Friday, February 26, 2016

HOW CAN CATHOLICS, ESPECIALLY PROGRESSIVE CATHOLICS, NOT PROMOTE UNITY WITHIN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WITH GROUPS THAT ARE MOSTLY CATHOLIC?




The clairvoyant that I am has written repeatedly that I think Pope Francis will be the one to restore the SSPX to normalcy with the Church. Apart from their "schism like attitude" toward the papacy and the modernizing effects of the pastoral council called Vatican II (and keep in mind schism means breaking with the papacy while maintaining valid sacraments) the SSPX is more in full communion with the pope than is Eastern Orthodoxy, Old Catholics, Polish National Catholic Church, Anglicanism and all the other Protestant sects.

A huge step in normalizing the SSPX with the rest of the Church was furthered by Pope Francis when he stated that any Catholic could validly go to Confession to an SSPX priest. That was huge. His Holiness stated that it was for the Year of Mercy but I would doubt that once Christ the King Sunday arrives in the Ordinary Form, that the Pope will rescind this gracious offer.

This is what Rorate Caeili is reporting:

For the record, from a conference given by the Argentine-Spanish Bishop of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), Alfonso de Galarreta, in Versailles, on January 17, 2016:


Towards a unilateral recognition of the Society?

...Bishop de Galarreta publicly confided that he thinks the pope may soon confer a status on the Society of St. Pius X:



“I think, and this is the other aspect of things, that this pope who tells anyone who will listen that we are Catholic, who says and repeats that the Society is Catholic, that we are Catholic, will never condemn us, and that he wants our ‘case’ taken care of. I think– and he has already started down this path – that when he sees that we cannot agree with the Congregation of the Faith, I think that he will overreach any doctrinal, theoretical, practical condition, or any condition whatsoever… He is going to take his own steps towards recognizing the Society. He has already begun; he is simply going to continue. And I am not saying what I desire but what I foresee. I foresee, I think that the pope will lean towards a one-sided recognition of the Society, and that by acts rather than by a legal or canonical approach.”

Bishop de Galarreta admitted that “this de facto recognition would have a good, a beneficial effect: it is a rather extraordinary apostolic opening, and it would have an extraordinary effect.” But he adds that there would then be two risks: that of creating an internal division and that of conditioning our preaching in certain circumstances. And he wondered: “It would take an extraordinary wisdom and prudence, a very great firmness and clarity. Are we capable of this?”

The Argentinian prelate answered by asking his audience to keep a supernatural confidence in the face of these eventualities:

“If that is what Providence sends us, then we will have the necessary graces to overcome the difficulties and deal with them as we should, but of course, only to the extent that it is not produced by our will but imposed upon us. If our ideas are clear, we can always take advantage of it and draw the good from it. But in this hypothetical case, – I am giving you my opinion based on conjectures, right? – in this case I think we will have the necessary graces to persevere and do the good we must do in our Holy Mother the Church. God will never deny us or stop giving us the means to persevere in the faith and in the good fight, if we always remain in the faith, in hope, in charity, in the strong confession of the faith, in our daily sanctification.
 My Comments: If the pope allows for a loose recognition of the SSPX, this will simply mean that they are no longer under any canonical censures and can function as any other religious group in the Church.

The problem I see with this is that the SSPX is more than a religious order or group, it has bishops with jurisdiction. It is here it seems to me that if the SSPX are to keep independent bishops or have territories within the jurisdiction of Ordinary Form bishops, that the SSPX needs to have the status of an Ordinariate similar to the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter made up of mostly former Anglicans/Episcopalians. Or it could be modeled after the Military Ordinariate of various countries including our own. The military is an independent Archdiocese traversing the world! Or it could be modeled after the Eastern Rites in this country and elsewhere all of which have their own bishops, code of canon law and styles of liturgy and spirituality.

The good news in all of this is that the SSPX which practices the Catholic Faith and celebrates her sacraments as was done for most of the history of the Catholic Church would no longer be seen as schismatic.

