Rorate Caeli

Doctrinal Preamble "temporary"; will be published in case of final agreement

From La Croix, the semi-official daily of the French Church:

"If an agreement with the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX) is found, the Holy See intends to publish the Doctrinal Preamble upon which this agreement on the return to full communion with Rome of the Integrist [sic] fraternity, separated since 1988, would take place. This is what authorized sources indicated to Roman agency I.Media on Thursday, October 6.

...
" 'We have nothing to hide,' sources close to the matter affirm in the Vatican, before adding, 'It is clear that, once the text is conclusive, we will publish it.' At the Pontifical Commission 'Eccesia Dei', in charge of the dialogue with the Lefebvrists [sic], it is also mentioned that the door is open for 'clarifications', if necessary, and it is added that it was therefore 'a temporary text' that was delivered to Bp. Bernard Fellay, superior of the FSSPX, and his collaborators at the time of their visit to the Vatican on September 14."

10 comments:

  1. We were told in the beginning that the entire transcription of the talks would be made public. I hope that is true. They will be historic.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Pray for Success11:01 PM

    "From La Croix, the semi-official daily of the French Church:"

    Without wishing to be too pedantic should it not read "the semi-official daily of the Church in France?"

    Unfortunately, with the establishment of all-powerful national episcopal conferences, you may well be correct in saying 'the French Church'.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous12:17 AM

    If the doctrinal preamble/agreement is written in such a way as to require the acceptance of it's terms in order for the SSPX to be in "full communion" with the pope, then it would not only seem logical but even necessary that Rome would make the final doctrinal agreement public. After all, if one Catholic must hold certain doctrines in order to be a Catholic, then it would seem reasonable to presume that all other Catholics must hold those doctrines as well in order to be in "full communion" with the Church.

    Besides, the Church is going to have to explain to the rest of the public how exactly the SSPX was able to be reconciled to the pope given the doctrinal difficulties that have publicly existed between them for the past few decades.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "...it is also mentioned that the door is open for 'clarifications', if necessary, and it is added that it was therefore 'a temporary text' that was delivered to Bp. Bernard Fellay..."

    I'd be willing to bet my ranch that the SSPX will come back with a counter offer. Prayers for tomorrow's meeting of the Superiors of the SSPX.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous12:40 AM

    You failed: that was indeed very pedantic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous1:54 AM

    "What will be the response of Bishop Fellay? Nobody knows. It should probably not be known in the next few weeks, as a sound journalist indicates."

    Week will pass before we know the result of the SSPX's upcoming meeting?

    Clarifications. Boring.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous4:39 AM

    No need for the sic after "integrist". I, for one, am proud to be an intégriste. I wear it as a badge of honour.

    P.K.T.P.

    Oh, and, by the way, we might well wonder what 'finding' regarding the Society's present status the Preamble includes. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If Ecclesia Dei is in charge of relations with the "Lefebvrists", what Commission is in charge of relations with the "Rahnerites", the "Kungists" and the "Von Balthazarians"?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous7:53 PM

    'It is clear that, once the text is conclusive, we will publish it.'

    Why isn't it conclusive? What doctrine does the Fraternity hold that the Holy See does not? Or, one could say it another way - what doctrine does the Holy See hold that the Fraternity does not? Ah, there's the rub - Ecumenism, collegiality, salvation/efficacy of false religions, etc, etc. You see, folks, it just ain't that simple.

    PEH

    ReplyDelete
  10. Tradical8:07 PM

    Why isn't it conclusive?

    Taking a swing in the dark with a two-handed sword I would say:

    Because what was once clear is no longer so.

    Example: Are Protestants in 'good faith' part of the Mystical Body of Christ? For Pius XII and earlier the answer was no. Since the council the answer is different - yes - at least under the interpretative lens of rupture.

    This is not the beginning of the end but the end of the beginning.

    The preamble is only the second step in this process of many small steps.

    Caveat: IMHO

    ReplyDelete

Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.

_______
NOTES

(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!