If what the good Cardinal says is true, then every Catholic except the half million SSPX have been led astray or duped! Can this be as far as orthodox Catholic teaching is concerned? I ask, you bloviate!
From Rome Reorts:
Cardinal Castrillón insists that the majority of Lefebvrians [SSPX] want full union with the Church. He justifies that some of their views are also due to incorrect interpretations and implementations from what was decided in the Second Vatican Council.
CARD. DARÍO CASTRILLÓN
"There were points without total clarity. Many of the architects of a post-council dealt with those points in a way that was not in line with the Council, which has in itself all its value. They made interpretations that were not in accordance with neither the Council nor the Magisterium."
According to his data, the Fraternity of St. Pius X is in 63 countries, and has about 600 priests and 200 seminarians, which serve around half a million people.
8 comments:
Cardinal Castrillon is saying no more than Benedict XVI did, so the presumed dichotomy between half a million 'Lefebvrians' and the 'rest of the Church' is a false one.
Could this be another "Athanasius contra mundum"?
The rest of the Church...
http://www.leforumcatholique.org/print.php?num=824935
Interview du cardinal Castrillon Hoyos sur la SSPX
Cardinal Castrillon: The Lefebvrians never made a complete schism
2017-03-29
Cardinal Darío Castrillón worked for nearly 10 years as the pope's mediator with Lefebvrian traditionalists. That is why he is happy about a possible solution to the existing conflict.
CARD. DARÍO CASTRILLÓN
"We always agreed on one thing: they never entered down the path of heresy. They had moments when they were away, but technically they never made any complete schism or heresy. For example, they did not create a separate jurisdiction, because to create a jurisdiction outside the jurisdiction of the Church, that means you want to separate."
Although the name is not correct, they are called "Lefebvrians." This is the Fraternity of St. Pius X, a traditionalist movement founded in 1970 by the most aggressive critical voice against the Second Vatican Council, the French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
Claiming a crisis in the Church, in 1988 he created four new bishops on his own, despite the expressed prohibition of John Paul II. Thus, he and the new bishops were automatically excommunicated.
In 2009, Benedict XVI withdrew the excommunication as a gesture of goodwill to try to facilitate reconciliation. After the Jubilee year, Pope Francis then allowed them to confess validly within the Church.
At present, they reject certain principles of the Second Vatican Council, such as religious freedom or interreligious dialogue, and as a consequence also some points of the later Magisterium.
Cardinal Castrillón insists that the majority of Lefebvrians want full union with the Church. He justifies that some of their views are also due to incorrect interpretations and implementations from what was decided in the Second Vatican Council.
CARD. DARÍO CASTRILLÓN
"There were points without total clarity. Many of the architects of a post-council dealt with those points in a way that was not in line with the Council, which has in itself all its value. They made interpretations that were not in accordance with neither the Council nor the Magisterium."
According to his data, the Fraternity of St. Pius X is in 63 countries, and has about 600 priests and 200 seminarians, which serve around half a million people.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Well, our Blessed Lord said that most people are on the broad road leading to hell. That should be a pretty good indicator of the answer to the question.
Since I have mentally checked out of the Latin church and am hanging with the Greek Catholics, I am happily distant from this issue. On this Thursday of the Great Canon of Saint Andrew of Crete (I made the last half of it, more than an hour with about 40 prostrations) my only thoughts are of repentance.
Not to speak specifically about this issue, but the number of people agreeing on a specific view is no guarantee of the correctness of that view.
As an SSPX parishioner, I'm unsure whether "the majority" of my fellow parishioners want a reconciliation. I think the majority would disagree with the cardinal that the Council is merely misinterpreted. Instead, the Council documents themselves are incorrect and problematic.
Personally, I do not favor reconciliation at this time. My reasons are essentially those given by Bp. Fellay on the occasion of the copitulation of the Diocese of Campo, which can be found readily on the internet. If these principles didn't matter, I'd go to the FSSP. Since they do mattter, I support the Society and its mission. Rome is in apostasy. So long as that situation isn't corrected, there is no reason to reconcile. On the contrary, Rome should reconcile itself to the Catholic Faith, at which time its union with the Society will be organic, rooted in right faith and right worship.
Post a Comment