Rorate Caeli

RORATE CÆLI Editorial note: The time is up

It was quite fitting that the successor of the usurpers of the extinguished see of Canterbury was present today as the news of the Apostolic Constitution which will establish a full-fledged canonical structure for Anglicans within the Catholic Church was made public in simultaneous conferences in Rome and London. He was there to witness the burial of his own Communion.

The stream of Anglicans back to the Catholic Church has been continuous since the events of the 16th century, and particularly intense after the triumph of liberalism in the Church of England and related entities in the 19th century. Confusion set in, as it happened with everything else in Catholicism, in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council: the Holy See pursued a path away from the only ecumenical path which had worked in the past (that of conversion), as it tried to engage in "dialogue" (ARCIC) with a community whose members cannot even agree on the basic tenets of the Christian faith.

For several decades following the Council, conservative Anglicans were left in a very dire situation: their only choices were a crumbling Communion, a Continuum splitting, in regular Protestant fashion, in thousands of pieces, or trying to face the tough reality of joining a Catholic Church in liturgical upheaval, with chaotic dissent and bishops tolerant of heresy yet intolerant of true Catholic diversity.

The time is up. Despite what the Archbishop of Westminster and the Anglican leader of Canterbury said in their diplomatic joint statement, it is obvious dialogue is dead - and has been dead since the unilateral and anti-Apostolic move of the Anglican Communion in favor of priestesses.

The details of the new Anglican structure will soon be made public, and serious Anglicans will be able to come to the Church without losing anything that is good and true and beautiful in their heritage. The Protestants (Liberals or Evangelicals) will remain in their dying or spiritually handicapped communities; those, still in the Communion or in the myriad of little communities in the Continuum, who wish to take their Catholic views seriously will have only one choice, as the time for role-playing is over:

Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved. (Lumen Gentium, 14)


Our Lady of Walsingham, pray for us.
Saint Thomas of Canterbury, pray for us.
Holy Martyrs of England and Wales, pray for us.

47 comments:

Carlos Antonio Palad said...

And let it not escape our notice that today, in the Calendar of the Missal of Paul VI / John Paul II, is the Optional Memorial of St. Paul of the Cross, who daily prayed for the conversion of England

Basil said...

I wonder if the model of this Apostolic Constitution will be used for those members of the SSPX who wish to join Rome?

wheat4paradise said...

That is quite an amazing quote from Lumen Gentium. Why is that passage never quoted in arch-traditionalist diatribes against LG?

Antonio said...

I just can't say how happy I am for this.
Ecumenism means something different from now on. Something that is really Catholic.

Anonymous said...

These are the times the prophets predicted.
Many Saints saw England converted.

Jordanes said...

Well said, New Catholic.

berenike said...

It's only the feast of St Paul of the Cross in the north American calendars.

[/pedantry]

Anonymous said...

You said "It was quite fitting that the successor of the usurpers of the extinguished see of Canterbury was present today."

Come on ! calling them usurpers of the extinguished see of Canterbury-
doesn't do - it's not being charitable. Afer all if the Pope doesn't say that why then should you for you are only a lay man !!!!
Jamie

Anonymous said...

Jamie, I think the pope needs to be a little more diplomatic and gentle than the average layman.

Jordanes said...

"Usurpers of the extinguished see of Canterbury" isn't uncharitable, just undiplomatic. It is strictly accurate, and every now and then it's good for people to be reminded what the status of the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury is to the Catholic Church.

Jordanes said...

"It's only the feast of St Paul of the Cross in the north American calendars."

They use distinctively North American liturgical calendars in the Philippines??

John McFarland said...

wheat4,

Your own characterization of the quote as "amazing" suggests the problem: most of the contents of LG share neither the spirit nor the letter of this passage.

