FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Tornielli: “Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
[Image: logo.gif]

“Peace” agreement reached between Vatican and Lefebvrians
09/15/2011
A proposal has been made to transform the Society of St. Pius X into a “Personal Prelature” like Opus Dei
ANDREA TORNIELLI
Vatican City


A two-page “doctrinal preamble”, with an invitation to accept it within a month or so. The transformation of the Society of St. Pius X into a “Personal Prelature” like Opus Dei. These are the proposals that Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior of the Lefebvrians, yesterday morning received from the Pope through Cardinal William Levada, Prefect for the Doctrine of the Faith, and from the secretary of the Ecclesia Dei commission, Guido Pozzo. Lefebvre followers’ story – a traditionalist Archbishop who challenged the conciliar reforms and in 1988 ordained, without mandate from the Pope, four new bishops thereby creating a schism – is at a turning point: the traditionalists must decide whether to reconcile with Rome or remain separate from it.

A communiqué reports that the meeting took place yesterday morning, at the Holy Office Palace, concluding talks that spanned over a period of two years. Benedict XVI, who wishes to do everything in his power to achieve reconciliation, had already agreed to two Lefebvrian preliminary requests: liberalization of the old Mass, and lifting the excommunications affecting the Bishops of the Society. In the past, more than once, a condition for full communion was set as the fact that Lefebvrians had to accept the last Council. In truth, yesterday’s “preamble” as it was offered to Fellay had a broader scope and it represents a fundamental platform stating “several doctrinal principles and interpretation criteria for the Catholic doctrine.”

It is a short and mediated document, which follows the “Professio fidei” published in 1989 by the former Holy Office and that states three different degrees of assent that the faithful must meet. In essence, a Catholic strives to believe “with firm faith” all that is “within the Word of God” and that the Church defines as “divinely revealed”. Secondly, a Catholic agrees to accept all dogmas stated as such to this day. Finally, and this is the difficult point for Lefebvrians, a Catholic is required to comply “with religious submission of will and intellect” to the teachings that the Pope and College of Bishops “set when they exercise their authentic Magisterium”, even when they are not stated in a dogmatic fashion, that is final. This is the most significant role of the magisterium, to which, for example, the encyclicals belong. And many Vatican II documents come from it and they should be read, as all the magisterium teachings – the Holy See explains – in the light of tradition and as a development, and not as a breaking point, from previous doctrine, according to hermeneutics proposed by Benedict XVI.

“Accepting the profession of faith contained in the preamble – a Vatican prelate explains to La Stampa – does not mean giving up the opportunity to discuss this or that affirmation of the conciliar texts, or to silence a debate on their interpretation.” But the different interpretations “cannot be used as a pretext to reject the magisterium.”

The meeting was held in a cordial atmosphere, Fellay requested clarifications and insisted a lot on the critical situation in which, he said, the Church finds itself. However, from the Vatican side what needs to be discussed are the individual facts – such as liturgical abuses in certain countries – but without questioning the Pope’s authority. Finally, the canonical solution to regularize the Lefebvrians was also discussed: a “Personal Prelature”, an institution introduced in new canon code and used only, so far, for Opus Dei. Its superior depends on the Holy See and there are no particular geographical jurisdictions. Now the decision rests in the hands of the Lefebvrians. Fellay has reserved the right to take “all the time that is necessary” and stated that he “will consult the main representatives of the Society of Saint Pius X, since on such an important decision I promised my brothers I would not make any decisions without consulting them first.”

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/hom...colo/8061/
A lot of people will get hung up on this:

a Catholic is required to comply “with religious submission of will and intellect” to the teachings that the Pope and College of Bishops “set when they exercise their authentic Magisterium”, even when they are not stated in a dogmatic fashion

but this is simply the traditional teaching of the Church, and is what you can find in any manual from before Vatican II. The important thing to remember is that it refers to when the Pope and College of Bishops

exercise their authentic Magisterium

and not, say, when they give an interview, or give a speech at a summit, or whatever.
How will the sspx be organized as a premature? Will it have different levels of membership? Such as opus deis numerary and supernumerary? Maybe the to sspx can be re worked as one level. Would parishinwrs at sspx chapels have to right a letter to the bishop seeking membership? As is done with opus dei?
Mmmmmm
doesn't sem to be as easy as some are making it
(09-15-2011, 11:59 AM)archdiocesan Wrote: [ -> ]A lot of people will get hung up on this:

a Catholic is required to comply “with religious submission of will and intellect” to the teachings that the Pope and College of Bishops “set when they exercise their authentic Magisterium”, even when they are not stated in a dogmatic fashion

but this is simply the traditional teaching of the Church, and is what you can find in any manual from before Vatican II. The important thing to remember is that it refers to when the Pope and College of Bishops

exercise their authentic Magisterium

and not, say, when they give an interview, or give a speech at a summit, or whatever.

