Will Pope Francis mend ties with the SSPX? [CNA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CNA_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CNA_News

Guest
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/i...e_Hackett_via_Flickr_CC_BY_SA_20_CNA.jpgParis, France, Apr 14, 2016 / 03:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X, has reportedly discussed several positive aspects of his meeting with Pope Francis at the beginning of the month.

Bishop Fellay had visited the Vatican April 1-2, meeting with the Pope and with Archbishop Guido Pozzo, secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei – the Vatican office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith responsible for doctrinal discussions with the estranged group.

The French-language blog Le Salon Beige reported April 10 that Bishop Fellay had spoken that day to some 4,000 pilgrims and “revealed some good news” from his encounter at the Vatican.

The blog post reported that Bishop Fellay indicated that: the Pope confirmed that the SSPX is Catholic in his eyes; the Pope said he would never condemn the SSPX; and that the Pope wants to extend the faculties of the priest of the SSPX, beginning with Confession.

Le Salon Beige also said that “in the course of his meetings in Rome, Bishop Fellay was encouraged to found a seminary in Italy.”

The website of the U.S. district of the SSPX also reported on Bishop Fellay’s comments April 10, linking to Le Salon Beige.

The SSPX had earlier stated that Bishop Fellay’s meeting with Pope Francis had been cordial and lasted 40 minutes.

“After the meeting, it was decided that the current exchanges would continue. The canonical status of the Society was not directly addressed, Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay having determined that these exchanges ought to continue without haste,” the statement added.

Pope Francis has already declared that during the current Jubilee Year of Mercy, the faithful can validly and licitly receive absolution of their sins from priests of the SSPX.

The Society currently operates six seminaries, and its Italian district includes four priories, 16 chapels, and a retreat center.

The SSPX was founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1970 to form priests, as a response to what he described as errors that had crept into the Church following the Second Vatican Council. Its relations with the Holy See became strained in 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops without the permission of Pope John Paul II.

The illicit consecration resulted in the excommunication of the five bishops; the excommunications were lifted in 2009 by Benedict XVI, and since then, negotiations between the Society and the Vatican have continued, “to rediscover full communion with the Church.”

In remitting the excommunications, Benedict also noted that “doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.”

The biggest obstacle for the society’s reconciliation has been the statements on religious liberty in Vatican II’s declaration Dignitatis humanae, which it claims contradicts previous Catholic teaching.

Doctrinal discussions between the SSPX and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith broke down in the summer of 2012, when the society’s superior general, Bishop Bernard Fellay, would not sign a doctrinal preamble presented by Rome. Talks between the CDF and the society resumed, however, in 2014.

Since then several moves have suggested a warming in relations between the Vatican and the SSPX.

In 2015 the Holy See delegated a cardinal and three bishops to visit the seminaries of the SSPX. They were sent to become better acquainted with the society, and to discuss doctrinal and theological topics in a less formal context.

And Pope Francis announced in a September 2015 letter on the Jubilee Year of Mercy that during the jubilee year the faithful can validly and licitly receive absolution of their sins from priests of the SSPX.

“I trust that in the near future solutions may be found to recover full communion with the priests and superiors of the Fraternity,” he wrote.

Full article…
 
Sometimes the most important aspects of a story are not mentioned. The position of the Catholic Church has been, and still is, that the members of the SSPX are wrong to remain outside the ministry of the Church, and that they should, for their own spiritual welfare and that of others, immediately seek reconciliation, generally through their local bishop.

That being said, yes, Pope Francis is concerned about the spiritual welfare of persons who choose to remain outside the ministry of the Church. He is trying to keep open all lines of communication. He is not condemning persons, just as he is not condemning couples who are living together outside marriage. I believe he wishes the SSPX clergy well, wherever they go, and to support the laity who are attached to them, has deemed that absolutions granted by SSPX clergy are valid during the Year of Mercy. He did not not encourage anyone to go to confession specifically there.

The fact that he supports laity who attach to SSPX does not mean he regards this as a harmless decision on their part, he also tries to reach out to laity in other situations based on their own decisions, situations that he likely regards as far from ideal. The fact that he wants pastors to be kind and accepting of couples who already put themselves in harm’s way does not mean he is neutral about whether the couple should stay that way. Obviously he would encourage the couple to take action now to get out of that situation, to resolve their life with the ministry of the Church. Same with SSPX. No condemnation of individuals, but loving encouragement towards prudent action now, by individuals involved.
 