Then, too, it all depends on what you mean by the "Church" the membership in which is necessary to be saved. The talk of "full" visible union implies that the Anglicans, or some of them, or something, are in partial communion with the Church; and could even be read as meaning that visible union is the only thing lacking. There is no partial communion in the real doctrine of the Church, but there is in the conciliar magisterium. So real traditionalists can hardly rejoice over this "more perfect union." Since there is no "partial communion," the unity represented by this development is predicated on a lie.

It also doesn't seem that there will be any effort to ensure that those achieving "full" communion believe what the Church teaches. But since the conciliar authorities don't show much interest in what the ordinary Catholic believes or doesn't believe, I suppose that is hardly cause for surprise or (additional) scandal.

In brief, we have here another triumph of the Holy Father's "communio" theology: all you need is love, and the technicalities are just technicalities. Of course, the technicalities include the faith without which, as it says in St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, it is impossible to please God.

So to all you who view this as the template for the reconciliation of the SSPX and its faithful and all the others who resist the conciliar novelties to disobedience where necessary, I say: please God, we will not sacrifice the faith that saves to a counterfeit unity.

Anonymous said...

It's a beautiful day for many reasons. And there are places out there in the world where there are Catholics with abusive NO parishes, with no other possibilities, and perhaps now they will have this possibility. The pope is really working towards creating a Church of Catholic communities, by facilitating the insertion or reinsertion of authentic branches of the Church while allowing for "diversity" in the correct way. He is in a sense engaging in revisionism, reordering our understanding of "ecumenism" and "cultural diversity" in the spirit of the "hermeneutic of continuity." Earlier, someone remarked that the statement in Lumen Gentium is never mentioned anywhere. This is a good point, and it is exactly the pope's mission to state and impose the will of the Council as it was truly intended. We will find that many gems of VII will emerge, because the abusers have themselves worked fervently to impose a liberal understanding of VII. Of course VII has its problems, but we have never seen VII as it was intended. But this kind of ecumenism, and this kind of diversity, and the reinsertion of the SSPX, are all going to be examples of "diversity" correctly understood. I don't know if the pope will achieve anything with the Orthodox, but clearly he aspires to, as the mention of them proves. I think the pope has a vision of a 21st Century Church in which correct ecumenism leads to diversity that serves the conditions of Catholics in the world: Traditional, Anglican, and Eastern. And he is working towars it. May God bless him with many more years in His service.

Anonymous said...

Hey! Take a look at this article, in which a Vatican official had said it was very unlikely that talks with TAC were anything more than rumors!!! It is good to see this now, as you can see that the pope has placed his men in the CDF, and others we might be tempted to believe, are left out of the picture:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14963

Anonymous said...

Basil- sspx never left ROME!

Gideon Ertner said...

Here goes John McFarland again, as always ruining everything for everyone (including himself) with his sour pessimism and idle criticism of the 'post-conciliar Church'.

Could he care to tell us what measures were undertaken to "ensure" that the laity of those Eastern Orthodox communities who united with Rome in the 16th century held the Catholic faith entirely and purely?

Were they all put before an Inquisition? Were they all required to attend obligatory catechism classes?

Or was a mere confession of faith by their Bishops considered good enough for the 'pre-conciliar Church'?

Ir. Tomás de Aquino said...

Blessed be our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI! May God grant him long life to help bring all christians back to Our Holy Mother the Church.

Anonymous said...

Basil:

Yes, it will. It could also be the model for the present Latin Mass groups who are approved by Rome. Romanus's p.p. is a dead duck. This creates the precedent which seals the deal, thank God. This is really the structure I have been advocating for twenty years, but under a different name.

Alleluia!

P.K.T.P.

Ir. Tomás de Aquino said...

November 19th is the feast day of Saint Paul of the Cross in the General Roman Calendar.

Anonymous said...

While I agree with what Mr. McFarland says about communion (as always), I am sure that incoming Anglican groups will have to accept the Catholic Faith as conditions for joining up. What, exactly, that Faith entails is another matter, one which might be clarified as a result of talks with the S.S.P.X.

