Skip to main content

Cardinal Müller’s Letter and His Non-Renewal as Head of the CDF - sspx.org

+
JMJ

Well, as you may have noticed I've gone a little rogue with lots of posts since I took my oral exam.

I'm going to try and pull back to a more reasonable pace over the next few weeks while I try to finish off another series on obedience as well as prep for a presentation.

The following is the official SSPX notification of the new / old demands from Rome.  The mantra is definitely in place.



I particularly like the last line:
Confronted with these questions, those having a pythonical [prophetic] spirit (Acts 16:16) will make predictions. For our part, we will be content to wait for the facts and to look at their effects.
So, what can we say except:

P^3


Courtesy of SSPX.org



Two events marked the beginning of summer in Rome: a letter from Cardinal Gerhard Müller to Bishop Bernard Fellay and his replacement as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) by Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer.

On June 26, 2017, Müller Once Again Imposed the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration

On June 26, 2017, Bishop Fellay, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), received from Cardinal Gerhard Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, dated June 6 of this year, in which the German prelate—with Pope Francis’s approval—spelled out the conditions necessary for a doctrinal declaration, the indispensable prerequisite for any canonical recognition of the Society. There are three conditions:
“1) It is necessary to require members of the SSPX to adhere to the new formula of the 1988 Professio fidei. Consequently, it is no longer sufficient to ask them to pronounce the 1962 Professio fidei.

“2) The new text of the Doctrinal Declaration must contain a paragraph in which the signatories declare explicitly their acceptance of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and those of the post-conciliar period, by granting to those doctrinal statements the degree of adherence that is due to them.

“3) The members of the SSPX must acknowledge not only the validity, but also the legitimacy of the Rite of Holy Mass and of the Sacraments, according to the liturgical books promulgated after the Second Vatican Council.”
On June 30, Bishop Fellay sent this letter to all the priests of the Society, with the following commentary: “We are again in a situation similar to the one in 2012. Whereas Archbishop Pozzo, Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, used quite different language last March concerning the criteria of catholicity that should or should not be required of us.”
He went on to recall his statement at the conclusion of the meeting of Major Superiors of the Society in Anzère, Switzerland, on June 28, 2016:
“The Society of Saint Pius X does not seek above all a canonical recognition, to which it has a right because it is Catholic. The solution is not simply juridical. It depends on a doctrinal question that it is imperative to express.
….
Divine Providence does not abandon its Church, the head of which is the Pope, the Vicar of Jesus Christ. This is why an indisputable sign of this restoration will be the express desire of the Supreme Pontiff to grant the means with which to reestablish the order of the priesthood, of the faith and of Tradition, which moreover is the guarantee of the necessary unity of the family of Tradition.”
This letter from Cardinal Müller is no surprise to those who followed closely the history of the complicated relations between the Society and Rome. Already during a conference that he gave in Port-Marly, France, on October 8, 2016, Fellay underscored a contradiction between the remarks of Cardinal Müller and those of Pozzo, Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission:
“All of a sudden they go and tell us that what was produced by the Council but is not dogmatic, in other words, all the Declarations are not criteria for being Catholic, according to Archbishop Pozzo. What does this mean? ‘You are not obliged to agree in order to be Catholic.’…Archbishop Pozzo actually gave several interviews on the subject. I quoted for you the one in April (La Croix, April 7, 2016), then there were the ones in July (Zenit, July 4, 2016, and Christ und Welt, July 28, 2016). Between these two dates, in June, his superior, Cardinal Müller, said the contrary (Herder Korrespondenz, June 2016)....Cardinal Müller insisted, saying: ‘No, the Society must accept the whole Council!’ And he even spoke about unrestricted commitment with regard to ecumenism. But not only that.... He speaks about the liturgy, about religious liberty. And afterwards his subordinate repeats the contrary, in July. What disorder! Whom are we to believe?” (See DICI no. 432 dated October 14, 2016)
The Pope, for his part, said in an interview with La Croix (May 16, 2016), that before any canonical solution for the Society, it was necessary to have “a fundamental agreement with them. Vatican Council II has its importance.” This means that a doctrinal document is a prerequisite. More recently, while traveling back from Fatima on May 13, 2017, the Supreme Pontiff answered journalists on the airplane: “The feria quarta of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith…their meeting—they call it feria quarta because it takes place on Wednesdays—studied a document, and the document has not yet reached me. I will study it.” In other words, once again, a doctrinal declaration is necessary, prior to any canonical recognition. (See DICI no. 356 dated May 26, 2017)  But what must the exact content of this declaration be? The terms imposed by Cardinal Müller or those proposed by Archbishop Pozzo?

