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

[John_of_Patmos]

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.

Agreed. And really, if people stopped supporting them and starting supporting the FSSP, they would either fade or rejoin, maybe. But please people, don’t fall for their illusion of traditionalism. St. Pius X would want them to come home…It is honestly really sad to see the SSPX defy Rome. Let us pray for their, and all those in defiance of Rome, to come home.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

No big surprise there. Bishop Fellay just missed his opportunity to go down in history as a great leader who worked with a Pope to resolve a great schism. Oh well, onto the dust heap of history. Probably would eventually have even been a saint. But for ego.

(and please don’t tell me it’s not a schism, blah blah, start a new thread for that.)

It’s been a formal schism since the 1980s.

 

[archangel04]

---

From what I have read – the NCW – has been saying that from day one-- yet today the Pope is called to insist – that they assent to the will of the Apostolic See. Sounds more like the NCW paying – “lip service” – and continuing to doing things the Kiko Arguello/NCW “way”.

Exactly This is why they scare me! Look at any of their liturgical celebrations. At least with the SSPX and other groups we know where they stand, and if they end up in schism it will be on them and no on else. But the Neocats seem to say “Yes Yes” to the Pope but insist on doing the contrary. But this is off the topic so it will be the last I will talk about my “friends” the Neocats lol.

 

[Exsilivm]

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

The SSPX adhere to Nicea, Trent, and all doctrine as stated up to 1963. Are you saying that Rome’s theology has changed since 1963?

 

[Big_Feet]

The SSPX adhere to Nicea, Trent, and all doctrine as stated up to 1963. Are you saying that Rome’s theology has changed since 1963?

I dont think he/she is saying this at all, but SSPX says it has. That is why they reject a number of the documents that came out of Vatican II.

 

[archangel04]

Agreed. And really, if people stopped supporting them and starting supporting the FSSP, they would either fade or rejoin, maybe. But please people, don’t fall for their illusion of traditionalism. St. Pius X would want them to come home…It is honestly really sad to see the SSPX defy Rome. Let us pray for their, and all those in defiance of Rome, to come home.

No one is supporting their “rebellious” position
We are praying for our brothers and sisters to be in union. What many failed to see when comparing this group to liberal “catholics” is that this group upholds all of Church tradition. As of yet, that I know of, they have not challenged and Dogmas or Moral Truths. The only thing comes close is challenging the council if that! Compared to some of the other dissent some of these are groups have taken, the SSPX comes no where even close to them. This will probably be the moment for the SSPX to show the world if their movement is inspired by God, or sadly by Satan. We will see.

 

[Exsilivm]

I dont think he/she is saying this at all, but SSPX says it has. That is why they reject a number of the documents that came out of Vatican II.

Is the SSPX right or wrong?

 

[Megan7]

An update from Salvatori Izzo on AGI via Rorate Cæli:

“The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Joseph Levada, delivered [the content of the communiqué] to the Superior General of the Society, Bishop Bernard Fellay, in a conversation that lasted for over two hours … . During today’s meeting in the Palace of the Holy Office - in which the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Abp. Luis Francisco Ladaria, and the Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, Mgr. Guido Pozzo, also took part, while Bp. Fellay was joined by his assistant Fr. Nély - a complete rupture was avoided by the Holy See, making it clear that Benedict XVI still expects a recomposition.”

I am praying for a positive outcome!
I do not want to lose hope, too many souls at stake!
Thanks for posting this!
PAX,
Megan

 

[Big_Feet]

Is the SSPX right or wrong?

That is not for me to decide, but I will side with whatever Rome, and the rightful successor of St. Peter says.

 

[Exsilivm]

That is not for me to decide, …

Are you saying the question is not important, or that you don’t know enough to answer the question?

 

[Melchior_1]

The SSPX adhere to Nicea, Trent, and all doctrine as stated up to 1963. Are you saying that Rome’s theology has changed since 1963?

What I am saying is the the primacy of the Pope has remained unchanged. Rogue theologians express dissent on certain issues, and the SSPX has expressed dissent on others. Both have tasted, and offer, the fruit of disobedience.

Take, for example, the documents of Vatican II regarding ecumenicism. Vatican II essentially states what has been practiced by the mendicants (and Benedictines) since their foundation, and opens that up for the entire Church. Keep in mind that through third orders and the like several members of the laity were practicing this methodology for some time, so the Church was already exposed to these things through the actions of secular members within those orders (look no further than Catherine, and of course numerous Secular Franciscans). The mendicants and Benedictines were never admonished, and often lauded for their efforts. Vatican II put a word in place to describe what they did, much like how “transubstantiation” was eventually used to describe the Bread and Wine becoming the Body and Blood.