Let's put this aside for now and celebrate this news. It is good news. We can mope on other days. THere are a lot of them.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

I note again that this new arrangement is the total defeat of Romanus and his insidious personal prelature structure. A personal ordinariate is exactly what I have been advocating but under a different name. The Holy Father chose a new structure because, at least in practice (but not in potential), apostolic administrations do not cover entire countries, let alone the whole planet. They could (and some of their Eastern relatives do) but they don't.

This new structure is a PARTICULAR CHURCH, equivalent in law to a diocese. It is much like a military ordinariate except that, in that one, the ordinary has some limited jurisdiction over his subjects (viz. servicemen) even outside their territories (viz. military bases).

This is de facto the 'ritual' apostolic administration of Canon 372.2 which I have advocated. But it allows there to be innumerable personal dioceses attached to persons and real property, all in overlapping territories. It is magnificent.

This will be a precedent for us in the T.L.M. They cannot realistically offer us a personal prelature when these entire dioceses are now avaialable as models. Romanus, who is obviously an enemy of tradition, is defeated.

P.K.T.P.

wheat4paradise said...

John McFarland, your comment reminds me of the following aphorism:

A cynic is someone who stops to smell the flowers ... and then looks around for the casket.

Anonymous said...

wheat4paradise:

Let's see how "upbeat" you are after having been in this as long as Mr. McFarland.

Paul Haley said...

The blockbuster yet to come and which is not yet even admitted to be in existence is what the Holy Father intends for the SSPX. Can he reasonably be expected to ignore the plight of Faithful attached to the SSPX in terms of canonical status and faculties for those priests engaged in the salvation of souls? Methinks not. Stay tuned, folks, I think we have yet to have heard the last from the Holy Father on this matter.

John McFarland said...

Mr. Ertner,

If you know anything at all about the mechanics of the reunion of the various groups from the Eastern schismatics, you're one up on me.

But I'd be amazed if the hierarchy and clergy were not required to abjure schism; and that if the laity were not so required, it was because their coming along with their bishops and priests indicated that they too abjured schism.

But as regards the Anglicans, schism is only the beginning of the issue. At a minimum, do you think that the doctrinal mess in the Catholic Church is not present in the Anglican? And more realistically, would you not think it likely that things are even worse among the Anglicans?

About the only generality I can confidently make about those who will take the Vatican up on the proposed arrangements is that they are against the ordination of women and professed homosexuals. (No doubt that is why the Archbishop of Canterbury is taking it all with such equanimity.) Beyond that, they are likely to be the more conservative end of the classic Anglican mishmash, which even those who actually joined the Church in the 19th century were by no means free of.

So as you see, I'm back where I've always been -- at the question of Faith. If you recognize the primacy of Faith -- that is, if you're a real Catholic -- you can only deplore this latest development.

wheat4paradise said...

Anon 17:14, I don't know what "this" is that Mr. McFarland has been "in" (although I surmise that you allude to "the battle for Tradition" or something of the sort), nor do I know how you deem yourself competent to make comparisons between Mr. McFarland and me. Have we met, Anon 17:14?

I'll continue to smell the roses, while you and Mr. McFarland seek out the casket.

wheat4paradise said...

If you're a "real Catholic", you must deplore the reunion of Anglicans with the Church of Rome? Bizarre.

Anonymous said...

"If you're a "real Catholic", you must deplore the reunion of Anglicans with the Church of Rome? Bizarre.

Not bizarre at all.
Time was, that when these people became Catholics, they had to re-enter the Roman Catholic Church, accept all the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church, accepted the Roman Catholic Mass (at the time the Tridentine Latin Mass), and for all intents and purposes repudiated their former Protestant faith and beliefs.