My only problem with the SSPX is my judgement abou the rigidity of this group which could make it cult-like. While I understand their concerns about Modernism infiltrating the Church after Vatican II and this has provoked  in terms of ecumenism, interfaith relations and openness to the secular world, an extreme position on these pastoral issues which provokes hatred and animosity towards other people is not helpful. And yes, I remember full well some extreme positions in the Church at large and in our parishes concerning Jews, Protestants and the world. Extremism that leads to hatred isn't good and we discovered that over the centuries as it concerns the Jews and what led to the Holocaust. This is serious business!

I appreciate their concern for tradition and Tradition as it concerns the Faith, Morals, Liturgies and Laws of the Church. I fear an over legalistic approach that does not appreciate pastoral needs.

But overall, it would be wonderful for the entire Church for the SSPX to be allowed to function freely and without stricture.

But progressive Catholics or Catholics that are uninformed feel more comfortable with  ecumenical relations with Protestants who are extremely far from us or with interfaith relationships with other religions or dialogue with the secular world.

When one hates one's own history, tradition, Tradition, Faith, Morals and Canon Law and feels more at home in an alien land, doesn't that mean that one has lost his Catholic identity?

12 comments:

Vox Cantoris said...

You keyed on a critical point Father, the structure in a diocese. It would need to be an Ordinariate type. Even a personal prelature, such as Opus Dei, cannot operate without the local Ordinary approving, they don't have parishes true, but, they cannot celebrate Mass publicly without the permission of the Bishop. Could a bishop seize their property? These are serious issues.

Dialogue said...

Vox Cantoris,

That's why I'd prefer to see them established as a personal prelature, with inalienable property.

Vox Cantoris said...

Dialogue, it would seem that a problem with a "personal prelature" would be an inability to expand to new locations; am I correct? If they were an "Ordinariate" then they would be separate and distinct from the local Ordinary and able to carry on under their own "Ordinaries" are am I wrong here?

Mark Thomas said...

Rome, and, most certainly, the SSPX, will ensure that the Society is ensconced in a protective shell to prevent anti-TLM/Holy Tradition bishops from hampering the Society in the same way that said bishops hamper priests and laity who support the TLM.

Rome years ago assured the SSPX of such protection. Such protection from Rome is a given. In August 2001, Bishop Fellay offered the following:

http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=2086

"First of all, last autumn, Rome approached us in an entirely uncharacteristic way, and made us offers it is still difficult for us to completely assess. We could never have imagined that Rome would make us such an offer. Undoubtedly you have heard about the idea of an apostolic administration. The Society of Saint Pius X would have been integrated into an apostolic administration. What does that mean?

"An apostolic administration is ordinarily a diocesan or quasi-diocesan organization established in time of crisis over a given territory. Well, for us, the territory was the whole world. In other words, they offered us an organizational form that encompasses the whole world, a kind of personal diocese.been integrated into an apostolic administration.

"What does that mean? An apostolic administration is ordinarily a diocesan or quasi-diocesan organization established in time of crisis over a given territory. Well, for us, the territory was the whole world. In other words, they offered us an organizational form that encompasses the whole world, a kind of personal diocese.

"An apostolic administration is even better than a personal prelature. First, a personal prelature is not necessarily governed by a bishop; an apostolic administration, which is a kind of diocese, usually is.

"What is more, the scope of an apostolic administration's action is not limited to its own members. We would be able to carry out our apostolate autonomously, without needing to obtain the authorization of the diocesan bishop, since we would have a real diocese the special characteristic of which is to extend to the whole world.

"The fact that such a proposition was made is very important because, after all, this legal solution is unprecedented, it is "sui generis." [i.e., "one of a kind"—Ed.]"

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Father McDonald, here is more in-depth information (then reported today by Rorate Caeli...perhaps they convered the following prior to today) about the SSPX story in question.

http://www.dici.org/en/documents/bishop-de-galarreta-i-think-the-pope-will-lean-towards-a-one-sided-recognition/

An excerpt from the DICI, the SSPX's communication agency:

"A double proposal from Rome:

"Doctrinal and canonical

"Bishop de Galarreta then related that in the summer of 2015 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith proposed a personal prelature along with a doctrinal declaration. And he explained that the “Superior General sent both Roman texts to all the major superiors and to some theologians of the Society, as well as to the bishops, so they could analyze them and give him our opinion.”