Sounds like the same old, +40 year old crap - SSPX will not sign. This lie here is enough to call crap, crap: "Benedict XVI, who wishes to do everything in his power to achieve reconciliation,"

Written about 1928, well before anyone could imagine the Church would be in it's present crisis, it's interesting what this little PDF pamphlet:
The Doctrine and Proof of Papal Infallibility has to say about the pope.

"........for if the pope on one single occasion teaches heresy, how are we to be sure that he will not do so again? We are then in a position just as deplorable as that of the non-Catholic sects who have no ultimate authority to decide their controversies.



(09-15-2011, 12:04 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: [ -> ]How will the sspx be organized as a premature? Will it have different levels of membership? Such as opus deis numerary and supernumerary? Maybe the to sspx can be re worked as one level. Would parishinwrs at sspx chapels have to right a letter to the bishop seeking membership? As is done with opus dei?
Mmmmmm
doesn't sem to be as easy as some are making it

Perhaps the prelature will just be for the priests, religious, and third order members? The faithful could just attend chapels run by the prelature even if they're not members. Opus Dei runs a large parish in my city and I'm fairly certain that most of the parishioners are not numeraries or supernumeraries.
Since personal prelatures - as a canonical form - were invented for Opus Dei, I'm guessing it can be tweaked for the SSPX. I think people worrying about things like the authority of diocesan bishops being overlooked are seriously underestimating the intelligence of +Fellay and the other SSPX men involved.
(09-15-2011, 12:10 PM)Aragon Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-15-2011, 12:04 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: [ -> ]How will the sspx be organized as a premature? Will it have different levels of membership? Such as opus deis numerary and supernumerary? Maybe the to sspx can be re worked as one level. Would parishinwrs at sspx chapels have to right a letter to the bishop seeking membership? As is done with opus dei?
Mmmmmm
doesn't sem to be as easy as some are making it

Perhaps the prelature will just be for the priests, religious, and third order members? The faithful could just attend chapels run by the prelature even if they're not members. Opus Dei runs a large parish in my city and I'm fairly certain that most of the parishioners are not numeraries or supernumeraries.

What exactly the cannonical structures of a regularized SSPX would be is a good question. But, we should keep in mind that Fellay has said "my hope is for a prelature." Prelatures were not created with Opus Dei in mind. Opus Dei just happened to be the first one. I doubt a SSPX prelature would be exactly the same as Opus Dei.

As for Opus Dei run churches. Those are all diocesan churches which are just staffed by Opus Dei priests. Kind of similar when Jesuits run a diocesan church. Opus Dei does not own any of its own churches.  So the comparison here isn't quite accurate as SSPX churches would not be diocesan. Actually, now that I think about it there status would be very unique.
This letter is a complete joke. Who here has ever heard of a "Doctrinal Preamble" anyway? - another fresh novelty of the NO?

Where did "Lefebvrians" come from? WTH is that? +40 years I never heard that one -  Another fresh novelty of the NO.

In short, the main message I see is that all the talks that spanned over a period of two years fell on deaf ears. Who thinks SSPX is going to agree this when, according to this letter, nothing at all has changed?
(09-15-2011, 12:20 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]This letter is a complete joke. Who here has ever heard of a "Doctrinal Preamble" anyway? - another fresh novelty of the NO?

You have the text? Please share.

Quote:Where did "Lefebvrians" come from? WTH is that? +40 years I never heard that one -  Another fresh novelty of the NO.

It's a translation of the Italian lefebvriani. The more usual usage in English would be "Lefebvrists".
(09-15-2011, 12:30 PM)archdiocesan Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-15-2011, 12:20 PM)Stubborn Wrote: [ -> ]This letter is a complete joke. Who here has ever heard of a "Doctrinal Preamble" anyway? - another fresh novelty of the NO?

You have the text? Please share.

I'm talking about the OP.
(09-15-2011, 12:30 PM)archdiocesan Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:Where did "Lefebvrians" come from? WTH is that? +40 years I never heard that one -  Another fresh novelty of the NO.

It's a translation of the Italian lefebvriani. The more usual usage in English would be "Lefebvrists".

Why not call them "Faithful Catholics" or "Traditional Catholics" or Priestly Society etc. - something along those lines? "Lefebvrians" is a new one on me and it makes them sound like  they are part of some non-catholic sect.

As though Rome is doing some great favor by reaching out to them when Rome itself is the reason for the disunity. 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28