Skip to main content

Rorate-Caeli, Don Pio Pace and Archbishop Pozzo

+
JMJ

Rorate recently posted another article by a "very wise, knowledgeable, and highly influential cleric, writing under the pen name of don Pio Pace" .

I take exception to the last statements of this article (seen below) as it appears to be fodder for the conspiracy minded:
Menzingen terrified?
As sson as knowledge of this intervention of the Cardinal of Buenos Aires was made known to the wider public, the General House of the SSPX immediately limited its reach. According to a communiqué published by its DICI agency, of April 13, 2015, essentially for internal purposes, Menzingen (the General House) affirms that, "Cardinal Poli’s document has no canonical authority," and that all of that, "is nothing more than a strictly administrative procedure in the restricted context of the Republic of Argentina.” That no one thinks, above all, that there could be a punctual and partial canonical recognition!
An additional evidence that, at this point in History, Bishop Bernard Fellay, the SSPX Superior-General, has in his hand all the cards for a complete canonical regularization, and that some around him (perhaps some of the faculty at the Écône seminary?) remain hostile to any regularization. Is the internal opposition preventing additional action? (source)
First the last paragraph is reminiscent of Archbishop Pozzo's latest words.  The response of the SSPX is here.   I would speculate that this prelate is potentially Archbishop Pozzo or someone who works closely with him.



There are a number of problems with the last statement.

The first is it pre-supposes that for Bishop Fellay it is only a matter of resolving 'internal opposition' and not a matter of principle.

Simply put: Does the SSPX still have to accept the Second Vatican Council and the New Mass?

If not ... then there is the six conditions set by the latest SSPX General Chapter for convening an extra-ordinary chapter and making a determination as to whether or not to accept a proposed canonical solution. For a more detailed discussion see this link here.

The six conditions are:

Sine qua non conditions:
  1. The freedom to preserve, transmit and teach the sound doctrine of the constant Magisterium of the Church and of the unchangeable truth of divine Tradition; the freedom to prohibit, correct and reprove, even publicly, those who foment the errors or innovations of modernism, liberalism, the Second Vatican Council and their consequences; 
  2. The freedom to use the 1962 liturgy exclusively. To preserve the sacramental practice that we presently have (including: Holy Orders, Confirmation, Matrimony); 
  3. A guarantee of at least one bishop.
Desirable conditions:

  1. Society should have its own tribunals, in the first instance,
  2. Exemption of houses of the SSPX from the diocesan bishops,
  3. A Pontifical Commission in Rome for Tradition “answering directly to the Pope, with the majority of its members and governing board in favor of Tradition.” 

"A procedural rule was established: the superior general and his council will not exercise their own authority to accept a proposed canonical normalization, but will convoke an Extraordinary General Chapter that will have a deliberative vote, with an absolute majority required for acceptance. "
(Taken from various sources including: CatholicWorldReport)

In essence, once Rome and the rest of the Church decide to stop shunning the Catholics who turn to the SSPX for the Sacraments - then we'll see what happens.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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...

Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum

 + JMJ  Now THIS is probably the most important news item in the last two years - yes I place this above the pandemic. I'm only surprised by how long it took for this to surface during this pontificate. I hope and pray that it is false or that if it comes to pass that somehow some good will arise out of the ashes of Summorum Pontificum. P^3  Courtesy of Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (Updated) Update (May 26): Rorate's additional sources in Rome have confirmed this Wednesday that Francis has indeed a text on Summorum Pontificum lined up, which has been developed for months, but what is not known at this point is if the text is just about a more limited take on the Summorum application questionnaire (first revealed by us in the spring of 2020) or about an overhaul of Summorum Pontificum in general: drafts could be dealing with both matters. It is also not impossible for a text to come ou...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

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.