Rorate Caeli

Rome-SSPX: Holy See Press Office communiqué regarding the response sent by the Society of St. Pius X [Updated, 1600, 2100, 2300 GMT]

Palace of the Holy Office, Rome - cloister

Vatican City, 16 May 2012 (VIS) - Early this afternoon, the Holy See Press Office issued the following communique regarding the Society of St. Pius X:

"As reported by news agencies, today, 16 May 2012, an Ordinary Session of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith met to discuss the question of the Society of St. Pius X.

"In particular, the text of the response of Bishop Bernard Fellay, received on 17 April, 2012, was examined and some observations, which will be considered in further discussions between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X, were formulated.

"Regarding the positions taken by the other three bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, their situations will have to be dealt with separately and singularly".

Father Lombardi, Holy See spokesman, added the following according to the report by La Stampa's Vatican Insider (Italian):
Answering the journalists, the Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, explained that the conclusion of the negotiations "is not a question, as it might seem, for a very short time", and he added, "it is premature to say when it will be concluded."

It is not clear, however, in what level will the discussions go on: considered the fact that the last word belongs in any event to Pope Benedict XVI, "it is not said that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith or the Pontifical Commission 'Ecclesia Dei' ... are done with their task."

____________________________________

[Update - Andrea Tornielli - 1600 GMT:] 
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith examined Fellay’s latest reply and the positions of the Society of St. Pius X. In the next few days the Congregation’s report will reach the pope.

 Does what happened this morning during the meeting of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith represent a stumble in the journey of negotiation with the Society of St. Pius X? Apparently not, even though the path seems full of new obstacles each day. The cardinals of the Congregation were struck by the publication of the correspondence between Mgr. Fellay and three other bishops.

The members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who usually meet on a Wednesday, otherwise known as Feria Quarta, decided to extract the opinions of the three which will be dealt with “individually and separately”. In those letters the bishops clearly put on paper their belief that “it is impossible to come to an agreement with the Rome of today” because after “The Second Vatican Council the Church’s official authorities broke apart from the Catholic truth”. The publication of the letters, probably orchestrated by someone opposed to the return to full communion with Rome, caused repercussions.

 In this morning’s meeting Fellay’s requests for explanations and the changes to the final ‘doctrinal preamble’ were discussed. Some cardinals, who preferred the text as originally drafted by the Congregation, expressed their worries and gave their votes conditionally. The result of this complex discussion will probably be given to Benedict XVI the day after tomorrow by cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation. The body’s judgment is not binding, the pope will be able to examine each member’s opinion and decide freely.


The cardinals’ considerations will be passed onto Fellay for the preparation of the final text of the ‘doctrinal preamble’. Once signed, the Superior of the Society of Pius X and the priests who will follow him will officially be reunited with the Catholic Church. The ratification might be imminent even though there are still obstacles to overcome. It will take time before the pope’s final decision is announced. In the last hours  a story began to spread. According to this rumour, Benedict XVI already knew of the requests for changes to the ‘doctrinal preamble’ and apparently Fellay himself sent them to the pope unofficially. This supposed informal contact would have reassured the Lefebvrian leader of Ratzinger’s support in essence and would have been the reason behind Fellay’s recent public and private declarations, in which the bishop mentioned more than once the importance of the appeal to the pope.
____________________________________

[Update - note:] So what does the more obscure part of the Holy See Press Office communiqué mean? This is a brief comment, provided at Le Forum Catholique:
Rome cannot ignore what everyone knows. When Rome found out, after the fact, the public declarations of one of the bishops, following the lifting of excommunications, they were embarrassed. What happened once cannot happen twice.

Therefore, the provocations of one bishop and the violation of ordinary secrecy, with an intent to cause harm, by a cleric of the SSPX cannot be without consequence, and Rome can do nothing else but be careful.
____________________________________


[Update - 2100 GMT] Other news notes before the end of the day: 1. From the semi-official daily of the French episcopate, La Croix:
According to a Roman source, the modifications that were asked [to the text of the preamble], simple rewriting advices, should not be an obstacle and could open the way for a reintegration of the SSPX in the Church by way of a Personal Prelature.
2. From Italian news agency Asca - declaration by Card. Koch following a Conference on Nostra Aetate held at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum):
"The debate with the Society of Saint Pius X is in progress and moves forward. We must prepare ourselves for what the Pope's decision will be."
____________________________________


[Update - 2300 GMT] Communiqué of the Superior of the Italian District of the Society of St. Pius X, Fr. Pierpaolo Maria Petrucci:
Divide et impera

Dear friends, 

As you are aware, the Society of Saint Pius X is going through a difficult period. Following the grave and immoral publication of private letters between three bishops and the General Council led by our superior, Bp. Fellay, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, made public today (May 16) a press communique. In the text, on the one hand, the will is displayed of moving forward in "further discussions between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X", on the other, it is affirmed, in reference to the letter of the three bishops, that, "regarding the positions taken by the other three bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, their situations will have to be dealt with separately and singularly".

This way of action clearly manifests the intention of dividing our Priestly Society in its highest representatives. For this reason, we invite all the friends and faithful to intensify their prayers and, in particular, the Holy Rosary, in the Crusade called by our Superior, so that the Society of Saint Pius X may remain united in the battle against the errors infiltrated in the Church.