Now, with this accord, it looks like they will be able to keep their Protestant service which, no matter how attractive or beautiful or reverent with bells and smells and fantiastic music...still has it's roots in the 16th century Protestant Reformation.
They have not been forced to accept the Catholic Mass and Sacraments.
They might be loyal to Rome now, but in their liturgy, prayer books, and traditions...they are still Protestants.
How repulsive and revolting it would be if one day down the road a Pope welcomed the Lutherans, Baptists and Pentecostolists back into the Catholic Church with all their Protestant traditions and not having to accept the Catholic Mass.
Allowing these people to keep all their Anglican traditions (which like it or not are Protestant), is an unacceptable accomodation.

Anonymous said...

"And there are places out there in the world where there are Catholics with abusive NO parishes, with no other possibilities, and perhaps now they will have this possibility".

I had not thought of that! Indeed there may be options for those stuck in dissenting parishes and who have had to endure for so long.

Deo Gratias for this Holy Father and all he is doing and accomplishing. Benedict the Great!

Ave Maria!

David Volk said...

I hope American bishops start enforcing canon law. As is, with pro-abort Catholic politicians proliferating, it is questionable what Faith these Anglicans will be joining.

Anonymous said...

'serious Anglicans will be able to come to the Church without losing anything that is good and true and beautiful in their heritage'

All that was good and true in the Anglican heritage was the scraps of Catholism Cranmer and Queen Lizzie left remaining to hood wink the average joe bloggs into accepting their new religion. The difference between Canmer's church and the loyal Catholics who gave their heads and entrails for the Faith, was that the latter kept the whole faith and refused to accept the watered down, adulterated subsitute.

Don't get me wrong, it is wonderful that the obsticles in the way of the conversion of these sincere people (ie:Vat2's notion of ecuminism) are finally being removed. But I find it abnoxious that they will be able to maintain Canmer's Rite- a rite which should be held in utter contempt by all good Catholics as it was by the likes of Edmond Campion, Robert Southwell, etc

By converting to Catholicism, and rejecting the Lizzi/Canmer reform 100%, an Anglican will loose nothing of what is good and true in their heritage.

I'm tempted to say 'They should leave their trash behind'. But then I have to admit that their trash is less trashy than what has been goning on in most Catholic parishes over the last 40years. But that is another story...

PM

John McFarland said...

Mr. Perkins,

This will be in the first instance a means to achieve "unity" with people most of whom do not profess the same faith as (for example) you do.

Do you seriously think that the SSPX would accept a status as one of what is now shown unambiguously to be the blueprint for the Church as the Zoological Gardens of the Catholic and the Sort of Catholic?

But let's assume for the sake of argument that Bishop Fellay buys the package. Do you then expect that he and (what is left of) his confreres will be free to go about evangelizing the rest of the zoo, every bit as much a part of the Church as the Anglicans?

But how can you evangelize a zoo? The whole point is that you have monkeys, giraffes, wombats, etc. That's what a zoo is all about: all different kinds of critters.

But what about the Faith? That's my question for you. Most of the denizens of this blog don't really understand what's going on. But you do; and so I am horrified.

Mr. Haley,

Same point.

Anonymous said...

Wheat4Paradise:

Whatever.

lexetlibertas said...

WHO CARES if the Anglican Missal has much of its roots in 16th century Protestantism? Any of you naysayers ever heard of the genetic fallacy?

This is just like Fundamentalist Protestants who dismiss Catholic liturgy and paraliturgy, especially traditional folk piety, on the grounds that, externally, much of it has either explicit pagan roots, or at least pagan antecedents.

If God chose to communicate his Goodness, Truth, and Beauty to 16th-century heretics, and if the Church can remove stumbling blocks (read your Pauline Epistles!) and allow these heretics to keep whatever is good, true, and beautiful in their former worship, why the heck not?

WHO CARES that the Church before 1962 did not do things this way? WHO CARES? Tradition does not begin and end with Trent, and pastoral strategies CAN change from one generation to the next according to ecclesial need.