"About the doctrinal declaration, the Argentinian bishop admitted: “What we see in the doctrinal declaration is that there is no longer Cardinal Ratzinger’s profession of faith. The Roman authorities ask us to make Pius IV’s profession
of faith, that is, the profession of faith of the Council of Trent.

"Also, in the previous profession, there was a paragraph on religious liberty. They have suppressed this requirement. Ecumenism has been removed. On the Mass they had asked us to recognize the validity and the legitimacy.

"Now they ask us to recognize the validity of the new sacraments and the new Mass according to the typical edition, the original Latin edition. The Society has always recognized this. You see, they are taking away their conditions in an effort to succeed."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Additional information from the SSPX on the Bishop Galaretta story:

"Then Bishop de Galarreta explained that the Superior General thought it important to answer the Roman offer to recognize the Society “as it is” with a preliminary answer that was anything but vague: “Bishop Fellay told us, ‘before answering this proposal from the Congregation of the Faith, I am going to write them an exhaustive explanation to make it very clear how we are and how we act, what we preach, what we do, what we do not do, and what we are not ready to do’,” – in order to find out if the Society really is accepted “as it is”.

"The Argentinian prelate then voiced his reservations for a profound doctrinal reason: “They still wish above all to make us accept, if only vaguely, if only in principle, Vatican Council II and its errors.” And he added that this Roman desire can be seen on the practical level in the canonical proposal: “There is always, in one way or another, a submission to the Roman dicasteries or to the bishops.”

"Which leads him to declare that personally, he would refuse the Roman proposals: “For me, an agreement with today’s Rome is out of the question.” He added that this is a prudential refusal, dictated by the circumstances – in the absence of the necessary warrantees for the life of the Society – and he was careful to distinguish himself from those who make this refusal an absolute.

“We do not refuse, you see, in an absolute and theoretical way the possibility of an agreement with Rome. That is what distinguishes us from the ‘Resistance’. For them it is a principle. It is a doctrinal question: ‘You cannot admit the possibility of an agreement with Rome without being liberal.’ Such is not our position. It is important to repeat it: it was not Archbishop Lefebvre’s position. He signed a protocol for an agreement with Rome. And at that time, even when he broke it off after the protocol, the Archbishop said: ‘it is because the necessary conditions for our protection, for our survival, are not there.’

"Because they wish to deceive us, because they do not wish to give us Tradition, because they wish to bring us over to Vatican II. It is because the conditions are not there. He said, ‘If they had granted me the conditions, the conditions I had requested, I would have signed.’ Archbishop Lefebvre said that after the consecration of the bishops. And he explained, ‘If I signed a protocol for an agreement, it was because there was nothing against the faith.’ Neither in the contents, nor in the act of signing. This is obvious. So we continue along these lines.”

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

From the SSPX...((source: FSSPX/MG – DICI no.331 dated Feb. 26, 2016):

Towards a unilateral recognition of the Society?

In the second part of his conference, and beyond the proposals of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Bishop de Galarreta publicly confided that he thinks the pope may soon confer a status on the Society of St. Pius X:

“I think, and this is the other aspect of things, that this pope who tells anyone who will listen that we are Catholic, who says and repeats that the Society is Catholic, that we are Catholic, will never condemn us, and that he wants our ‘case’ taken care of. I think– and he has already started down this path – that when he sees that we cannot agree with the Congregation of the Faith, I think that he will overreach any doctrinal, theoretical, practical condition, or any condition whatsoever…

"He is going to take his own steps towards recognizing the Society. He has already begun; he is simply going to continue. And I am not saying what I desire but what I foresee. I foresee, I think that the pope will lean towards a one-sided recognition of the Society, and that by acts rather than by a legal or canonical approach.”

Bishop de Galarreta admitted that “this de facto recognition would have a good, a beneficial effect: it is a rather extraordinary apostolic opening, and it would have an extraordinary effect.” But he adds that there would then be two risks: that of creating an internal division and that of conditioning our preaching in certain circumstances. And he wondered: “It would take an extraordinary wisdom and prudence, a very great firmness and clarity. Are we capable of this?”