We need to look at this from the perspective of those who are religious or belong to other societies. Societies of Apostolic Life and Religious Orders have specific standards and expectations. Societies of Apostolic Life do not have the Right of Exemption. At the end of the day, regardless of what their moderator says, the diocesan Bishop does have a say. There is some autonomy, but in this kind of fashion:

Diocesan Bishop: Your Society is being assigned this parish. Staff whomever you want there. Do your thing, keep me updated.

The Societies need to listen though. So when a Bishop says “guys, I don’t want you here”, they need to leave. They do not have the same Right of Exemption as Religious Orders. In fact, in six years I’ll fall under the Right of Exemption, but the SSPX won’t. They’ve never had it. So whenever a Bishop has said “you guys need to shut this down”, it needs to shut down and they need to get out.

So they haven’t listened or obeyed. Not just to the Pope, but the Bishops. And this sets a terrible example, and if they ever move forward with something like giving the SSPX a prelature it is rewarding them for poor behavior. You too, can get you own special status by consecrating you own Bishops! Instead of following in the footsteps of Holy Fathers Dominic & Francis who created change within the Church while fully obeying, break off and be stubborn! All the while the FSSP and the Companions of the Cross have played by the rules and done everything by the book.

Hardly what I call ideal.

The most ironic thing about all of this? Supporters of the SSPX and the SSPX do not like what Vatican II and later Popes have discussed when it comes to ecumenism. As I mentioned before, it was influenced by the mendicants. Who was one of the pioneers of the mendicants? Francis of Assisi. Who knew the Franciscan model of evangelizing, who lived that life? Who would not have been opposed to what Vatican II, Blessed John Paul II, and now Benedict XVI says regarding ecumenism?

St. Pope Pius X, who was himself a Secular Franciscan.

 

[Exsilivm]

What I am saying is the the primacy of the Pope has remained unchanged.

Unchanged from when?

Rogue theologians express dissent on certain issues, and the SSPX has expressed dissent on others.

Are you saying that there is no difference between on the one hand someone who adheres to an earlier dogmatic statement and on the other hand, someone who makes up a new belief that was never held by the Church?

 

[TrueLight]

St. Pope Pius X, who was himself a Secular Franciscan.

Secular Franciscan or not, Saint Pius X fought against modernism, from the little knowledge that I know. I very much he would be for present day ecumenism.

 

[Melchior_1]

Unchanged from when?

From Matthew 16:18 of course, all are bound to Papal Authority. Such as when the Pope tells you not to consecrate four Bishops, you best not do so.

Are you saying that there is no difference between on the one hand someone who adheres to an earlier dogmatic statement and on the other hand, someone who makes up a new belief that was never held by the Church?

I’d like to see evidence of these “new beliefs”. Ecumenism is bandied about as one, but as I mentioned above, the mendicants and Benedictines have done it for centuries. The open concept thing that Timothy mentioned is another item which people say is an invention, but as Timothy said; that’s a 1000 year tradition within the Church.

I’m interested to know your take on the rest of my previous post.

 

[floresco]

I’d like to see evidence of these “new beliefs”. Ecumenism is bandied about as one, but as I mentioned above, the mendicants and Benedictines have done it for centuries.

I do not understand what you mean by “doing ecumenism”. What exactly were they doing?

 

[Melchior_1]

Secular Franciscan or not, Saint Pius X fought against modernism, from the little knowledge that I know. I very much he would be for present day ecumenism.

What we now treat as ecumenism reflects what Holy Fathers Dominic & Francis did, and how they built their families. If St. Pius X was opposed to these methods, he would have pulled the Franciscans away from the Holy Land. As a Franciscan, and the Pope, who knew what they were doing. And what they do there is what we’re encouraged to do within the world, which is essentially what the message of ecumenism is with what JP2 and BXVI has said on the topic.

I do not understand what you mean by “doing ecumenism”. What exactly were they doing?

I’m assuming most here know about the story of Francis and the Sultan. If people aren’t, I’ll see if I can find Brother JR’s posts on the topic since he does a great job in telling the story.

 

[ProVobis]

From Matthew 16:18 of course, all are bound to Papal Authority. Such as when the Pope tells you not to consecrate four Bishops, you best not do so.

This issue has been resolved to some extent by the lifting of the excommunications that resulted from the disobedience.