We traditional Catholics need to stop accepting rose-colored perspectives of church history, or this Manichean distinction between what's Catholic and what's not, as if the Church and her pastors are always in the right, and heretics in the wrong with no valid point whatsoever. Sheesh! Maybe if pre-Vatican II Catholics were better promoters of the Gospel of the true religion, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now to begin with! Ever think about that?!

Lord knows I have been a VOCIFEROUS critic of the past several pontificates, but when our Popes FINALLY do SOMETHING right, I'm giving them full credit!

We'd do well to ignore the foamed-mouth ravings of Gnostic rad-trads who never have done anything good for the traditional Catholic cause. They're a waste of oxygen, and would be walking, talking arguments for euthanasia if the natural law did not so clearly forbid the practice.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. McFarland:

We need to clarify a few points.

1. While the TAC bishops and vicars-general swore on the C.C.C., this will NOT be the basis of their entry into the Church, either for them or for their laity, who have not sworn on it. I know some of the TAC people through the Monarchist League of Canada and I know their choirmaster at their cathedral. I also correspond frequently with some of their priests and other members. Many of them hold are very close to holding the same positions as the S.S.P.X does. Those who do not would do so if they only knew what that is. And they are about to find out what it is. I predict that most of them will hold Society positions as Catholics, regardless of what their bishops swore on two years ago. They will come into the Church by adherence to a profession of faith in a traditional formula. They will quickly move towards Society positions after that. Give them a break, Mr. McFarland. I can, despite the fact that some of my ancestors were persecuted by theirs. They have been out in the cold for 450 years. Some time for adjustment will be needed.

Of course, it is true that the Holy Father has also made provision for Anglicans who are far less close to us than is the TAC. But I cannot see it as bad that they move closer to us. Some will become good Catholics; others will be no better--or worse--than Novus Ordo conciliarists.

2. On the Society: Realistically, what Fellay will likely do is thank the Pope after H.H. publicly recognises that all Society Sacraments are licit and valid. Full Stop. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Then the talks will continue for, say, twenty years. Then the S.S.P.X, once Rome has been more converted, will accept a temporary and provisional personal ordinariate. Then another fifteen years will pass. Once Rome is fully converted back to the Faith, Fellay's successor will make it permanent. By that time, the N.O. will have to be consigned to the trashcan. Everything has its place. Eventually, we can simply put Catholic bishops back into Catholic dioceses.

3. Today is a day of celebration. These traditional Anglicans are very close to us and they are about to become closer. I know for a fact that S.S.P.X priests have good relations with them. I know of case in which they have borrowed one another's vestments in a pinch. As Americans might say, Chill, dude.

P.K.T.P.

Paul Haley said...

John McFarland,

I said only that I believed we had not heard the last on this matter of the SSPX from Pope Benedict XVI and that I believed he would not leave Faithful attached to the SSPX in canonical limbo with their priests and bishops suspended a divinis. It's inconceivable to me that he wants unity with Anglicans but not with the SSPX.

The real question is what will the SSPX do if the Pope grants them canonical status and faculties. Will they refuse them? Will they say, no thanks, Holy Father, we prefer to stay in our present condition until you convert to the Catholic Faith? Methinks not but I could be wrong.

John McFarland said...

Mr. Perkins,

If they're so traditional, why are they still Anglicans?

In particular, the creation of their communion obviously requires belief in the validity of Anglican orders. I feel confident that the Vatican will not require their re-ordination. Is that all right with you? Is it good enough that they THINK they're Catholic?

Sincere Anglo-Catholicism is an exercise in self-delusion. The Vatican's scheme is going to solidify them in that delusion. Do you really think that such folks are likely allies of the SSPX?

Mother of God, Seat of Wisdom, pray for us.

John McFarland said...

Mr. Haley,

The traditional Anglicans have not been handed a blank check. The idea has been floated; the deal has yet to be worked out.

Do you think that the deal will be: well, you're all now in full communion, and you have your prelate(s), please do keep in touch?

An unconverted Vatican must necessarily break them to halter. Why would it do anything else?

