Skip to main content

Letter of Bp. Fellay to Benedict XVI

+
JMJ

This leaked letter of Bishop Fellay to Benedict XVI, provides useful insight to the attitude that one should have in addressing the Successor of St. Peter - on more than one level.

  1. Bishop Fellay assumed the good-will of those communicating with him in unofficial capacities.
  2. Based on this he believed that the conditions for obedience may have been met ('accept us as we are').
  3. Indicates that his interview (my inference) was to obtain clarity of intention.
  4. Asks for further clarification.
We know that the Pope responded with clarity.

P^3


PS. It is necessary to avoid jumping to conclusions that the Pope always wanted the SSPX to compromise.  A Catholic principle is to assume the good-will of those involved. Applying this principle, we find a consistency in the timeline that indicates that at first the Pope was willing to grant a no compromise regularization (ie requiring true obedience) and that at some point this was changed.

To cast aside this possible scenario in favour of others is simply a confirmation bias.

Pray much as we head up to the Calvary of the next Synod.




Letter of Bp. Fellay to Benedict XVI

June 2012



To His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI 


Most Holy Father,

I am ever so sorry, at a time you are afflicted with such trying difficulties for which I assure you of  my poor prayers, to present you with yet another problem rather than some consolation.

Indeed, Wednesday evening, 13th June, during a cordial meeting, Cardinal Levada presented me with a doctrinal declaration which I could not sign. Not heeding the request not to modify the proposition I had submitted, because of the consequences that would lead to, the new text resumes almost all the points that caused difficulty in the September 2011 Preamble and which I had endeavored to set aside.

Unfortunately, in the current context of the Society, the new declaration will not be accepted.

I must admit to no longer knowing what to think. I had believed that you were disposed to leave till a later date the resolution of outstanding disagreements over certain points of the Council and liturgical reform, rather like when the Council of Florence, in order to achieve union, overlooked the question of the Greeks allowing divorce following adultery, and I committed myself in this perspective despite the fairly strong opposition in the ranks of the Society and at the price of substantial disruption. And I fully intend to continue to do my best to pursue this path to reach the necessary clarifications.

It seems now that I was mistaken, and what is really asked of us is the total acceptation of the litigated points before proceeding further … I regret it if any of my recent statements have added fresh difficulty, but it was for the sake of clarity.

Moreover, given the enormous opposition brewing up in certain circles of the Church determined to render impossible the activity of the new prelature, given the pressure even of certain countries, I wonder how in such circumstances the project could come to fruition.

I believe you alone can still change the course of events to come. Of course it is not for me to apply any kind of pressure, but simply set out the facts and find out if I mistook your intentions concerning our situation. If you judge it opportune, at this rather delicate moment, I dare ask of your goodness an audience (the most discreet possible) in order to hear from your own lips your appreciation of us.

May Your Holiness deign to believe my filial devotion and my dearest wish to serve the holy Church. 

Menzingen, Sunday 17th June 2012

+ Bernard Fellay

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

Thoughts on the FSSP Perspectives On the SSPX Situation

+ JMJ  Perspectives – FSSP vs SSPX In August, Fr. Debow (FSSP) of Holy Family Parish in Vancouver, B.C. wrote two letters on the SSPX “situation”. Obviously, Father is writing from the FSSP perspective and some elements are simply repeating what he’s been taught in seminary by the founders of the FSSP. In other words, they don’t truthfully reflect the position of the SSPX or, I feel, make the necessary distinctions. Father’s key points I noted were: The situation isn’t primarily about the Tridentine 1 Mass, the SSPX “no longer believes that Rome can transmit the faith, the SSPX “have taken it upon themselves to save the Church”, the penalties are not a persecution but a correction of a theological error manifesting itself as schism, It is a sin to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel. My goal is to assess the five points in as objective a manner as possible. Since I have sought the sacraments from either Fr. Normandin or the SSPX since the early 80’s it is probably t...

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...

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.

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...