Fr. Pierpaolo Maria Petrucci
District Superior

[P.S.] We invite you to read anew the Letter to Friends and Benefactors n. 79, in which Bp. Fellay denounces the grave errors present within the Church and, at the same time, launches the Rosary Crusade that will be concluded on Pentecost, explaining its intentions. [Source, in Italian]

72 comments:

Edward said...

If the Holy Father wants to deal with each bishop separately i believe their will be no agreement. So it seems to be down to 2 choices , no deal, or a deal with Bishop Fellay and the SSPX divides into 2 camps.

Peter said...

Fr. Frederico Lombardi, answering journalist questions, said : "It is pemature to say when it will be concluded."

Well, he would say that, wouldn't he ? But we have aleady been told the Holy Father will announce his decision before the end of May.

someone said...

yes, it is funny that we have been already told about the end of May. I suppose, but really I don't know, that the Holy Father may say "yes" to bishop Fellay's response. Than it will be a quastion about other three bishops, if they go with Fellay or no, but for me it would be strange if nothing more said before the end of May. Yes, the letters of three bishops might change the matter a bit, but bishop Fellay had probably knew the opposition before and Congregation too, hadn't they?

We must pray to the Holy Ghost for the Pope Benedict XVI!! Pray and fast!

NewCatholic, do you know something more about today strange situation? Shall we listen Fr. Lombardi or rather Card. Levada who has told that he is meeting with the Holy Father tomorrow and than the Holy Father will decide. In my opinion Card. Levada knows better, because he was at the meeting of CDF and Fr. Lombardi wasn't there.

someone said...

"a decision by the Pope is expected regarding this response which could be taken towards mid-May, after which other meetings with the Fraternity will be possible"

It has been already told here: http://affaritaliani.libero.it/politica/vaticano-lefevriani-a-un-passo200412.html on 20th April;

so, I think- the Pope's decision and than meetings regardings the details of the canonical structure. Is it possible, NewCatholic? What do you think?

Cruise the Groove. said...

...the end of May 2013.

There does not seem there will be any change in the Societys situation for a very long time.

Gratias said...

Pray that the discussions about the Preamble are concluded in a short time. After that there will be lengthy negotiations about the type of personal prelature. Pray that Benedict XVI enjoys a long life. Rorate Caeli remain at the interface of Una Voce, FSSP and SSPX for a long time.

john said...

Bishop Fellay may have informed the Pope that the 4 bishops do not all see the Preamble in the same light. This is what may end up putting a spanner in their spokes, because if the other 3 will not adopt Bishop Fellay's position, the Church cannot give the entire SSPX a single canonical structure, but would have to instead approve of Bishop Fellay and the Districts in communion with him.

Hilltop said...

It may be possible that one, two or all 3 Bishops penned the letter as they said "in Charity" to + Fellay offering their counsel to him and that is all. Though strongly worded, their letter did not threaten their departures from the FSSPX. Thus, I hold out hope for one, two or all of them, in the event that matters are decided against their advice to + Fellay, that they might humbly and charitably submit to their Superior's decision.

Thus I believe that the spokesman's statement of dealing with the 3 bishops separately is both premature and injudicious. It also appears that in his statements today he is speaking for the CDF and not for the Pontiff which would seem to natural given the statemants' timing so soon after the meeting.

Spaceman said...

Sounds like three uniquely tailored decrees of excommunication to me. I bet Cardinal Burke is working on them already.

Hidden One said...

One day I shall wake up to news of reconciliation. I look forward to it.

Anil Wang said...

While all of us want a quick resolution to all issues and full information on all developments as they happen, that's not the way the Vatican, or real life works for that matter. All pressure does is slow down the process.

Give the Vatican and the SSPX time. Even if the response is yes, it'll take at least a year before all the details are worked out, and all members of the SSPX will have to decide if they want to follow the SSPX into full union or go into schism or join the sedevacantists.

In the mean time, please be patient and continue to pray. All involved will need it, regardless of the resolution.

Zak said...

Rome has lost the Faith. That is what is being made clear right now.

The words of Christ:

"But you, Peter, I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not."

Our Lady of LaSalette never said that Peter would lose the Faith!

Have faith in the words of Christ you in the Society of St. Pius X who may doubt this pope!

We were so spoiled by the magnificent strength of popes like St. Pius X and St. Pius V that we seem to have forgotten the weaknesses of Peter as well...

PRAY FOR THE MAN WHO SITS IN THE CHAIR TODAY!

And consign the demon of sedevacantism and the demon of fraternal discord to Hell in the of Christ that you may pray for the pope of today with your whole heart!

--Zak

P.K.T.P. said...

We must look at these statements very carefully, ladies and gentlemen. They are saying that this matter will not be resolved for some time. Well, we knew that, since there must be a second phase of the disussions in which a canonical form is determined. The "observations" which will require further discussion with the S.S.P.X could refer to recent comments made by Bishop Fellay about provisions needed to protect the S.S.P.X's freedom to discuss doctrine.

Notice how the statement does not say if Fellay's statement on "principles and criteria" was deemed to be adequate. Notice also, however, that nowhere is it said to be insufficient.