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Finally, Father...the SSPX concluded with the following in regard to Bishop Galaretta:

The Argentinian prelate answered by asking his audience to keep a supernatural confidence in the face of these eventualities: “If that is what Providence sends us, then we will have the necessary graces to overcome the difficulties and deal with them as we should, but of course, only to the extent that it is not produced by our will but imposed upon us. If our ideas are clear, we can always take advantage of it and draw the good from it. But in this hypothetical case, – I am giving you my opinion based on conjectures, right? – in this case I think we will have the necessary graces to persevere and do the good we must do in our Holy Mother the Church.

"God will never deny us or stop giving us the means to persevere in the faith and in the good fight, if we always remain in the faith, in hope, in charity, in the strong confession of the faith, in our daily sanctification.”

Fear of risks and trust in Divine Providence

And he concluded after raising an objection: “So you are going to tell me: ‘In these cases there is a risk!’ – Yes, of course. In life there are many risks; in war there are even more. We are at war. So it will be as God wishes. But I have trust in Providence; I have complete trust in the love of Our Lord Jesus Christ for His Holy Church. So as long as we do not seek it, even if it happens, I think we must not panic. Nothing changes.

"It is the same fight that goes on, the same lines. We must simply take advantage of these areas of freedom that are left to us. In a war, if the enemy abandons the trenches, we have to take them over; if the enemy falls back, we must go forward. You don’t stay home because there are risks. We must act prudently, and we must take courage. And above all, we must have trust in God. It is the fight for God. Our trust is in Him and in the Blessed Virgin Mary.

“Personally I am not at all worried about the future of the Society or Tradition; however, for the future of society, of our nations that were once Catholic and even of the official Church, yes, I am worried and pessimistic. We can foresee that things are evolving for the worst. And it is when we are coming to a much more desperate, extreme situation that Divine Providence intervenes; God, who always uses divine means, intervenes.

"Our Lord is always the master of events and of history. And not only in general, but also in particular. So if the Gospel tells us that not one hair of our head falls, that all the hairs on our head are counted, that not a sparrow falls without the permission of God, I think we must remain peaceful. That is how we maintain an equitable judgment on objective realities and preserve an attitude that is not only balanced, but also Catholic, Christian and holy. That is the wisdom Archbishop Lefebvre passed on to us, this Catholic attitude. We can certainly continue along these lines in the present situation of the Hoy Church today, and in the face of all the eventualities that will soon present themselves.”

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant Newspaper, a leading traditionalist publication, issued a kill-joy "Traditional" Catholic response to the hopeful story that His Holiness Pope Francis may regularize the SSPX. Poor Pope Francis is simply an evil man, according to the hearts and minds of certain "Traditionalists"...he will never please certain folks.

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/2340-coming-soon-unilateral-recognition-of-the-society-of-st-pius-x

The Remnant

Friday, February 26, 2016
Coming Soon: Unilateral Recognition of the Society of St. Pius X Featured

Written by Michael Matt | Editor

"Obviously, Francis is going to regularize the SSPX. Why? Well, the old adage should sum things up quite nicely: Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.

"The question we all must ask ourselves is this: When it comes to regularization of the SSPX, what's in it for today's Vatican? Let me repeat that: What’s.in.it.for.them?

"Do we really believe that Francis the Great — the man who refuses to judge homosexual priests, who will travel to Sweden next October to celebrate the Protestant Revolt, who thinks atheists go to heaven and Jews need not convert — do we really believe that that man is deeply concerned about the souls of the adherents to the SSPX and their...ahem..."schism"? Really?!

"And if that's not it, what is it?

"In my opinion (and that’s all this is), the Vatican knows full well that opposition against their diabolical revolution against the old Faith comes principally from one source, and that so long as that source remains out from under their control -- well, they can't control their opposition.

"This time around, the Vatican will not make demands of the SSPX regarding Vatican II (for one thing, Vatican II is too traditional for them now. They don't accept Vatican II anymore!). They will make no demands regarding the New Mass.

