FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: News on the SSPX discussions
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Some News about the SSPX Discussions

by Gregor Kollmorgen
New Liturgical Movement
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/200...sions.html

Via the website Panorama Católico Internacional (found via messainlatino.it) come news about the doctrinal discussions between the Holy See and the SSPX.

The follwing is a synthesis of remarks made by Bishop Alfonso de Galareta, head of the SSPX delegation for the discussions, on the occasion of recent ordinations of the SSPX at its Argentinian seminary of La Reja.



1) The outcome of the first meeting has been good.

2) Primarily the agenda and the method of discussion were established.

3) The issues to be discussed are of a doctrinal nature to the express exclusion of any canonical question regarding the situation of the SSPX.

4) The common doctrinal reference point will be the Magisterium prior to the Council.

5) The talks follow a rigorous method: an issue is raised, and the party raising it sends a paper substantiating its doubts. The Holy See responds in writing, after prior email exchanges among the technical advisers. At the meeting, the issue is discussed.

6) All meetings are taped by both parties and filmed.

7) The conclusions of each topic will be submitted to the Holy Father and the Superior General of the SSPX.

8) The timing of these meetings depends on whether the topic is new or is already being discussed. In the first case, it will be approximately every three months. In the second, every two. The next meeting is planned for mid January.

10) The theological representatives of the Holy See "are people you can talk with", they speak "the same (theological) language as we". (meaning presumably they are Thomists).

11) Some of the topics mentioned by the bishop in his homily, not exhaustively, are:

a) The Magisterium of the Council and after the Council.

b) The conciliar liturgical reform.

c) Ecumenism and interreligious dialogue.

e) Papal authority and collegiality.

f) Freedom of conscience, religious freedom, secularism and the social reign of Jesus Christ.

g) Human rights and human dignity according to the Council's teaching.

The Bishop repeated that the results of the first session are good, compared to the previous situation. The parties talked entirely freely and only about doctrinal issues in a Thomist theological framework.

No one can foresee what will happen in the future. One will move forward day by day, as prudence and evangelical spirit direct.

Seems like a promising start, anyway.
(12-22-2009, 01:00 PM)cgraye Wrote: [ -> ]Seems like a promising start, anyway.

we can certainly hope!
(12-22-2009, 12:42 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]1) The outcome of the first meeting has been good.

2) Primarily the agenda and the method of discussion were established.
They have just surpassed the US Congress, every UN meeting and the Scranton City Council.
I worry that the Roman delegation is just going to agree with whatever doctrinal points the SSPX makes and they won't be able to nail down exactly what is not the Catholic Faith but is running around in the Church as if it is the Catholic Faith.    As Bishop W says in that famous video  "Yes, 2+2 is 4, but it's also 5 and 15 and 5 million..." 
(12-22-2009, 02:44 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]I worry that the Roman delegation is just going to agree with whatever doctrinal points the SSPX makes and they won't be able to nail down exactly what is not the Catholic Faith but is running around in the Church as if it is the Catholic Faith.    As Bishop W says in that famous video  "Yes, 2+2 is 4, but it's also 5 and 15 and 5 million..." 

The Society will probably take care to phrase its proposals as "2+2 can only be 4."
In case anyone is not familiar with the Holy See's representatives, here are a couple essays by two of them on the controversial phrase "subsistit in" in the Constitution Lumen Gentium. It gives an idea of where they may be coming from:

Fr. Karl Becker, SJ:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/subsistitin.htm

Fr. Fernando Ocariz (Vicar General of Opus Dei):
http://www.ewtn.com/library/Doctrine/subsistit.htm

(I may have posted these in another thread some time earlier, so if it's a repeat, my apologies! Embarrassed )
(12-22-2009, 02:56 PM)columba Wrote: [ -> ]The Society will probably take care to phrase its proposals as "2+2 can only be 4."

True, I'm confident the SSPX priests and those reviewing their work and progress will look at everything with the suspicious eye of a good doctor. 

I've read on a few blogs where some hopeful conservatives were thinking the Vatican appointed theologians will make mincemeat out of the SSPX.  But I was thinking, SSPX priests everywhere have been working for these specific discussions for a good portion of their lives.  You don't dedicate your life to becoming a priest with the express mission of helping save the Church without a thorough look into the crisis in the Church. 



(12-22-2009, 04:38 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-22-2009, 02:56 PM)columba Wrote: [ -> ]The Society will probably take care to phrase its proposals as "2+2 can only be 4."

True, I'm confident the SSPX priests and those reviewing their work and progress will look at everything with the suspicious eye of a good doctor. 

The article implies the debate is being held in Thomistic language which precludes any funny business.
(12-22-2009, 04:38 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]I've read on a few blogs where some hopeful conservatives were thinking the Vatican appointed theologians will make mincemeat out of the SSPX.  But I was thinking, SSPX priests everywhere have been working for these specific discussions for a good portion of their lives.   You don't dedicate your life to becoming a priest with the express mission of helping save the Church without a thorough look into the crisis in the Church. 

LOL. Non-trad "conservatives" by definition do not know these issues. Anybody who knows the issues would have become a trad. The discussions are in writing and on video so nobody can cover his tracks. I can't see the Vatican participants putting up any real struggle while stuck in the Thomistic "straight jacket." If Vatican participants became obstructionist or dishonest, the SSPX could put the video up on Youtube for the world to see.
(12-22-2009, 02:56 PM)columba Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-22-2009, 02:44 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]I worry that the Roman delegation is just going to agree with whatever doctrinal points the SSPX makes and they won't be able to nail down exactly what is not the Catholic Faith but is running around in the Church as if it is the Catholic Faith.    As Bishop W says in that famous video  "Yes, 2+2 is 4, but it's also 5 and 15 and 5 million..." 

The Society will probably take care to phrase its proposals as "2+2 can only be 4."

And the Vatican will agree it is four.  Then carry on like it is 5, or 15 or 5 million.  That's the thing about mutable truth.  It's mutable.
Pages: 1 2 3 4