What we do learn from this statement is that all three of the other bishops have been separated from Bishop Fellay and the S.S.P.X which, in law, he controls. So the other three, at least in Rome's view are now separated both from Fellay and from the S.S.P.X. In itself, this is negative, as a united front among the other three benefits the position of Bishop Williamson.

It remains possible that the Pope will approve Bishop Fellay's statement as adequate 'with certain observations and certain reservations'. That is what I expect. More time will be needed more carefully to define the scope of the freedom afforded the S.S.P.X to question doctrine openly. After that, a canonical form will need to be considered.

Overall, however, the lack of a definite response here does not bode well. The C.D.F. should consider that any delay in SOME positive agreement could throw Fellay back into the arms of the other three and end all hope of an agreement.

I'm presuming that the Pope will now review the dossiers of each at this meeting.

P.K.T.P.

Prof. Basto said...

Shouldn't the Dicastery report their findings to the Pope, before reporting them to the world?

How can the Congregation know that there will need to be separate discussions with the Bishops, if the Pope's pleasure in this regard has not been ascertained?

It seems to me that the ingenuity of those who are against a reconciliation is behind the terms of this communiqué.

I would be very glad if someone could show me that I have no reason to fear, and that I'm wrong.

disturbed said...

"Regarding the positions taken by the other three bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, their situations will have to be dealt with separately and singularly".

This is certainly a strange and ominous comment; and, possibly, an indication that the leakers actions are on the way to bearing their intended fruit.

Ceolfrid said...

Looks to me like the CDF is playing for time, and this is a time-critical issue: the Holy Father is not a young man...

P.K.T.P. said...

Notice how difficult it is for Conciliar Rome to 'include' the S.S.P.X as Catholic. Meanwhile, the balloon Masses continue and the delegates of Satan are allowed to serve even as parish priests in such places as Montreal and its environs, with the strong encouragement of our bishops. Meanwhile, these same bishops--a considerable number of them--labour hard each day to destroy the Church from within. One must admire their dedication.

Here we see an attempt by elements in the C.D.F. to discourage an agreement with the S.S.P.X while, at the same time, announcing with satisfaction that the other three bishops must be isolated from the S.S.P.X as a group and then separated each from the others. This is standard 'divide and conquer' strategy. If it backfires, however, a united S.S.P.X could walk away from the table. That is what Levada is hoping for.

The real problem here is how the Pope will deal with Levada and the liberals. Is the liberals' theological position "sufficient" or does it place them beyond communion with the Holy See? Can we say that Levada remains Catholic but with certain reservations and observations? What scope should Levada and the liberals be afforded to continue elaborating teachings which are foreign to the Deposit of Faith? Are liberals' teachings compatible with the Faith? Do they, at certain points, contradict it directly? These are difficult matters which must be considered in due course. Until a successful conclusion has been reached in their regard, liberal prelates will need at least to be suspended from their offices pending investigations on suspicion of heresy.

P.K.T.P.

Cruise the Groove. said...

Meanwhile while we wait, souls continue to be in jeopardy because the Society cannot validly absolve sins or witness marriages.
I pray the Holy Father remedys this situation tomorrow.

P.K.T.P. said...

I note that, despite all the 'concerns' of these officials in the C.D.F., not only the findings of the whole but the opinions of each voting member will be forwarded to the Holy Father for his determination.

Notice also that there is no indication here that Bishop Fellay's letter was deemed to be insufficient on the main matter being decided, which is the "priniciples and criteria" for interpreting Vatican II. Presumably, then the vote was positive but with some major reservations and perhaps by a close margin.

This looks to me like a positive vote which the C.D.F. is trying to 'cool'. That is meant to keep Rome's bargaining position strong and to allay fears of powerful liberal interests in and beyond the Church.

The major surprise here regards how the other three bishops will be dealt with. Should this not be an internal matter in the S.S.P.X? The statement points to a probability that Bishop Fellay is no longer able to deal with the other three and that an agreement between them and him is no longer possible. This is something the C.D.F. wants us to know: DIVISION in the S.S.P.X!

I would have thought that the C.D.F. would have wanted to keep any such division private until a final decision had been taken on the principles and criteria, a decision from the Pope.

P.K.T.P.

Alan Aversa said...

It seems Bp. Fellay is more patient that Abp. Lefebvre…

Janet Baker said...

I would like to relate (for the second time here) what our SSPX pastor told us three weeks ago: that the Vatican would need some face-saving condition, and that we (traditionalists/SSPX) should be accepting of that. He did not elaborate. Yesterday on another blog there was a discussion of 'penance' for SSPX, with a great out-cry, but I can see that for the sake of unity, to man the ramparts together tomorrow, as it were, the men I know in SSPX would suffer much for that cause. Whatever it took to strengthen the papacy, and also whatever it took to get the right deal. The sweetest deal is the one SSPX needs to continue its work. I think Father meant there would have to be some counter-balancing sacrifice, that they had discussed the possibility, and that it was okay. The separate accomodations to those three bishops who have so strongly stated the case for caution may take the hit, and they may take it voluntarily and willingly.

Tim said...

P.K.T.P., stop spreading your theories.

There are absolutely no provisions in the SSPX statutes to depose Msgr. Fellay, as his mandate will last for another 6 years.

