Recently, the Vatican published an ultimatum in which Rome invites the SSPX to return to the NO fold, as covered by numerous news agencies, it is reported that Fellay has declined the offer:
"Catholic rebel snubs pope's call to rejoin Rome"
"PARIS (Reuters) - The leader of a breakaway traditionalist Catholic group has rejected a Vatican offer to rejoin Rome, accusing Pope Benedict of trying to silence dissenting voices.
Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) that broke with Rome 20 years ago, said conditions set by the Vatican amounted to muzzling the traditionalists who claim to be the only true Catholics since Church reforms in the 1960s."
One of the things I first take note of is that, like the novus ordos, the secularists define traditionalists as "dissenters" as well, and also makes the claim that traditionalists "claim to be the only true Catholics" since Vatican II, an opinion shared amongst novus ordos as well. Now, since we're talking about the SSPX here, I assume that those traditionalist who are said to have made such a claim are SSPXers [those who participate in the SSPX liturgies and spiritual guidance/retreats and seminaries], the only thing is, I don't remember the SSPX explicitly making such a claim. I think it to be one example of unnecessary generalizations; as varied as traditionalists are, putting one big label on 'em all becomes quite difficult when it comes to specific premises.
"Keen to end this schism, Benedict agreed last year to their demand to restore the old Latin Mass."A curious statement... so, are we to conclude that the whole Motu thing was a cave-in by the Vatican to the demands of this group of "dissenters"? That's a possibility... the Vatican does have a recent history of doing things like that, as the Good Friday controversy demonstrated.
"But he insists they must accept the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) before he can lift excommunication decrees against them."
Naturally...
"Rome is telling us, okay, we are ready to lift the excommunications, but you cannot continue this way," Fellay said in a sermon last Friday now posted as an audio file on the U.S.-based Voice of Catholic Radio website."
Well, of course Rome would say that, why ever would they want a society of priests acting independently of them?
"So we have no choice... we are continuing what we've done," the Swiss-born Fellay said in English at an SSPX seminary in Winona, Minnesota. "They just say 'shut up' ... we are not going ... to shut up."
For what purpose? Is there some special reason why it is imperative to remain independent of Rome?
"The Milan daily Il Giornale reported on Monday the Vatican had told the SSPX it must pledge to respect the pope and accept him as the Church's final doctrinal authority."
I thought they already did that? I mean, with all of the humongous images of Benedict in their Churches and on the website, and the atmosphere of respect for him amongst SSPXers, how does this come as some special condition?
"Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi told the Paris Catholic daily La Croix: "The pope wants to extend his hand so they can return, but for that to happen, this offer must be received in an attitude and spirit of charity and communion."
Lombardi did not spell out the consequences of rejecting the offer, but Il Giornale's well-informed Vatican expert Andrea Tornielli wrote: "Such favorable conditions for a return to full communion will in all probability not come again."
Of course there's gotta be some pressure to hurry up take the offer, I mean, this kinda deal might not be available again, "don't wait!, if you accept within the next ten days, we might remove those penalities..."
"TIP OF THE ICEBERG
The SSPX claims about a million followers worldwide, many of them in France. It split off when its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, consecrated four traditionalist bishops -- including Fellay -- in 1988 against orders from Pope John Paul.
Since then, it has regularly appealed to the Vatican to withdraw the excommunications and allow it to return to the 1.1-billion strong Church. But its leaders often publicly denounce the pope."
I wonder why?
"Fellay said the pope must restore other Church traditions besides the old Latin Mass before the SSPX could return. It is particularly critical of the Vatican Council's reconciliation with Judaism and call to cooperation with other Christians."
Could there possibly be some motive behind that? Of course not, it's not like that stuff has been an excommunicatible offense for 1900+ years...
"The new Mass is the tip of the iceberg of Vatican II and of these modern ideas." Adding the old Mass to the "iceberg of Vatican II" did not change the reforms hidden below, he said."
Well of course the Mass is not all there is to it, V2 did more than change the mass...
"Vatican watchers say the ultimatum could split SSPX into a hard core of rebels and a larger group ready to return to Rome now that it has allowed wider use of the old Latin Mass."
As we predicted post motu proprio last year...
They're after that in the SSPX because it's soooo haarrdd to find in the parish nowadays, now that guitars and soft drinks typify the mass, and sermons become like oprah winfry or Montel Williams: Gossip conventions..."Most people want a reverent Mass and sound preaching. They care little for the loftier theological arguments," Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a prominent conservative Catholic blogger, wrote in an analysis. "The identity of the SSPX is at stake now."
The ultimatum's deadline of June 30 is the 20th anniversary of the bishops' ordinations that sealed the schism."
And So again, the situation presents itself, what will happen to the SSPX now that the NO has a Latin version and is presently devoid of guitars and rappers, and Rome is offering reunion?
0 comments:
Post a Comment