doctrinal Preamble, accompanied by a Preliminary Note, as a fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See. This defined certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church Magisterium and ‘sentire cum Ecclesia’.

“The response of the Society of St. Pius X to the aforesaid Doctrinal Preamble, which arrived in January 2012, was examined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before being submitted to the Holy Father for his judgement. Pursuant to the decision made by Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop Fellay was, in a letter delivered today, informed of the evaluation of his response. The letter states that the position he expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems which lie at the foundation of the rift between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X.

“At the end of today’s meeting, moved by concern to avoid an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X was invited to clarify his position in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI”.

Fr. Z. goes on to suggest that Rome, in its frustration with the SSPX, is essentially informing them that they are bordering on schism. This is something he’s mentioned before.

 

[archangel04]

Just sad I hope formal schism does not happen, but the signs are all pointing that direction. As one comment states “Neocats in, SSPX out” I completely agree, btw one group that scares me more than political liberal is them. St. Pius X pray for them.

 

[domandcarols]

Just sad I hope formal schism does not happen, but the signs are all pointing that direction. As one comment states “Neocats in, SSPX out” I completely agree, btw one group that scares me more than political liberal is them. St. Pious X pray for them.

Agreed. St. Pius X, pray for all of us.

 

[Melchior_1]

Just sad I hope formal schism does not happen, but the signs are all pointing that direction. As one comment states “Neocats in, SSPX out” I completely agree, btw one group that scares me more than political liberal is them. St. Pious X pray for them.

This highlights a point that I made in another thread;

I don’t know a lot about the NCW, but I do know every time they have been asked by those in Rome whom have authority to change/do something, they have obeyed. That’s a lot better than some Societies of Apostolic Life.

That aspect of obedience by the leadership should surely be a little encouraging, no?

The SSPX has been given chances time and time again, and have remained disobedient to the Pontiff and his delegates. They have remained disobedient to local Bishops. They essentially slap all other Societies of Apostolic Life in the face by refusing to play by the rules set forth for such societies.

Meanwhile, groups like the NCW have been open to any and all comments, criticisms, suggestions, and compliments from Rome. And have acted the requests made.

 

[mattkubes]

Meanwhile, the Keehans and Küngs of the world will take note that their clearly schismatic/heretical statements haven’t resulted in the same swift (at Vatican speeds, anyway) penalties. I don’t see how this can do anything but give a sense of legitimacy to the now-prevalent heterodoxy.

I can’t think about it much more, it’s making me feel nauseous. Kyrie elision. Thy Will be done, Lord.

 

[Melchior_1]

Meanwhile, the Keehans and Küngs of the world will take note that their clearly schismatic/heretical statements haven’t resulted in the same swift (at Vatican speeds, anyway) penalties. I don’t see how this can do anything but give a sense of legitimacy to the now-prevalent heterodoxy.

I can’t think about it much more, it’s making me feel nauseous. Kyrie elision. Thy Will be done, Lord.

What it worse; a group of people close to the Truth yet have the failing of disobedience and pride? Or a group of people far from the Truth yet have the failing of disobedience and pride?

With the latter, the problems are obvious. With the former, we have people leading people away from Rome under something that looks very closely like Truth, but still contains the poison of disobedience and lacks all of the elements required.

The SSPX is no different than rogue theologians, in the sense that all parties think they know more than Rome does.

 

[archangel04]

This highlights a point that I made in another thread;

The SSPX has been given chances time and time again, and have remained disobedient to the Pontiff and his delegates. They have remained disobedient to local Bishops. They essentially slap all other Societies of Apostolic Life in the face by refusing to play by the rules set forth for such societies.

Meanwhile, groups like the NCW have been open to any and all comments, criticisms, suggestions, and compliments from Rome. And have acted the requests made.

Regardless of the that I still don’t trust them and would never participate in any of their activities. They may have papal approval, but that does not mean that I have to participate with them nor even accept their practices. SSPX will make their choice, and what ever they decide will be on them.

 

[Melchior_1]

Regardless of the that I still don’t trust them and would never participate in any of their activities. They may have papal approval, but that does not mean that I have to participate with them nor even accept their practices. SSPX will make their choice, and what ever they decide will be on them.

That’s your call to make. Personally, I find them to be more trustworthy because they do listen to Rome, and their Priests have valid facilities.

Prayers to the SSPX, that they may see that they need to come home to Rome, and not the other way around.

 

[pnewton]

Meanwhile, the Keehans and Küngs of the world will take note that their clearly schismatic/heretical statements haven’t resulted in the same swift (at Vatican speeds, anyway) penalties.

I would hardly call anything that happens at generational speed swift. Schism and heresy are two separate issues. At hand here is the SSPX and the possibility of schism. Heresy or other people are nothing but red herrings.