You are indeed right that this will be the Vatican's template for the SSPX. But the Vatican template has been the same right along; accept V2. The SSPX will not accept it, unless they are selling out.

As I've noted before: the jurisdiction impediments to the SSPX is not the SSPX's issue; it is not the Vatican's issue; it is the issue of you and likeminded souls who mistake wishful thinking for reality.

The Vatican is not going to write the SSPX a blank check, and the SSPX, God willing, will not accept any check that the Vatican IS willing to write the Society.

Anonymous said...

A great day for God and His Church. Deo Gratias and welcome home to our separated brethren.

Mr. McFarland, please revisit the Church's teachings on Love, Hope, and Charity.

Anonymous said...

Mr. McFarland writes:

If they're so traditional, why are they still Anglicans?



Look, McFarland, they were born that way and they have not been graced with direction from the Catholic Church. You can judge them if you will. I'd rather not. I never claimed that they are perfectly traditional, only that they are much like us and getting closer. Will that work for you? Good grief. I suggest a new mattress. You really got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

I am willing to bet you that, once fully catechised, they'll be a hell of a lot more Catholic than 99% of the others.

Get real.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

McFarland gets it all wrong yet again:

"In particular, the creation of their communion obviously requires belief in the validity of Anglican orders. I feel confident that the Vatican will not require their re-ordination. Is that all right with you? Is it good enough that they THINK they're Catholic?"

Your confidence is totally misplaced. The Vatican definitely WILL require their ordination and this has already been agreed to. The only q. is whether it will be conditional or absolute. Owing to the large number of them and the difficulty of making distinctions, Rome might make an exception in favour of conditional ordination. But they will have to be ordained. Some of them do not qualify (impediments) and will only be admitted as laics.

Where do you get your 'confidence' from? I've been in close contact with some of them over the last decade or so. Trust me: they WILL have to be ordained. Not re-ordained, but properly ordained.

As for their past belief in valid orders, it was correct in most cases because they got around Apostolicæ Curæ decades ago and included Old Catholic bishops for their ordinations. But I'd rather not go into this. Be happy for once.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

There is only one thing worse than Talmudic Judaism -- and that's Talmudic Catholicism, which, ultimately, is what "Traditional Catholicism" has devolved into. The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) signed the Catechism and humbly approached Rome to consider their appeal for some form of reunification.

In their apologetics materials, the SSPX questions whether the Catechism of the Catholic Church is Catholic. By signing the Catechism and agreeing to its contents, the bishops of the TAC have demonstrated more sensus fidei than the SSPX have. The SSPX is attempting to "teach" the Church. This is ironic, since it is The Church that teaches; it is not taught. The dual charisms of indefectibility and infallibility belong to the Bishop of Rome and the See of Rome. That's Vatican I. That's de fide. Catholics don't have the freedom to believe otherwise. This is not legal positivism for the puerile-minded as some erroneously and arrogantly contend. In other words, the dual charisms of indefectibility and infallibility do not rest with any particular Archbishop or his illicit ordinands, nor do they rest with with any particular apparition. Moreover, one cannot make a distinction between pastoral versus dogmatic pronouncements as a basis for disobedience to divinely-instituted authority.

"How shall they preach unless they be sent." Indeed, who sent Archbishop Lefebvre? Who sent the SPPX? Despite their self-professed superior knowledge of the faith, the SSPX clergy don't know enough about rudimentary sacramental theology to acknowledge that jurisdiction can't be separated so easily from sacramental validity. We won't even begin to discuss the charismatic liturgical tendencies in the SSPX milieu (if they have an internal, subjective reaction to a particular rite, that reaction informs their subjective argumentation to determine the rite's validity or invalidity). And these are the theological heavyweights that are going to teach Rome?

In light of the glorious news of the day, it would serve Traditional Catholics well to review Newman's "On the Development of Christian Doctrine." Having done so, the Traditional Catholics -- if they are not of ill will -- will hopefully begin to see that Dignitatis Humanae satisfies all of Newman's criteria for valid doctrinal development.

