FFI and the Witch Hunt for the Crypto-Lefebvrists

+

JMJ

While Psychology cannot predict behaviour with great precision on the individual level, at the group level, where outliers of smoothed over by the unthinking masses, a greater degree of precision can be obtained.

This has been a concern among many of us [members of the FFI] since the General Chapter of 2008, and particularly since the end of 2010, when the Institute became, not merely the premier religious Institute representing the implementation of SP, but one that gave a platform to those who wished to call into question the very possibility of a real hermeneutic of continuity in regard to Vatican II.  RC infers agreement with the bogus claim of Roberto de Mattei that Pope Benedict’s December 22, 2005 address was an invitation to such questioning.  And that is precisely the way in which the Italian press understood the situation.  A firestorm of controversy erupted in public as a result. (source)

I think that Fr. Greiger is refering to this portion of the talk:

Here I shall cite only John XXIII's well-known words, which unequivocally express this hermeneutic when he says that the Council wishes "to transmit the doctrine, pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion". And he continues:  "Our duty is not only to guard this precious treasure, as if we were concerned only with antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our era demands of us...". It is necessary that "adherence to all the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness..." be presented in "faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine, which, however, should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another...", retaining the same meaning and message (The Documents of Vatican II, Walter M. Abbott, S.J., p. 715).
It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking on this truth and a new and vital relationship with it; it is also clear that new words can only develop if they come from an informed understanding of the truth expressed, and on the other hand, that a reflection on faith also requires that this faith be lived. In this regard, the programme that Pope John XXIII proposed was extremely demanding, indeed, just as the synthesis of fidelity and dynamic is demanding. (source)

The consequence of the affirmation that the Council wished to " transmit the doctrine, pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion" and if some see a clear rupture (four points) is it an act of disobedience to say that a 'spade' is a 'spade' or more appropriately that 'black is white'. 

It would appear that Fr. Greiger believes this to be the case. 

Well if Pope Benedict XVI did not call for deeper work free of confirmation bias, perhaps this will serve as a reminder:

Moreover, I should like to remind theologians and other experts in the ecclesiastical sciences that they should feel themselves called upon to answer in the present circumstances. Indeed, the extent and depth of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council call for a renewed commitment to deeper study in order to reveal clearly the Council's continuity with Tradition, especially in points of doctrine which, perhaps because they are new, have not yet been well understood by some sections of the Church. (source)

So what if, in the course of this study, some would conclude that there are areas where the Council has not only obfuscated, but also contradicted pre-conciliar magisterium?

Then they would become subject to Fr. Greiger's witch hunt for crypto-lefebvrists because, following his cultural assumptions, that conclusion is excluded from possibilities.

This conspiracy theory mindset is very dangerous as eventually the perception will be so narrow that anything outside of the accepted 'way of thinking' will be viewed with hostility.  Just as Fr. Greiger and many of the hierarchy view the pre-conciliar culture with hostility.

P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience

Postscript:

In Pope Benedict’s December 22, 2005 address he mentioned the following:

However, wherever this interpretation guided the implementation of the Council, new life developed and new fruit ripened. Forty years after the Council, we can show that the positive is far greater and livelier than it appeared to be in the turbulent years around 1968. Today, we see that although the good seed developed slowly, it is nonetheless growing; and our deep gratitude for the work done by the Council is likewise growing.

I wonder where in the Church this new life is taking hold?  According to CARA, it is in the Traditional orders (SSPX included), that once included the FFI.

In my personal communication with a CARA researcher, she related that the attrition rate for the Traditional vs 'Modern' seminaries is that same. The key difference is that there are more men trying their vocations in the Traditional orders.

Further, she indicated that the way to assess the growth or strength of a religious congregation is the use the ratio of people served to ordinands.

In my own diocese with over 130,000 Catholics there were 3 ordinations this year.  A ratio of 43,333 to 1.

The SSPX in the US had 7, with a 'people served' value of appoximately 33,000.  A ratio of 4714 to 1.

When last I checked, I found this ratio very close to pre-conciliar ordination rates.

Coincidence?  I think not!  Obviously, the Traditional Culture supports the generosity required to try one's own vocation.

It is clear which culture is selfish and which is generous.