Sometimes the most important aspects of a story are not mentioned.
OTOH, when Summorum Pontificum was still being considered, seldom didn’t the first sentence include reference to some “schismatic” group or such. I think it’s good some of these accusations (for lack of a better word) can be laid to rest, whether they fully reconcile or not. If they get confession extensions and marriage witness allowance, with legitimate liturgical acknowledgement, then for all intents and purposes the faithful should be able to frequent their chapels without guilt, though I’m sure many bishops won’t be too happy with that.

This btw is coming from someone with mixed feelings on the FSSPX matter. In diocese where there are no EFs available, it would be wonderful news. OTOH, in those that already have diocesan EFs, it may have the effect of thinning out their crowds, not necessarily a good thing.
 
Pope Francis seems to be trying to connect with individuals - he refers to laity going to confession, priests and superiors in the SSPX -* individuals*. Pro SSPX websites, refer to the protection of the organization.

The websites for years have presented 2 themes:
  1. The Vatican and most dioceses have teaching and practice that is risky to your spiritual health.
  2. The SSPX organization is, just now, on the verge of a breakthrough - “it should be clearer within the next 6 to 12 months” - of final recognition of the organization, with our requirements protected, to enter the Church as a fully independent **intact **community, with full dignity, honor, and respect that is due to it. They have been “on the verge of a breakthrough” many, many times.
The message in both these themes is "Do not leave the SSPX. Be patient, just a little longer.

The message I infer from the Vatican seems to be, we will try to minister to these persons, wherever they are - but that doesn’t mean every place is equally spiritually beneficial to them. It is better for their spiritual well being that individual priests, bishops, attached laity come in sooner, rather than later.
 
I pray this comes to fruition. Pope Benedict was close, before insiders gutted the process.
As to Pro Vobis’ worry of thinning Diocesan EF Masses, in my Diocese which encompasses the entire state, we have 3 parishes that offer the EF, and only 1 is weekly. There is 1 FSSPX Chapel in the state, and it is but a small mission parish.
 
Pope Francis seems to be trying to connect with individuals - he refers to laity going to confession, priests and superiors in the SSPX -* individuals*. Pro SSPX websites, refer to the protection of the organization.

The websites for years have presented 2 themes:
  1. The Vatican and most dioceses have teaching and practice that is risky to your spiritual health.
  2. The SSPX organization is, just now, on the verge of a breakthrough - “it should be clearer within the next 6 to 12 months” - of final recognition of the organization, with our requirements protected, to enter the Church as a fully independent **intact **community, with full dignity, honor, and respect that is due to it. They have been “on the verge of a breakthrough” many, many times.
The message in both these themes is "Do not leave the SSPX. Be patient, just a little longer.

The message I infer from the Vatican seems to be, we will try to minister to these persons, wherever they are - but that doesn’t mean every place is equally spiritually beneficial to them. It is better for their spiritual well being that individual priests, bishops, attached laity come in sooner, rather than later.
Interesting observation regarding individual vs. organization. I’m inclined to agree.
 
I do not want to sound judgmental, but many of those affiliated with SSPX that I have interacted with think that the pope and the Church since Vatican II are extremely evil. Moreover, they seem bigoted and arrogant towards anyone supporting the Church.
 
I do not want to sound judgmental, but many of those affiliated with SSPX that I have interacted with think that the pope and the Church since Vatican II are extremely evil. Moreover, they seem bigoted and arrogant towards anyone supporting the Church.
The people I have met are not like that.
 
I do not want to sound judgmental, but many of those affiliated with SSPX that I have interacted with think that the pope and the Church since Vatican II are extremely evil. Moreover, they seem bigoted and arrogant towards anyone supporting the Church.
No offense taken…:rolleyes:
 
No offense taken…:rolleyes:
I actually do not like the modern church, with lots of talking and excessively loud music, and I would do anything to get people to behave much more reverently. A Latin Mass with Gregorian chant would sooth my soul, however, from my personal experiences I would not join the SSPX crowd.
 
I like Taylor Marshall’s thoughts here:
I once met a priest who had been involved in the dialogue between the Holy See and the SSPX. He said that theological debates with the SSPX are more difficult and confusing than theological debates with the Russian schismatics. At least with the Greeks and Russians, you know what the differences are. With the SSPX, you talk for three hours and find complete agreement the entire time. Then at the end of the meeting, the SSPX pulls away from the table and still identifies themselves as opposed to the Holy See. It’s confusing and leads one to wonder whether the stance of the SSPX is one contrary to filial charity.
 
I really hope that Pope Francis could mend ties with the SSPX. After all, it’s no use of starting another organization outside the Mother Church and the Pope’s authority must always be respected.
 