What hasn’t been resolved is the status of the FSSPX priests who have been under suspension since 1975, well before the consecration of said bishops. Some have left the fraternity and become FSSP priests; the others, well, we’ll just have to wait and see.

 

[TrueLight]

What we now treat as ecumenism reflects what Holy Fathers Dominic & Francis did, and how they built their families. If St. Pius X was opposed to these methods, he would have pulled the Franciscans away from the Holy Land. As a Franciscan, and the Pope, who knew what they were doing. And what they do there is what we’re encouraged to do within the world, which is essentially what the message of ecumenism is with what JP2 and BXVI has said on the topic.

I’m assuming most here know about the story of Francis and the Sultan. If people aren’t, I’ll see if I can find Brother JR’s posts on the topic since he does a great job in telling the story.

Melchior,

I know you don’t like to read this, but I don’t understand why we must always bring up Orders when we’re speaking of laity.

Orders were established for a purpose and maybe those methods worked and continue to work for them.

I can’t go into specifics about what Orders did and did not do or developed.

I do know that St Francis went to Egypt to preach to the Sultan the unadulterated truth. I’m sure Br. Jr, will weigh in.

Ecumenism to me is reaching out to those outside of the Church in love and because of that love, being clear about what people need to do to please God and be converted.

 

[Melchior_1]

Melchior,

I know you don’t like to read this, but I don’t understand why we must always bring up Orders when we’re speaking of laity.

Orders were established for a purpose and maybe those methods worked and continue to work for them.

I can’t go into specifics about what Orders did and did not do or developed.

I do know that St Francis went to Egypt to preach to the Sultan the unadulterated truth. I’m sure Br. Jr, will weigh in.

Ecumenism to me is reaching out to those outside of the Church in love and because of that love, being clear about what people need to do to please God and be converted.

Because like it not, Orders have influenced the laity and the the entire Church throughout their existence. There has been attitudes, customs, procedures, and theological motifs which Orders have had, and they have been brought into either the hierarchy of the Church or even with the laity. Something simple such as why does the Pope wear white? St. Pius V started that trend, because despite becoming Pope you can’t take the Dominican charism away from a Dominican. Something complex, like anyone who has read the Summa. Something mystical, like St. Catherine.

As a Lay Dominican, I will be called to bring Dominican spirituality to my parish. As it stands now there are already Dominican influences at play, such as myself sharing with youth about the joys of Lectio Divina. These things have happened for centuries, and will continue to do so. To say “that works for them, but not for the laity” shortchanges the laity, and prevents them from getting a glimpse at what the entire Universal Church has to offer. Every so often, the Church in Her wisdom will open the doors and show the laity what the religious have done and that they can follow that example. In some cases, like ecumenism, this has happened.

It’s an important point when discussing the SSPX, because of the topic of obedience is one that will come up. Either one will say “look at all of these other people who get away with things!” or one will say “look at how all of this started, and why is it they just won’t accept what Rome says and come back”. There are several other groups playing by the book, playing by the Rule, so to give this specific group a treat wouldn’t be fair to those who did what they are to do.

 

[TrueLight]

Because like it not, Orders have influenced the laity and the the entire Church throughout their existence. There has been attitudes, customs, procedures, and theological motifs which Orders have had, and they have been brought into either the hierarchy of the Church or even with the laity. Something simple such as why does the Pope wear white? St. Pius V started that trend, because despite becoming Pope you can’t take the Dominican charism away from a Dominican. Something complex, like anyone who has read the Summa. Something mystical, like St. Catherine.

As a Lay Dominican, I will be called to bring Dominican spirituality to my parish. As it stands now there are already Dominican influences at play, such as myself sharing with youth about the joys of Lectio Divina. These things have happened for centuries, and will continue to do so. To say “that works for them, but not for the laity” shortchanges the laity, and prevents them from getting a glimpse at what the entire Universal Church has to offer. Every so often, the Church in Her wisdom will open the doors and show the laity what the religious have done and that they can follow that example. In some cases, like ecumenism, this has happened.

It’s an important point when discussing the SSPX, because of the topic of obedience is one that will come up. Either one will say “look at all of these other people who get away with things!” or one will say “look at how all of this started, and why is it they just won’t accept what Rome says and come back”. There are several other groups playing by the book, playing by the Rule, so to give this specific group a treat wouldn’t be fair to those who did what they are to do.

Okay then…

Have any references of either St Francis or St Dominic’s type of ecumenism or that they did not preach that:

1. That there is only one true faith
2. That one needs to convert to that faith

I’m seriously curious.

The little that I have read of the Holy Fathers show them both to be very adamant about preaching the truth.