There is no option to end Fellay's rule as Superior General just due to the fact armchair analyst P.K.T.P. feels this might be the case. Please stop as you just keep on confusing the readers and spreading panic...

New Catholic said...

Tim is absolutely correct.

Kathleen said...

There is no bad news here.

Given the wretched scene created by gossips elsewhere, there had to be some acknowledgement of that complication.

And intentionally dampening hopes for speedy results is just a standard move.

So all in all this is ok.

Given the wretched behavior we've seen elsewhere it could have been far worse.

The minefield Bishop Fellay must cross only gets worse, yet it hasn't blown up yet.

Thanks be to God.

We need to pray harder.

Fr. A said...

Many Modernists love to use the mass media to create news (and shape public opinion) instead of to report it. If one reads the "Rhine Flows into the Tiber" one will see that they were very adept at doing just so during the time surrounding Vatican II.
I am admitedly speculating but I suspect that Modernists in the Secretariat of State and the CDF went to the mass media with their comments in order to run an interference on the Pope's plans. They know that the Holy Father would not normally want to appear to distance himself publicly from what Curial offices are saying and so given today's conferences the Pope would be pressurred to slow down the regularization of the FSSPX and start to deal seperately with each Fraternity bishop. The Modernists are cunning. However, while we can become demoralized by once again being reminded of how many Modernists are running the institutional Church we can also opt for redoubling our efforts of prayer, penance, and work to combat their stranglehold on the Faith. May the Lord and our Lady now more than ever strengthen the Holy Father, Bishop Fellay, and the rest of the Fraternity bishops in their efforts to advance Catholic Tradition.

Irony said...

P.K.T.P. said - "What we do learn from this statement is that all three of the other bishops have been separated from Bishop Fellay and the S.S.P.X which, in law, he controls. So the other three, at least in Rome's view are now separated both from Fellay and from the S.S.P.X. In itself, this is negative, as a united front among the other three benefits the position of Bishop Williamson."

Did it ever occur to you that this is not the doing of Rome BUT the other three bishops, themselves. The release of the 'Letter' and the various releases from Bishop Williamson seem to indicate the three have separated themselves. Perhaps that was their word to Bishop Fellay and perhaps he conveyed that.

Also note worthily is that they are to be dealt with individually indicates that the 'hold-ups' may be different for each. This would also go along with what was said in Bishop Fellay's responding letter to the 'Three'.

Cruise the Groove. said...

So if signed the ratification could be imminent?
Or
"It will take Pope Benedict XVI some time to come to a decision?"

Whish is it?

Elizabeth said...

Tim, thanks for saying just what I was thinking! Enough already ~ wait, pray, leave it to THEM and God.

Not only so much conjecture going on but as I read on another blog, the Church is not a democracy. Of course we have our opinions and wants but it's up to our dear shepherds and our Supreme Shepherd.

I say let's try to block out all this attempt at analyzing every little word spoken by whomever.

Francis said...

In my opinion Fr A hit the nail on the head. The modernists and the relativists in the CDF, and in the media are panicking and are trying to save face. While Satan and his minions are doing all that they can to derail this agreement I believe that the Holy Ghost will not let this happen.

Uncle Claibourne said...

This is why the accursed leaks (and leakers) are so damaging. The way this SHOULD have played out:

1) The three bishops express their objections to Bishop Fellay IN PRIVATE.

2) Bishop Fellay responds to the three IN PRIVATE.

3) They hopefully all align on a unified response IN PRIVATE. And the three decide whether or not they will obey their Superior.

Hopefully, #3 has happened, and they're now all on the same page. However, airing it all in public has caused incalculable harm.

And that's exactly what the leaker wanted. Absolutely shameful.

Enoch said...

Very good and wise post, Kathleen, at 17:28. Indeed, as you said, the minefield which Bp. Fellay must cross only gets worse, but it hasn't blown up yet. I agree, and surely it has something to do with the trust that he has placed in Our Lord and Our Lady, and also in the Holy Father. Our Lady and Our Lord will surely guide Bp. Fellay through it, and although he may be a bit bruised and worn out when all is said and done, it's obvious that he is NOT going to give up.

I also find it hopeful that the other SSPX bishops will be treated separately and individually. I think that this is an act of charity on Rome's part.

Blast said...

Hundreds of individuals writing thousands of comments day after day in blogs, forums, emails... spreading rumors, calumnies, conjectures, opinions... and nobody knows what is Bishop Fellay's proposed text or what is the Holy Father's precise request and offer.

P.K.T.P. said...

It would be good if the C.D.F. could actually consider implementing "Summorum Pontificum" to show the good faith of Rome. since late in 2008, the motu proprio has been almost ignored. As a result, there is no change in the number of dicoeses offering the Latin Mass. This is not what the S.S.P.X asked for: it asked for a freeing of celebrants. Instead, we get a freeze.

In regard to a deposition of Bishop Fellay, I was thinking more of a de facto split.

P.K.T.P.

JMJ Ora Pro Nobis said...

If Rome tries to make an agreement with fellay excluding the other bishops, things could get ugly and a split would be almost inevitable. As for the leaker, again I think people are jumping to conclusions.

john said...