I really hope that Pope Francis could mend ties with the SSPX. After all, it’s no use of starting another organization outside the Mother Church and the Pope’s authority must always be respected.
The FSSPX were established back in 1970 legitimately. Their priests are officially suspended however, but they are not outside the church.
 
The FSSPX were established back in 1970 legitimately. Their priests are officially suspended however, but they are not outside the church.
The individual priests and bishops are in the Church, by virtue of their baptism.

Organization? The FSSPX or SSPX was established legitimately as a Catholic Church organization in 1970. It was disestablished as a Catholic Church organization in 1975. In other words, the organization has been “out” 8 times as long as it was “in”.

Even in the early years after 1975 - say 1980 - the great majority of its clergy had served for years in dioceses, parishes, and ministries of the Church, itself, alongside bishops, Catholic religious orders, and a multitude of laity, much more than they had served in SSPX. Today I would guess the great majority of their clergy have served almost exclusively in SSPX, and little if any time in a diocese or parish, maybe never under a bishop who was ordinary of any diocese.
 
The FSSPX or SSPX was established legitimately as a Catholic Church organization in 1970.
As a point of order, SSPX was never official. It was recognized by the Vatican as the Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X. We really shouldn’t be using unofficial titles such as SSPX and SSPV inter alia, only gets confusing, and can get disparaging.
 
The individual priests and bishops are in the Church, by virtue of their baptism.

Organization? The FSSPX or SSPX was established legitimately as a Catholic Church organization in 1970. It was disestablished as a Catholic Church organization in 1975.
So have they been suppressed as I think one poster put it? (Sort of like the Jesuits for 40 some years?)
 
So have they been suppressed as I think one poster put it? (Sort of like the Jesuits for 40 some years?)
Other posters, including Deacon Jeff, Don Ruggero, and another priest who I can’t recall at the moment, have explained the status much better than I can. My own opinions follow, subject to correction.

The Jesuits submitted in obedience to the Holy See. Those who were priests continued to serve as priests within the Church, under bishop ordinaries. They were in union with the non Jesuit priests serving in their dioceses, not isolated from them. They did not do activity to cause them to be suspended, did not engage in illicit ministry, did not ordain priests or bishops in defiance of the Church. They did not set up chapels, schools, retreat centers in defiance of the Church, though they might have set up or continued some things, with the Church. At the end of their 40 years, they were no more apart from the Catholic Church than they were at the beginning; no movement away, at all.

You can see how this differs from the situation with the SSPX.

My background is Sociology, not Theology. From a sociological view, in 1975 I guess SSPX people were still more part of their diocese than part of SSPX. Today they are far more part of SSPX than their diocese. Today the SSPX is in effect a separate denomination, except that they technically don’t enroll their lay attendees. Today the organization has a tradition, of its own - not just loyalty to traditions of Trent, or the TLM, but to the tradition of SSPX organization itself. In 1980, or 1985, the TLM was likely still a higher priority than maintaining the identity of the SSPX organization.

Archbishop L spent far more years working in a diocese than working in SSPX, and that was true of all the early leaders. Today I bet most SSPX leaders have spent almost no time working in a diocese, little contact of any kind with religious orders or ordinaries.

Drastic movement over 40 years, each year a little farther away - isolation, which did not happen with the SJ’s.
 
Well, it’d be nice if it happened, but I’m a wee bit skeptical - especially after the Amoris Laetitia kerfuffle. It provides them with a convenient excuse to express reservations and ask for clarifications (a concern which, to be honest, many non-SSPX followers, self included, also share). Still, there is hope. 🙂
 
The Jesuits submitted in obedience to the Holy See. Those who were priests continued to serve as priests within the Church, under bishop ordinaries. They were in union with the non Jesuit priests serving in their dioceses, not isolated from them. They did not do activity to cause them to be suspended, did not engage in illicit ministry, did not ordain priests or bishops in defiance of the Church. They did not set up chapels, schools, retreat centers in defiance of the Church, though they might have set up or continued some things, with the Church. At the end of their 40 years, they were no more apart from the Catholic Church than they were at the beginning; no movement away, at all.

You can see how this differs from the situation with the SSPX.
Maybe so, but there had to have been something there to prompt that suppression of the Jesuits. (You can probably include intellectual property in that mix, btw.) I have my own opinions given the history books I have read on the topic. Either way, there had to have been some I’m-right-and-you’re-wrong resentment and as a sociologist you probably agree that this does not necessarily bring on the perfect union we all seem to envision in the end.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top