Skip to main content

A Look Back: Pre-Conditions for Doctrinal Discussions Circa 2001

Image
By
+
JMJ

I know that some 'resistors' will  freak at:
that the censures against the Bishops be declared null.
But hopefully they'll get over it because Bishop Williamson also agreed to the final letter before the excommunications were lifted.

Having been involved in negotiations between two organizations, I know that it is natural for  'positions' to be altered as opposed to issues. Even more so over negotiations that last eight years!

P^3



PRIESTLY FRATERNITY OF SAINT PIUS X
Statement of Bishop Fellay
to SSPX Members and Friends,
January 22, 2001
(Official Translation)
  1. In August, at the end of last summer's pilgrimage to Rome, Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos had a first direct contact with the Society's Bishops.

  2. During the month of November the same Cardinal, under a mandate from Pope John Paul II, invited the Superior General to come to see him 'to prepare a visit with the Pope".

  3. On December 29, Cardinal Castrillon proposed to Bishop Fellay different elements that could serve towards a possible agreement between Rome and the Society. The Superior General expressed his point of view, his distrust, his apprehension. (Although never before had Rome gone so far in favor of Tradition).

  4. On December 30, for a few seconds, the Superior General saw the Pope in his private chapel. (No words of importance were exchanged).

  5. On January 13 there was a special meeting of the General Council, of the Society's Bishops and of the delegate of Bishop Rangel, at which were established the principles to guide us in the present situation.

  6. On January 16, there was another meeting with Cardinal Castrillon, during which the Superior General exposed the necessity of having guaranties from Rome before going ahead in the details of eventual discussions or an agreement:
  • that the Tridentine Mass be granted to all priests of the entire world
  • that the censures against the Bishops be declared null.
The principles that are to guide us through this rather new situation are the following:
  1. Given that Rome has initiated this effort, it is normal that the Society take it with the seriousness that it deserves.

  2. Our distrust is extreme, keeping before our eyes on the one hand the very recent example of the Fraternity of St. Peter, and on the other hand the continuity in the post-conciliar direction, which is constantly reaffirmed.

  3. The Society has in no way the intention of modifying its principles and its general goal. The so abundant fruits of Grace, on the one hand, and the conciliar disaster on the other just go to reinforce its determination to conserve Catholic Tradition.

  4. If there were to be an agreement it could only be seen in the perspective of giving back to Tradition its rights of citizenship, even if the final triumph will only be obtained gradually.

  5. The prayers requested of the members of the Society for the duration of one month do not at all signify our expectation that this will be resolved within that time frame, or with any haste at all. This time of prayer is so that we can request more intensely of Our Lady that She open the hearts of those responsible in Rome and of the Bishops; that She enable us to avoid every trap, and that She might enable the rights of Her divine Son to triumph in the Church.
Menzingen, January 22, 2001
+ Bernard Fellay
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more

Regarding Post: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

By
 + JMJ   I've been watching the popularity of the post about Fr. Pfeiffer's attempted episcopal consecration and its continued top listing on the 'popular posts' list at the bottom of posts.  After some thought, I decided that I don't want to be responsible for anyone joining Fr. Pfeiffer's 'group', however unlikely that would be at this time. So I have reverted the article to the draft state. If anyone wants it reinstated, I would ask that they comment on this post with a rationale for reinstatement. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Schism

By
There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

By
+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

By
+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.
2 comments
Read more