Conclusion: the whole business could have been a done deal, but that segment of the SSPX that refuses to return has sabotaged the deal, at least temporarily. Hopefully, the pope will choose to frustrate such an evil desire, and negate that evil act of the leak by approving quickly of Fellay. On the other hand, the other 3 bishops do not really deserve the confidence of the pope the way Bishop Fellay does, so maybe a one-by-one approach is best anyway.

Matt said...

For a long time now I've thought Lombardi doesn't have a clue to what he is doing. How did he land the job and what credentials does he bring? He has never given an articulate or succint statement to any subject the Press Office discusses. When the media asks for clarification on whatever, Lombardi just babbles along and that's it. A real journalist would follow up, but not the ones covering the Vatican.

Is there no meeting in which Lombardi is debriefed on the goings-on of the Vatican, or any official communiques from the various Dicasteries on what they officially want said about what they're doing? This is why information out of that Press Office is chaotic and confusing. Day and night compared to Navarro-Valls.

Matt

Kathleen said...

Uncle Claibourne,

Exactly.

Just add those forums, and their participants, that gleefully went into a feeding frenzy about it. They have been frothing at the mouth, but at a low simmer, all along -- this was their big opportunity.

And Fr. A is correct about the opponents on the other side.

But -- it hasn't all blown up yet.

The updates confirm that.

Which is a huge blessing in the face of all this and we need to offer proper thanks to God.

And pray harder.

Chris said...

Mr. Perkins,

I for one appreciate your commentary ... which is after all only contextual analysis and speculation.

Even if reasonable people arrive at different speculations, your analysis is always insightful.

CL

A. M. D. G. said...

Whether you agree with the three bishops or Bishop Fellay it would seem that the CDF is trying to change the rules of the"negotiations" at the last minute. Aren't the other bishops members of the SSPX too? How does the CDF know the opinion of each and every SSPX priest?

In reality, who can blame the CDF for not wanting a bunch of trads in their modernist hen house?

Athanasius said...

There needs to be a little more reflection. I have a hard time believing that Rome has not been inquiring about other bishops throughout this process, given the Williamson affair. The communique does not necessarily mean Rome was unaware of some disagreement of the other three, although they likely would interpret the letter of the three more dramatically than it should.
The wider issue is what the role of the bishops or any bishops be in the Society if a reconciliation comes about, and when they say "individually" it shows they are aware that each of the three bishops have different views and different reasons for expressing their caution, knowledge which no doubt comes from Fellay. I don't see that as anything alarming, a bishop is in a higher state of orders than a priest even if he is a member of a clerical fraternity. It just seems to me as something which is apart of the process and we shouldn't read any more into it. Recall we swallowed the media line of a "deadline" with Fellay's response, which turned out to not be the case. It was read into the Holy See communique. Likewise here, it is another wait and see.

P.K.T.P. said...

Notice that they avoided saying here what the majority of the voting members opined. Did a majority vote simply to accept Fellay's position? Did a majority favour it but only with conditions? Did some vote against it unconditionally? This tells us as much about what did not happen as it tells us what did happen.

So, now, a new new new new Preamble will be prepared for Fellay's consideration. When will this process end?

It looks positive to me on the whole as regards Fellay and the S.S.P.X which he and his assistants govern. There seems to be a willingness for an acceptance of Fellay's position but with attached concerns and reservations. The best news is simply what is not being said. It is not being said that Fellay's statement was "insufficient". Perhaps a majority of the cardinals found that to be the case, perhaps not. They want to leave this to the Pope so that it does not appear as if the Pope is overruling any particular cardinal or agreeing entirely with any one in particular.

I am actually cheered by this news. In the matter of the other three bishops, I fear a rebellion. This is why Rome wants to isolate them from one another and deal with each in turn. The curia recognises, no doubt, that Williamson, in particular, needs to be separated from the others.

P.K.T.P.

Marty Jude said...

Blast said...
"Hundreds of individuals writing thousands of comments day after day in blogs, forums, emails... spreading rumors, calumnies, conjectures, opinions... and nobody knows what is Bishop Fellay's proposed text or what is the Holy Father's precise request and offer."

Precisely!!! We do not know the details and those that do have kept stom [apologies if that's incorrect spelling]... thus far!

However, it makes me wonder if this is a perfect oppotunity to 'deal with' Williamson, who is a square-peg-in-a-round hole and not exactly popular with the SSPX faithful.

We can only Hope and Pray

Marty Jude said...

I'm wondering about the need to assess each of the Bishop's situations. Perhaps [besides the dreadful publicization of Bishop Fellay's reply to his brother bishops] there is a need to regularize them as bishops, whereas the priests are subject to their Superior General? Anyone know of any precedent[s]?

New Catholic said...

Fr. Skeptico: are you really a priest? Are you a member of a Traditional institute? If you are, get informed. If not, you have no idea what you are talking about - each one of us has a job, do yours properly and let us do ours.

spikey said...

Lombardi has NEVER told the truth about anything, so this all looks like good news

Floreat said...

"...If Rome tries to make an agreement with fellay excluding the other bishops, things could get ugly and a split would be almost inevitable. As for the leaker, again I think people are jumping to conclusions...."

JMJ: There will likely be a split anyway.

The leak was made with the deliberate intent of sabotaging negotiations and those involved are known, both to Menzingen and to the Vatican.

If a deal goes ahead, those individuals will likely be excluded, or will exclude themselves from it.