 

[mattkubes]

I would hardly call anything that happens at generational speed swift. Schism and heresy are two separate issues. At hand here is the SSPX and the possibility of schism. Heresy or other people are nothing but red herrings.

Not so. They’re entirely related situations in that it’s the same Vatican that has authority over both groups and has the duty to correct Her children. She just doesn’t seem to be all-to-keen to do it, at least for now, when it comes to certain people. They can be separated in an academic abstraction, but in the real world it’s clear that the same entity has to apply these principles in the same way - if only for justice’s sake. Sadly, that’s not what we’re seeing.

 

[pnewton]

Not so. They’re entirely related situations in that it’s the same Vatican that has authority over both groups and has the duty to correct Her children. She just doesn’t seem to be all-to-keen to do it, at least for now, when it comes to certain people. They can be separated in an academic abstraction, but in the real world it’s clear that the same entity has to apply these principles in the same way - if only for justice’s sake. Sadly, that’s not what we’re seeing.

They are related because they are all Catholic? That is kind of thin. I for one am not in any position to judge the Holy Father on the treatment of “children” to use your term. I am surprised anyone here is. I find the the analogy of children interesting because it is also children that use lines like “Well, Johnny got to go” or " Mary didn’t get grounded."

I still think bringing up off topic issues is nothing but a deflection.

 

[mattkubes]

They are related because they are all Catholic? That is kind of thin.

That’s not what I said. This is very the definition of a straw man. I said that it is one entity, the same Vatican, that appears to be acting inconsistently in two nearly identical situations. The next logical question would be “why?”, but I suppose that goes beyond the scope of the OP.

 

[pnewton]

That’s not what I said. This is very the definition of a straw man. I said that it is one entity, the same Vatican, that appears to be acting inconsistently in two nearly identical situations.

The situations are no where near identical. If you think saying they are both Catholic, okay, then they are both dealing with the same Vatican, not that I understand the difference between those two statements as the Catholic Church only has one Vatican and one Holy Father. I still hold that point the finger at others because of one’s own shortcomings is the response of a child, not an adult. The Holy See deals with each individual, or each group, in its own way because, whether you see it or not, each case is unique. Dealing with an individual is different that dealing with a group. Dealing with heresy is different than problematic theology and that is different than disobedience. Etc.

 

[TrueLight]

This is very sad.

 

[mattkubes]

The situations are no where near identical. If you think saying they are both Catholic, okay, then they are both dealing with the same Vatican, not that I understand the difference between those two statements as the Catholic Church only has one Vatican and one Holy Father. I still hold that point the finger at others because of one’s own shortcomings is childish.

Again, we would need to go into this further in order to develop the point. I think it’s obvious that I would be on the side of the SSPX not being in schism, but we must still await the Church’s judgement on this matter anyway. Naturally I deny that there is any finger pointing going on because I don’t concede that the SSPX are guilty of any heresy or schism.

Sure, finger pointing would be childish, but I ask that you try not to impute another straw man onto my posts.

 

[TrueLight]

I sometimes get the impression that there are people who are almost waiting in anticipation for the SSPX to be declared in schism.

I mean, who do they think they are, huh? What makes them holier than the Pope? That’ll show 'em.

Right?

I know that nothing is impossible for God.

 

[TrueLight]

Meanwhile, the Keehans and Küngs of the world will take note that their clearly schismatic/heretical statements haven’t resulted in the same swift (at Vatican speeds, anyway) penalties. I don’t see how this can do anything but give a sense of legitimacy to the now-prevalent heterodoxy.

I can’t think about it much more, it’s making me feel nauseous. Kyrie elision. Thy Will be done, Lord.

 

[Lormar]

What it worse; a group of people close to the Truth yet have the failing of disobedience and pride? Or a group of people far from the Truth yet have the failing of disobedience and pride?

With the latter, the problems are obvious. With the former, we have people leading people away from Rome under something that looks very closely like Truth, but still contains the poison of disobedience and lacks all of the elements required.

The SSPX is no different than rogue theologians, in the sense that all parties think they know more than Rome does.

I have to say that I agree with you. Wherever humility and obedience are lacking, whether it is on the right, or left, or center, there lurks Satan and his minions.

 

[pnewton]

Naturally I deny that there is any finger pointing going on …

Maybe I misunderstood this:

the Keehans and Küngs of the world will take note that their clearly schismatic/heretical statements haven’t resulted in the same swift (at Vatican speeds, anyway) penalties.

It seemed like you were pointing to them, i.e., using them as an example.

 

[pnewton]

I sometimes get the impression that there are people who are almost waiting in anticipation for the SSPX to be declared in schism.

Lest their be any misunderstanding, this is the last thing I want. I have often come out and expressed my desire for resolution to this situation that would result in their full function within the Church as they are.