Skip to main content

SSPX and Rome - It isn't over ... Updated

+
JMJ
An update to the update:
Bishop Fellay gave a conference today that corroborated the I.Media / Vatican Insider version of the story. This casts doubt upon the source of Rorate Caeli - which, in my opinion, appears to have been exaggerated.

P^3


Of course we knew from Bishop Fellay that he would never cut all ties with Rome because they would cease to be Catholic.

Rorate Updates:
UPDATE (05/11/14)I.Media reports that Bishop Fellay came to the Vatican with Frs. Niklaus Pfluger and Alain-Marc Nély (respectively the First and Second Assistants to the Superior General of the SSPX). On this occasion, the two assistants of the Superior General of the SSPX were present at the daily Mass celebrated by Pope Francis at St. Martha House. Afterwards Bishop Fellay dined with Abp. Guido Pozzo and Abp. Augustine Di Noia (respectively the Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei and the Adjunct Secretary of the CDF) at the refectory of the same House. At the end of the meal, Bishop Fellay briefly met the Holy Father.

Vatican Insider has another account, with further details -- and an acknowledgment of Rorate's initial report.

Rorate has learned and can exclusively confirm that Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X (Fraternité Sacerdotale Saint Pie X - FSSPX / SSPX), was received by Pope Francis in the Domus Sanctae Marthae sometime in the past few months. In order to protect our sources, we cannot detail the date and persons involved in the meeting, but only generally locate it in time - if the current pontificate so far can be divided into two halves, the meeting took place in the second half.

We can also add as part of this exclusive information that it was not a merely fortuitous event - that is to say, many off-the-record meetings with His Holiness have taken place since his election precisely because his being at Saint Martha's House make him much more accessible and available than many previous pontiffs. No, that was not the case at all - the pope was previously duly informed and duly met Bishop Fellay. The meeting was apparently short and cordial.

The Pope has a true interest in resolving this situation, it seems to be understood by our sources.

____________________
Note to new readers: the Society of Saint Pius X is a society of common life for priests and the formation of priests founded by Abp. Marcel Lefebvre in 1970, and it was involved in the controversial episcopal ordinations of 1988, in Écône, Switzerland. The penalties incurred by the living parties with that act were rescinded by order of Pope Benedict XVI in 2009. Doctrinal talks were conducted with the Vatican between 2009 and 2011, and the discussions fell through at the last moment on June 13, 2012. The Holy See considers the canonical situation of the Society as irregular and that, "as long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church."


[When mentioning the content of this item anywhere and in any language, please mention Rorate by name and link to us, as a matter of courtesy. Thank you.]

A few days ago this appeared on Suscipe Domime in a discussion on Bishop Williamsons latest EC355 predictions of doom and gloom:
Bishop Fellay spoke about this a couple weeks ago at his talk in Dillwyn, Va and seemed to at least state that this was a real possibility. It certainly seems credible that this is going to be the route that Rome and the SSPX takes. 
+Fellay mentioned that Francis is not a "doctrine" guy but a "pastoral" guy. In his estimation this was a good thing in that Rome will "tolerate" the SSPX in the spirit of pastoral sensitivity. source
I wasn't certain what would happen, however with the way this pontificate vascillates back an forth who know.


In response to any 'cries of woe', I answer pray!

As I just told a friend who implied that I trust the authority in Rome:

I trust in God, that as long  as the SSPX does not deviate from the principles we have been discussing, God will not allow them (us) to come to harm.


P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...

What Archbishop Lefebvre Said About the New Mass - SSPX.org

+ JMJ The New Mass is many things and one thing that it is is ambiguous.  While there are a few Catholic elements in the Novus Ordo, but even those are lost in the morass of protestant simulation. It truly is a case of : P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org: What Archbishop Lefebvre said about the New Mass

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

Does the SSPX 'Reject the conclusions of the Second Vatican Council'? (Updated 2026-08-03)

 + JMJ Update: Dr. Lamont, in a Rorate article (link) , pointed out that : It is notable that the profession does not reject any text of the Second Vatican Council, but only states that the influence of the Council promoted deviations from the faith. Catholics may hold that the influence of an ecumenical council was noxious in some respects. It is only the authoritative teachings of a council that demand their assent; they do not have to approve of all the historical results that it led to. One may, for example, reasonably hold that the definitions of papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction of the First Vatican Council led to an exaggerated and harmful conception of papal power, while accepting the definitions themselves. Further what the SSPX actually wrote (link) : I acknowledge in particular that modern errors represent a dreadful threat to the whole of the Catholic order, and that their penetration into the life of the Church, under the influence of the Second Vatican ...

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection.  The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements.  So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.