As of July 2, Cardinal Müller is No Longer Prefect of the CDF

What was truly surprising was the non-renewal of Cardinal Müller at his post. At the conclusion of five years at the head of the CDF, Pope Francis decided not to renew his term of office, which ended on July 2, 2017. The Supreme Pontiff appointed as his successor Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, a Spanish Jesuit, who had been Secretary of the CDF since 2008.
According to a report by InfoCatho dated July 1, this decision “is said to be part of a delicate, crucial context. Cardinal Müller had gone on the record with his refusal to interpret Amoris Laetitia from a perspective of discontinuity with the Roman Magisterium. Some think that this is the reason for his non-renewal.”
As Zenit noted on July 1: “His departure before the canonical age of retirement is causing a lot of ink to be spilled, whereas all former prefects had remained at this post at least until they were 75 years old.” And it ventured a new explanation: “The initiative occurs also a few months after the resignation of the Irishwoman Marie Collins from the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors (PCPM).” In her letter of resignation to the Pope, Marie Collins denounced “the lack of cooperation, in particular on the part of the dicastery most involved with the question of sexual abuse” as “shameful.” She regretted “the constant setbacks” due to the “resistance” of “some members of the Curia.” Zenit writes: “Some, reading between the lines, saw in this a criticism of the heavy bureaucracy of the CDF.”
Whatever theories may be devised concerning the reasons for Cardinal Müller’s departure, we can observe that the Pope did not think it necessary to keep him at his post in order to bring to a successful conclusion the decision to make the SSPX return to the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration. Considering this, all that can be done is to ask several questions:
In openly manifesting a viewpoint different from that of his hierarchical superior on the subject of the “criteria of catholicity,” was Abp. Pozzo acting motu proprio [on his own], or did he know that he was supported by someone ranking higher than Cardinal Müller? What is his future at the Ecclesia Dei Commission?
What will be the role of Archbishop Ladaria, a Spanish Jesuit with a much less overactive personality than that of the German Cardinal? Being more inclined to obedience as a member of the Society of Jesus, he describes himself as a “moderate conservative.” As the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will he be a moderately conservative influence?
Confronted with these questions, those having a pythonical spirit (Acts 16:16) will make predictions. For our part, we will be content to wait for the facts and to look at their effects.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Count Capponi - RIP

+ JMJ I had heard of Count Capponi over the years and was happy to hear a voice crying in the wilderness. I suspect that his conscience was clearer than many. This part of the article caught my attention: Capponi defended the right of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to continue his work without the label “schismatic,” which term Capponi rejected, saying: “You cannot apply the standards of the new code of canon law and the mentality of the old code. According to the new code, Lefebvre could do what he did with a Catholic intention, and he did what he did in ‘sincerity’ and invoked the ‘state of emergency’ argument, which the new code permits. You might not like the new code, but it’s what governs the Church.” I know a few people who tried to stir up a fuss when the SSPX cited the New Code in one of the documents with Rome.  Yet, the truth is what it is --- the New Code was promulgated by a reigning Pope and flawed as it is ... there are some benefits to its liberality. ...

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized ma...

Those who return to the past are not outside the Church - Rorate Caeli

+ JMJ I had been thinking about putting together a post explaining some of the history of how the SSPX has arrived at its current position. Now I see that Rorate has posted a translated editorial that shows the roots of the SSPX principles. In reading these words, I see patterns and themes that were put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre decades ago. Perhaps his sight was clearer than most. P^3

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him...

SSPX Transfers

+ JMJ Eponymous flow posted the following list of transfers etc. Source: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2020/04/castling-of-leadership-at-sspx.html The departures Bishop Bernard Fellay, the third Superior General until 2018, leaves the General House in Menzingen and moves to the Seminary of St. Thomas Aquinas in the USA. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, suffering from ill health, is being referred to the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecene as a retreat. Fr. Christian Thouvenot, until now Secretary General of the General House, becomes a professor at the seminary in Ecene. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, until now Rector at the Seminary of the Heart of Jesus in Zaitzkofen, moves to the district of Germany. Fr. Jürgen Wegner, until now district superior of the DISTRICT USA, moves to the district of Austria. Fr. Philippe Brunet, until now Superior of the Autonomous House of Spain-Portugal, becomes professor at the Seminary U.L.F. and co-saviour of La Reja in...