What the heck is grec?

+

JMJ

One of the fall back positions taken by the 'resistance' is to say "what about GREC?".

Up to now I've always said: What the heck was GREC?

First let's start with my perspective and early assumptions.

• Perspective:
• The SSPX exists for the Catholic Church to help in the recovery from this crisis. 
• In that view I have seen a number of 'modern' priests visit the SSPX priories.  Some for discussion, others for training in saying the Tridentine Mass.
• Assumptions based on this perspective when I became aware of the involvement of the SSPX in theological debates at GREC:
• This is a 'none' item as it is simply the extension of the work of the SSPX to help other Catholics understand:
• Their position is based on accepted common pre-conciliar doctrine,
• Help others to see and understand the core issues of the crisis of the Church.
• The SSPX did not compromise on the core items
• Four points of the Second Vatican Council
• New Mass
• To refuse communion with other Catholics is schismatic (Pick either the 1917 or 1982 code of Canon Law).  Naturally, it is not that the SSPX shuns (per se) the other Catholics, it is that we are shunned.

What is the reality about GREC?

It appears that my assumptions were correct:

“The Society of Saint Pius X considers that the solution to the crisis cannot skimp on a rigorous clarification of the doctrinal questions in dispute, for it does not believe in the efficacy of medications that treat only the symptoms and not the cause” (pg. 140).

Just yelling at the top of our lungs that the New Mass is evil etc doesn't help much.  It is necessary to be able to put forth rational arguments to support this position. 

In short theological disagreements are resolved by having theological arguments.

That 'resistors' have a narrow and misguided perspective on the SSPX, its mission, and the nature of the Church is not the fault of the SSPX.

It is their own.

I've written the following statement before:

It is important to adhere to what the Church ACTUALLY teaches not what WE BELIEVE it teaches.

There are those who believe that the Catholic Church is represented by a few disparate souls who are labelled as 'home aloners sedevacantists'.  In order to believe this, they need to re-imagine a number of doctrines of the Church.  But no doctrine is too large to re-imagine in order for them to believe what they want to believe.

It is the same with the 'resistors'.

P^3

Source: Angelus Press (hopefully they won't object to my lifting the entire article.)

Catholic or Compromised: What is the GREC?

Posted on August 2, 2013 by Angelus Press

Blog Note: Over the past couple of years, a great deal of misinformation has been circulating about the group known as the GREC, including what some on the traditionalist spectrum seem to regard as a desire for compromise between tradition and novelty. Despite there being no justification for this claim, it has continued to circulate. In the interest of justice, we offer the following from reliable sources who are familiar with the group and its work, and offer the following clarifications.

As a result of misinformation, or one-sided application of information received and badly digested, it has become necessary to address the issue of the GREC, much mentioned in recent correspondence.

The acronym GREC is French in origin. Its meaning in English translation is a study group for Catholics.

A book published fairly recently in France by Nouvelles Editions Latines traces the origins and development and topics discussed in the study sessions between Traditional and Conciliar Catholics. The text was written by a French priest, Fr. Michel Lelong, and contains many contributions by other participants.

Regarding the GREC and its presentation to the public, it is clearly stated on page 71, “in this chapter dedicated to the Second Vatican Council as in the previous chapters the author [Fr. Lelong] presents his point of view. The viewpoints of the other participants will be given later on in relation to the way in which the last Council was received and lived. So it will be with all the other chapters of the book.”

The contribution of Fr. Alain Lorans, the editor of DICI, a publication of the Society of Saint Pius X, can be found on pages 136-141 of Fr. Lelong’s work.

On page 137, Fr. Lorans writes, “However, if a climate of Charity appears necessary to us, it is not enough for all that. A peaceful dialogue is not an end in itself, but an indispensable means of reaching the truth.”

“The GREC does not seek a compromise made up of half- truths or things not said; our mutual charity does not exclude frankness, on the contrary it demands it” (source: pp. 136-137).

“The Society of Saint Pius X considers that the solution to the crisis cannot skimp on a rigorous clarification of the doctrinal questions in dispute, for it does not believe in the efficacy of medications that treat only the symptoms and not the cause” (pg. 140).

As Cardinal Ottaviani said, Veritatem facientes in caritati. Speaking in Charity does not mean not speaking strongly (source: L’Eglise et La Cité).

On the matter of the authorization given him by Bishop Bernard Fellay to take part in the meetings of the GREC, Fr. Lorans writes – “I received permission from the Superior General to participate in the meetings of the GREC. He confided in me that he believed only in the possibility of a dialogue at this informal level, as the gates of the official structures appeared to him at the time, 1997 — the formal launch of the GREC — to be blocked and bolted. In fact, the GREC was an informal group, a few dozen people that met between 1997 and 2011 in Paris.”

When the official discussions began between the Roman theologians and those of the Society, the GREC meetings no longer served any useful function, and so ended towards the end of 2011.

“Just as with the GREC and Roman discussions, the constant aim of the Society was to make better known the traditional doctrinal positions and not to negotiate a practical agreement of whatever kind. No member of the GREC, whether traditionalist or conciliar, ever received a mandate from his superiors to proceed in that direction.”

That is why Fr. Loran’s wrote on page 136, “The GREC is not so pretentious as to settle the crisis. We know that the solution is not in our hands and that it will only come from those who have the grace of state to take such decisions”

With its infinitely more modest means, the GREC debates were in line with the Scholastic method of discussion, and general apologetic principles applied in controversy.

To see this one must not be merely content with a partial view of things but above all be honest in seeing and quoting both sides fairly.