If a deal does not go ahead, the marks left by the appalling behaviour of the SSPX's "hardline" contingent have done serious damage to the unity and cohesion of the Society.

There will be those within the Society who will no longer wish to associate themselves with the individuals concerned, or their behaviour.

Pride, disloyalty and the rebellious spirit of revolution have done their work, as was fully intended.

Pilgrim said...

"Therefore, the provocations of one bishop and the violation of ordinary secrecy, with an intent to cause harm, by a cleric of the SSPX cannot be without consequence, and Rome can do nothing else but be careful."

A reconciliation would do more to solve that problem than caution will do.

Garrett said...

I see the Holy Spirit in all of this. Perhaps, in the end, it is for the greater good that Bishop Williamson and the other hardline bishops do not enter into the agreement; the unavoidable flack from the media and the resulting damage done to the Catholic Church's reputation by accepting back into its fold the hardest-core elements of the SSPX, along with the "anti-Semitism" expressed by Bishop Williamson, would be avoided.

Perhaps then the Society can move more freely and less conspicuously to fulfill its mission in the Church.

John McFarland said...

None of these alarums and excursions are of any signficance if it is true that the Holy Father is ready to make a decision, as Bishop Fellay has been told that he is.

If that decision involves a declaration that the SSPX is in full communion, then we have the no-strings offer that the Society will accept. The subsequent status negotiations should go smoothly; and if they don't, it won't matter much. The SSPX will have a battle on its hands with the hostile and the indifferent Novus Ordo forces whether or not it has a settled canonical status to appeal to. But it will no longer be possible that argue that it is fighting from outside the Church.

I myself find it difficult to believe that anything but an upfront declaration of full communion would serve much purpose. If a declaration of full communion is conditioned on settling status, then the focus of tradition's enemies will shift to dragging the negotiations out, by fair means or foul, until the Pope dies.

Furthermore, I find it equally difficult to believe that the Holy Father doesn't understand this.

P.S. I don't see the three bishops as a real issue. Regularizing the Society wouldn't be a possibility if the Holy Father believed that the differences between conciliar teaching and that of the SSPX mattered a great deal. So if the Holy Father does regularize the Society, and the three bishops are content to stay in the Society, I don't see why the Holy Father wouldn't be content to let them stay.

P.K.T.P. said...

Irony writes of my analysis:

"Did it ever occur to you that this is not the doing of Rome BUT the other three bishops, themselves. The release of the 'Letter' and the various releases from Bishop Williamson seem to indicate the three have separated themselves. Perhaps that was their word to Bishop Fellay and perhaps he conveyed that"

Did it ever occur to you that I never suggested otherwise? I didn't suggest in my post that this division was the work of Rome at all.

P.K.T.P.

Marty Jude said...

If Bishop Williamson tow's the line, how long will it be before he gets himself into trouble by saying something embarrasing at best, outrageous, or downright offensive at worst?!

Not long, I suspect. Seems he cannot, or will not be tamed. Perhaps he has an issue with authority, in which case, let him go, and declare himself 'Pope' !
He spoils himself by being such a liability and makes life difficult for others in the process.

Tissier and Galaretta should know better...

God bless and guide them all. Miserere nobis

Bartholomew said...

I can think of no other reason for the revelation by the CDF participants that they will be dealing with the other three SSPX bishops "separately and singularly" than a desire to make this process more difficult and cause as much disarray as possible within the SSPX. They would be very satisfied to have no more than a husk of the SSPX reconciled.

Brian said...

According to John McFarland,

None of these alarums and excursions are of any signficance if it is true that the Holy Father is ready to make a decision, as Bishop Fellay has been told that he is.

If that decision involves a declaration that the SSPX is in full communion, then we have the no-strings offer that the Society will accept.


Indeed, "If that decision involves a declaration that the SSPX is in full communion, then we have the no-strings offer that the Society will accept."

On that two-letter word "if" hangs the balance of success or failure. I pray that our Holy Father settles the dust and turmoil by declaring that the SSPX is fully Catholic with valid and licit sacraments.

Then the process of healing and trust-building can begin while the long work of settling a canonical status is slowly worked out.

I cannot imagine any SSPX priest or bishop refusing such a just and generous declaration from our Holy Father, who would thereby prove himself to be a true Papa.

Peterman said...

if part of the SSPX doesn't enter into the agreement and splinters off into their own sect, do they really believe that the Church will stll be chasing after them in hopes of a reconciliation? Or perhaps they desire to be alone off by themselves somewhere?

One thing I'm sure of, if a group splinters off, nobody within the Church will give a flip about them nor give them any credibility. They'll just be another protesting church of the bizarro, sect which you find on every other block in the US.

JWDT said...

I find it interesting that all point the finger at H.E. Williamson...it is my understanding that if those of us in the English speaking world understood or read Spanish...we would be shocked by what H.E. Gallareta writes on subjects.

My point is, let us PRAY and not make haste decisions/judgements on these men.

Hidden One said...

Multae sententiae, paucae preces.

The Ascension Angels' advocate said...

Just YESTERDAY, Rev. Fr. Rostand's letter said he was "regularly and recently in contact with His Excellency Bishop Fellay and other superiors of the Society". He then stated: "DO NOT BE DISTURBED BY MEDIA REPORTS, which may PREMATURELY, and WITHOUT SUFFICIENT INFORMATION, prophesy many things."