Moreover, it would also help Traditional Catholics to remember that St. Pius V established a legal precedence (more appropriately, he utilized a theretofore unused power) for mandating and imposing a liturgy on the entire Western Church. The character of the Pauline reforms was different, but the abstract principle was the same. In other words, one can't say Paul VI overstepped his bounds without admitting that Pius V did the same when he restricted and suppressed all the other Western rites except the Tridentine Rite when he mandated its use on the entire Western Church.

Anonymous said...

McFarland asks:

"Do you really think that such folks are likely allies of the SSPX? "

Definitely, but much less today than they will be a decade from now. They will grow in the faith once they are part of the Mystical Bride. Have some compassion, Mr. McFarland. Their ancestors did horrible things to torture the true Christans, the Catholic martyrs. This is spiritual contagion and they are the victims of it, not the Catholic recusants who now reign in glory.

Get compassion. Get humility and charity.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Haley asks:

"The real question is what will the SSPX do if the Pope grants them canonical status and faculties. Will they refuse them? Will they say, no thanks, Holy Father, we prefer to stay in our present condition until you convert to the Catholic Faith? Methinks not but I could be wrong."

To be realistic, Mr. Haley, the Pope will likely grant public recognition that the Society already and has always had faculties owing to an honest belief in an emergency. Unfortunately, I don't think that the Pope can do more: the Society is not ready to accept a structure, even provisioinally.

We must not let today's events blind us. It remains the case that Conciliar Rome needs to be converted to the Catholic Faith, not the Society to conciliarism. It is the Society's divine mission to restore the Catholic Faith in Rome. This will take time. However, the Pope does sit in Moses' chair and can grant recognition. This, I think, is the most he can or should do under present circumstances.

The real question is whether or not the Society should grant recognition to the New World Church of the Age of Aquarius, and its Freemasonic Protestant liturgy. The answer is negative. It would militate against charity to accept the reforms. All Catholics deserve tradition.

There is hope for a papal recognition of the Society's faculties but that is all we can hope for right now. It will take many years, even decades, to go further. The Society has no right to risk the Faith by acting precipitously.

P.K.T.P.

Paul Haley said...

An unconverted Vatican must necessarily break them to halter. Why would it do anything else?

I would not say the entire Vatican is unconverted because I know for a fact that statement is false. By the Vatican I presume you mean Pope Benedict XVI which, following your thought process, has left the Faith and needs to be converted back to the Faith. That being the case he has lost the papacy and is an impostor Pope. That is not the position of the SSPX but is the position of the sedevacantists which I presume you are not.

As I've noted before: the jurisdiction impediments to the SSPX is not the SSPX's issue; it is not the Vatican's issue; it is the issue of you and likeminded souls who mistake wishful thinking for reality.

So, I mistake wishful thinking for reality, eh? Is it wishful thinking to suggest that Pope Benedict XVI might want to cure the doubt in the minds of many concerning the ministry of SSPX bishops and priests? Or, that he might want to use the SSPX clergy as the vanguard for restoration of Tradition in the modernist church?

Look, my friend, he is either the Pope or he is not and if he is, then he has the authority to act in the manner I have described and you can call it wishful thinking if you want but I'll call it pastoral necessity -- action taken for the salvation of souls.

lome said...

This call for "patience in Charity"?
Wait till the Vatican restores the true worship (Latin Mass and all the old setting of the Church back before Vatican 2.)
Wait till the Vatican put the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel (The guardian of God's people back in the Church.
Wait till the Holy Spirit really convicts them of the offenses suffered by the Church even among her own.
God is Gathering the "many" and not the "all" who are calling him LORD, LORD; For Christ blood doesn't cover the unrepentant sinners and the Damned.

Jordanes said...

November 19th is the feast day of Saint Paul of the Cross in the General Roman Calendar.

No, it's October 19, not November.