The Vatican confirmed in a short statement this morning that yesterday it received a response to the doctrinal preamble from the Society of St. Pius X, and it is now being examined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said the response is substantially different from the previous one, therefore "encouraging" and marks a "step forward" according to Catholic News Service. He also said it will be examined "quickly", and given to the Pope, probably within a "few weeks." Father Lombardi added: "we cannot consider the matter concluded yet."
"On April 17, 2012 was received, as requested at the meeting of March 16, 2012, held at the headquarters of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the text of the response of H.E. Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X. The above mentioned text will be examined by the Congregation and then submitted to the judgment of the Holy Father."
UPDATE: The SSPX this afternoon issued its own statement, pouring cold water on media reports that the Society had given a positive response to the doctrinal preamble:
The media are announcing that Bishop Bernard Fellay has sent a “positive response” to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and that consequently the doctrinal question between the Holy See and the Society of Saint Pius X is now resolved.
The reality is different.
In a letter dated April 17, 2012, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X responded to the request for clarification that had been made to him on March 16 by Cardinal William Levada concerning the Doctrinal Preamble delivered on September 14, 2011. As the press release dated today from the Ecclesia Dei Commission indicates, the text of this response “will be examined by the dicastery (Congregation for the Doctine of the Faith) then submitted to the Holy Father for his judgement”.
This is therefore a stage and not a conclusion.
Menzingen, April 18, 2012
Comments
Post a Comment
Nothing has changed in 40 years. An agreement with the Vatican by the SSPX would constitute spiritual insanity,
SSPX has strung their scandal out far too long. Fish or cut bait, PETER’S BOAT does not need half-baked “traditionalists” who are as un-traditional as possible.
They went through the bard door long ago. Let them go and pray for them.
All faithful Catholics should pray for the return of the members of the SSPX to full communion with the Church.
Contrary to popular opinion, the SSPX is not a small splinter group. It has 600,000 members, 500 priests, 200 seminarians, 86 schools and 2 institutions of higher learning.
These are not people who have rejected the heart of the Church as so many fallen-away Catholics have, but rather intensely faithful Catholics who have unfortunately responded to the problems that resulted from improper interpretation of the documents of the Second Vatican Council by turning their back on the Church and rejecting the primacy of the Holy Father.
While schism is a terrible and grievous sin, I believe they want to return and make amends.
We would be better with them in the fold of the Church than outside it.
Viva il Papa.
The article’s interpretation (“pouring cold water”) of the SSPX statement issued in the afternoon of 18 April is unduly pessimistic. The statement merely says is that the issue is not yet resolved because it has not reached the end of the process. Therefore, I will continue to pray for the reconciliation of SSPX with the Church.
After 50 years of Disorientation and Crisis in the Church, things seems that are starting to turn around. Great battles and wars inside and outside the Church will happen during the Restoration process.
Justice to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the SSPX is due.
They are not, and never were in “schism”. Anyone who says this quite simply doesn’t know what they’re talking about!
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was treated unjustly, something that a few modernists above cannot bear to admit.
The notion of Tradition itself is understood differently by those in power, different from how it was believed in previous centuries by those in power at that time. If it was understood the same way now, the spirit of Assisi would have to be something of the past, and the visits to the Synagogue would have to be something of the past. The original practice of the Week of Christian Unity would be a move in the right direction. Any one of the ancient martyrs who died for the Faith, take your pick, instead of even so much as offering incense to pagan deities would simply say, “This is not the Faith I died to uphold.”
There is a new “flag” going around, flown outside a Florida Democratic office this month, that has Obama’s picture in place of the field of stars (it was seen on the Internet for $12.95, made in China). Elderly veterans are on video crying, “This is not the flag I fought to defend.” Would that Catholics see with the same clarity of understanding!
It seems to me that a dogmatic definition of Tradition, per se, would be beneficial. But dogmatic definitions are the rarest of the rare in this age of the unclean spirit of Vatican II. A New York rabbi said in 2008 that if the SSPX is regularized, it would bring back the “old teaching” that the old covenant was superseded by the new, and they want to prevent that from happening at all costs. One thing that needs to be cleared up is, how can what was taught as truth 200 years ago be superseded by a teaching that proclaims the opposite?
The fruits, since Vatican II. Mass exodus of priests from the church. Unprecedented lack of vocations, never before seen prior to Vatican II. Rampant divorce and use of contraception by so-called Catholics. Homosexual “masses”. Bishops who defy the age old teachings of the church and Rome. Scandals in the priesthood in numbers never before imagined. Novelty and diversity of worship in a church which shed the blood of many martyrs to keep the universal mass, worshiped in by all Catholics. Only a fraction of those who call themselves Catholic attend mass regularly. This cannot all be laid at the foot of Vatican II, but at the feet of liberal clergy and Catholics who do not understand their faith.
Are not all councils protected by the Holy Spririt? From an authentic Catholic viewpoint therefore it is not possible for V2 to contain heresy, irrepective of eroneous interpretations.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.