Pax Christi. Divine Providence gave these words to bestow transcendent peace to His children.

Now, Divine Providence uses the additional letter of the District Superior of Italy as an instrument to focus us back with intensity to our prayers after the somewhat "pandemonium" of the press releases.

Surrounded by the Ascension Angels who spoke to the Apostles, LOOK UP to Christ Our King upon the Throne of the Lamb on His Feast of the Ascension. Enjoy the time of prayer before His Throne where He Reigns Triumphantly - forever. And while you visit with the Sovereign Head of the Church, ask Him to have Mercy on the Holy Father, Bishop Fellay, the other Apostolic Bishops and all the SSPX. Then may the Ascension Angels encourage all to live in the peace only found in the Will of the Holy Trinity through dedication to our duty of state throughout the rest of this "little while of exile."

"The sign of the Cross is the opening of the Heavenly Gates for those who truly pray."

"Veni Sancte Spiritus"

Alan Aversa said...

Card. Koch is trying to cut off all criticism of Nostra Ætate and Dignitatis Humanæ:

The ASCA article concludes with this quote:

Il porporato ha sottolineato che ''non si puo' essere cattolici e non accettare il Concilio Vaticano II, il magistero della Chiesa successivo e la Nostra Aetate, cosi' come tutti i documenti, i decreti e le costituzioni del Concilio sono importanti e vincolanti per ogni cattolico''.

The cardinal emphasized that "one cannot be Catholic and not accept the Second Vatican Council, the successive magisterium of the Church and
Nostra Ætate, and all the documents, the decrees and the constitutions of the Conucil are important and binding for all Catholics.

I'm praying Pope Benedict XVI exercises his full Petrine powers and ignores all these "Vatican II Superdogma" cardinals' opinions and biases.

℣. Orémus pro Pontífice nostro Benedicto.
℟. Dóminus consérvet eum, et vivíficet eum, et beátum fáciat eum in terra, et non tradat eum in ánimam inimicórum eius.
Pater, Ave.

Deus ómnium fidélium pastor et rector, fámulum tuum Benedictum, quem pastórem Ecclésiæ tuæ præésse voluísti, propítius réspice: da ei, quǽsumus, verbo et exémplo, quibus præest, profícere; ut ad vitam, una cum grege sibi crédito, pervéniat sempitérnam. Per Christum Dóminum nostrum. Amen

Omnípotens sempitérne Deus, miserére fámulo tuo Pontífici nostro Benedicto, et dírige eum secúndum tuam cleméntiam in viam salútis ætérnæ: ut, te donánte, tibi plácita cúpiat et tota virtúte perfíciat. Per Christum Dóminum nostrum. Amen

Hoping, Praying said...

I'm tired of this. Shame on the person who leaked! I am hope with all my heart that this reconciliation is the will of God, and pray that many fruits and opportunities for a better world for our children come of it. Even if there still needs to be discussion, I'm hoping Rome will at least give us some kind of recognition in the meantime. I'll continue to storm Heaven! I just don't know how much longer things can continue like this. It's not right.

Pilgrim said...

"This way of action clearly manifests the intention of dividing our Priestly Society in its highest representatives."

Who's dividing? What was the leaking of the letter, and Bishop Williamson's warnings of a split if there is an agreement?

The Vatican is going to be hammered ten times more than the Society if this agreement takes place, and they aren't going to take on the center of controversy if he doesn't want to come. Things are going to be hard enough.

The dividing attempts are being made by those who disobey the Superior and attempt to undermine his authority. The dividers are the closet sedes who trash Bishop Fellay in the forums and elsewhere. Unity will be found through obedience to the decision of the superior, just as the founder intended it to be.

john said...

Tell the District Superior of Italy that it was not the Pope, the cardinals, or anyone in the Vatican that leaked the documents. Divide et impera is taking place WITHIN the SSPX, BY members of the SSPX. You can't pin THIS one on the Vatican.

Peterman said...

"
I'm praying Pope Benedict XVI exercises his full Petrine powers"

I wish he'd wear the tiara, the proper pallium and be carried around and fanned with ostrich feathers.

He is Christ's vicar on earth so lets get back to what it should be and dump the protestant bcrap.

nemo said...

The Priestly Ordinations for Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary will broadcast LIVE from the Cathedral of the Risen Christ, Lincoln Nebraska, on Saturday May 19th 2012 at 10:00 AM Central Time, (11:00 AM Eastern, 8:00 AM Pacific), on LiveMass.net and iMass.

The Priestly Ordinations will be administered by His Excellency Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, Bishop of Lincoln Nebraska. The following candidates will be ordained priests for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter:
Rev. Mr. Gregory Eichman FSSP
Rev. Mr. Karl Marsolle FSSP
Rev. Mr. Brian McDonnell FSSP
Rev. Mr. Kevin O’Neil FSSP
Rev. Mr. Kenneth Walker FSSP

Commentary will be given during the broadcast by Rev. Fr. Calvin Goodwin FSSP.

nemo said...