"In fact, as Bishop de Galarreta here admits, the Vatican will make no demands on the SSPX whatsoever. They will simply regularize the SSPX by decree, and then sit back and watch the SSPX be torn in half. It's called divide and conquer, and it is a strategy as old as the Garden of Eden.

"Even the neo-Catholic world is finally waking up to the fact that Peter’s chair is occupied by a man who despises the old Catholic Faith. A principled counterrevolution against the regime of Pope Francis, led by 650 SSPX priests around the world, would be unstoppable right now….and a deeply divided Vatican knows it. Thus, no condition will be imposed, and the Vatican will make the SSPX a deal they literally can't refuse.

"There is no conspiracy in the SSPX. The Vatican is doing this on its own, in my opinion, with Francis calling all the shots. Can the SSPX handle this "beneficence" of Pope Francis? 'It would take an extraordinary wisdom and prudence, a very great firmness and clarity. Are they capable of this?’ -- that is the question.

"When it comes to the regularization of the SSPX, be careful what you wish for.

"Pray for the SSPX, one of the last best hopes of the Church. I’m confident that Bishop Fellay and his team are on the side of the angels. Now let us wait and see what the devils will bring."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

How does Michael Matt's claim that Pope Francis has embarked upon a nefarious plan to rip the SSPX "in half" comport with the following Church teaching?

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: The Eighth Commandant

2477: "Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:

- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;

- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them;

- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them."

2478: "To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:"

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Father McDonald, if I may add please to my post about Michael Matt...

Michael Matt's comments about His Holiness Pope Francis and the SSPX don't make sense to me. Bishop Fellay long ago stated that in Argentina, then-Cardinal Bergoglio was kind to and cooperated at every turn with the SSPX. Bishop Fellay insisted that then-Cardinal Bergoglio declared that the SSPX was 100 percent Catholic. Then-Cardinal Bergoglio cooperated with the Society each time that the SSPX had requested his assistance.

Rorate Caeli, on May 28, 2014 A.D., reported the following from Bishop Fellay, who offered the following in regard to then-Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (His Holiness Pope Francis):

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/05/sspx-bp-fellay-on-pope-francis-he-has.html

"When, as a Cardinal, he was in South America, the District Superior [Fr. Christian Bouchacourt] came to ask him for an administrative favor with no relation to the Church; a visa problem, of permanent residency. The Argentine government, which is very leftwing, makes use of the concordat that was established to protect the Church to bother us quite seriously, and tells us, "you say you are Catholic, it is thus necessary for you to have the signature of the bishop in order to reside in the country."

"The District Superior therefore went to him to present the problem: there was an easy solution, and that would be to declare ourselves an independent church [before Civil Law], but we did not want to do it because we are Catholic.

"And the Cardinal told us, "no, no, you are Catholic, that is evident; I will help you;" he wrote a letter in our favor to the government..."

"Now he is the pope, and our lawyer had the opportunity of having a meeting with the Pope. He told him that the problem was still going on with the Society, and asked him to please designate a bishop in Argentina with whom we could sort out this problem.

"The Pope told him, "Yes, and this bishop is myself, I promised to help, and I will do it"...he said it, just as he said that, "those people there, they think I will excommunicate them, but they are mistaken"...he said something else that was very interesting: "I will not condemn them, and I will not stop anyone from visiting them."
-----------------------------------

By the way, Pope Francis honored his promise to the SSPX. With his assistance, the SSPX is recognized by the Church and civil authority as "Catholic".

In light of all of the above, Michael Matt's opinion — that His Holiness Pope Francis has embarked upon a plan to rip the SSPX "in half" — does not make sense.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

the Egyptian said...

if it is done, how wonderful, now the next step, will Bishops allow the SSPX access to the many churches that have been "clustered" one priest 5 parishes in our area, maybe just one in a cluster, if that happens, then we will see progress. It will help elevate the "priest shortage" and expose the faithful to a forgotten heritage. Personally I believe you will see liberal priestly heads explode at the sight of a priest in cassock and biretta at deanery meetings and public functions.

Not holding my breath, just hoping