The Priestly Ordinations for Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary will broadcast LIVE from the Cathedral of the Risen Christ, Lincoln Nebraska, on Saturday May 19th 2012 at 10:00 AM Central Time, (11:00 AM Eastern, 8:00 AM Pacific), on LiveMass.net and iMass.

The Priestly Ordinations will be administered by His Excellency Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, Bishop of Lincoln Nebraska. The following candidates will be ordained priests for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter:
Rev. Mr. Gregory Eichman FSSP
Rev. Mr. Karl Marsolle FSSP
Rev. Mr. Brian McDonnell FSSP
Rev. Mr. Kevin O’Neil FSSP
Rev. Mr. Kenneth Walker FSSP

Commentary will be given during the broadcast by Rev. Fr. Calvin Goodwin FSSP.

Uncle Claibourne said...

I don't quite know how to adequately express my thoughts and feelings at the moment.

I keep thinking of Our Lord standing on top of the hill above Jerusalem, a week before his Passion and Death. Weeping. "How many times have I wanted to gather you all to myself, as a hen gathers her chicks?" How deeply He loves us! And yet, how little we understand!

Were He here now, would He be doing the same, as he looks upon us engaging in our petty political maneuvering, our backbiting, our infighting? Our "leaking"? Our jockeying for leverage. All in imitation of the Prince of this World, and his followers?

Heaven help us all. How little we have changed since He stood on that hill 2000 years ago. How little we understand.

In Jesus and Mary said...

Is it allowable to bring up the issue of calumny? This is not an insignificant issue! There are countless instances of posters here maligning general categories of persons as well as individuals. (Can we do a word search for “proud” and “arrogant”?) Targets include any elements of the SSPX or their supporters who might oppose regularization and in particular Bishop Williamson. People are purporting to know the motivations, character, intentions, and in general any aspect of the internal forum of persons they’ve never met. Never. Met.

Has anybody casting aspersions on Bishop Williamson even read his writings? Or are they just repeating what “everybody” else is asserting? If one sincerely desires to understand the Bishop’s positions, then read his publicly available writings. One could start with the December 2007 issue of The Angelus which contains the article, “Pascendi,” which analyzes St. Pius X’s encyclical against Modernism. The Bishop’s treatment of the modernists in the church is far more evenhanded and charitable than the treatment he receives here.

Divine Mercy's beggar said...

Dear Uncle Claibourne, Your reflections are illumined by Divine Charity Who is comforted by your humble anguish. Soon enough there will come echos of: "And they cast dust upon their heads, and cried weeping and mourning, saying: Alas! alas!". . .BUT Triumphantly there follows echos of: "Alleluia: for the Lord our God the Almighty hath reigned. Let us be glad and rejoice, and give glory to Him."

For now, please rest you soul before the Eternal Father and behold His "smile" as He receives His Son at the Ascension. Then immerse your soul in the refreshment of the Holy Spirit's words through St. Paul in Ephesians 4:1 - 16.

Finally, PLEASE PRAY FOR MERCY for the Holy Father and H.E. Bishop Fellay that they may lead us: "With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." Eph 4:2-3.

P.K.T.P. said...

It is ominous that, after all these events, we still have no public statement from Bishops Tissier de Mallerais or de Galarreta. I wonder why?

P.K.T.P.

Uncle Claibourne said...

Divine Mercy's beggar, thanks for your kind words. I haven't given up Hope, nor given in to despair. We know Who wins in the end. :)

Let's all indeed place our complete trust in Him, and continue to pray without ceasing for our Holy Father and Bishop Fellay.

Uncle Claibourne said...

In Jesus and Mary,

Yes, indeed it can! On all sides! You may be right about Bishop Williamson, but as I survey the Traditionalist webscape, I see far, far worse things being said about the Holy Father and Bishop Fellay. Some of comments are so absolutely vile that I can't accept the claims of the people saying them to be Catholic. And I won't repeat them here.

Divine Mercy's beggar said...

Dear Uncle Claibourne,

Your words CLEARLY reveal that you will NOT give up hope.Please know they never indicated such a temptation.

Please enjoy the Feast of the Ascension with Our Father and the Word Incarnate in Their Union of Charity, the Holy Spirit. A day in Heaven always helps! Remember us all in your prayers there.

For others, may Our Lady comfort us as we remember her time of physical separation from her Son. What courage she bestows for those who incessantly experience "patiencia = sufferentia".

Tom said...

"The Vatican is going to be hammered ten times more than the Society if this agreement takes place, and they aren't going to take on the center of controversy if he doesn't want to come. Things are going to be hard enough."

So what? Big deal. (Please realize that my tone in print isn't meant to be nasty to you.)

Holy Mother Church and Her representatives are hammered each second of the day throughout the world.

The Church is the (blank) of Babylon...Her teachings are false...She promotes idol worship...

...His Holiness is a Nazi war criminal...

The Church is attacked round-the-clock in regard to:

-- Artificial birth control.
-- Her anti-abortion teachings.

Her teachings on marriage, gender-related ordination issues...name it!

His Holiness and orthodox belivers are attacked daily throughout the world.

Unfortunately, said attacks often are found within the Church.

(Yes, even among Traditionalists.)

From within and without, Holy Mother Church and, of course, as you noted, "the Vatican," are attacked daily thoughout the world.

Do not worry, as God is with us, His Holiness and The Faithful will survive this and that attack.

Tom