FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: SSPX says no to Rome
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
http://cathcon.blogspot.co.at/2012/07/ss...-rome.html


SSPX says no to Rome-updated


Announcement due tomorrow. There is no return to Rome. The superior of the Lefebvrists of Spain and Portugal, Juan Maria Montagut, will communicate to the faithful, after the mass of 11, that the hierarchy of the FSSPX, gathered in Ecône, have decided to say "no" to the Vatican.


The followers of Lefebvre will not return to the Roman fold. Primarily, because they are not willing to accept the Second Vatican Council in all its extremes. The Vatican, through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Levada, had demanded "full acceptance of the Council". And the Lefebvrists are not willing to return with that condition. They believe that accepting the Council would accept its errors, which, according to them, they are particularly focused on the chapters of "religious freedom, ecumenism and conciliarismo".


The decision of their hierarchy will be well accepted among the followers of the Lefebvrists, which did not see with good eyes a return to Rome conditional on the acceptance of the Council, in which they criticized much of the evils of the present church. However, they are thankful to Rome for the rapprochement and the possibility that has been provided for them to be able to present their doctrinal point of view.


Tomorrow, the superiors of the local FSSPX will read out the statement setting out the reasons and circumstances of their refusal to return to Rome and to reintegrate into the Catholic Church.


Spanish source

Original translation done in great haste- now revised.

Not a surprising decision given the recent unhelpful comments of the new head of the Congregation for the     Doctrine of the Faith.

If so a tragedy for the Church and the SSPX.

(07-14-2012, 06:58 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]If so a tragedy for the Church and the SSPX.

Oh yah, real tragedy alright.
(07-14-2012, 07:02 PM)tmw89 Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2012, 06:58 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]If so a tragedy for the Church and the SSPX.

Oh yeah, real tragedy alright.
My thoughts exactly.
(07-14-2012, 07:02 PM)tmw89 Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2012, 06:58 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]If so a tragedy for the Church and the SSPX.

Oh yah, real tragedy alright.

That's not my comment...but the writer of the article...I would agree it's a tragedy for the Church as it means they are still persistent in their errors.

(07-14-2012, 07:05 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2012, 07:02 PM)tmw89 Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2012, 06:58 PM)Petertherock Wrote: [ -> ]If so a tragedy for the Church and the SSPX.

Oh yah, real tragedy alright.

That's not my comment...but the writer of the article...I would agree it's a tragedy for the Church as it means they are still persistent in their errors.

Apologies, PTR.

Redirect my comment towards the article-writer  :)
I'll be curious to see if Rome (The Fox) calls the SSPX (The Grapes) sour (schismatic).
(07-14-2012, 07:29 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]I'll be curious to see if Rome (The Fox) calls the SSPX (The Grapes) sour (schismatic).
Declarations will be made, Ex-communications will be declare, etc.etc. You know the drill.
(07-14-2012, 07:34 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2012, 07:29 PM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]I'll be curious to see if Rome (The Fox) calls the SSPX (The Grapes) sour (schismatic).
Declarations will be made, Ex-communications will be declare, etc.etc. You know the drill.

That'll be nice.  I wasn't paying attention back in 1988, so it's like a "second time around" type of thing.

The problems within the SSPX are going to have be dealt with and it's going to be more difficult with an unreconciled "SSPX."  If they had reconciled, it would have offered a clear demarcation. Now there is going to be tension and deceptions and moles and abuses and defiance without a conclusive break. 

When Rorate Caeli posted this same article they added the following comment:
Quote:We are posting this for the record of events. Since this has not been confirmed or presented by official sources, and considering its source (a journalist in the most extreme Liberal edge of the Church in Spain), we ask you to consider it with a grain of salt while we await for actual documents, and to be reserved in your comments.

It looks like there will be an official announcement soon.  Perhaps we could wait to express our opinions until then.
Rorate is extreme left itself.  That's why they don't want to know that there's no possibility of a deal until it's absolutely impossible to ignore.

There's no deal.  That's why this is a joint statement (i.e. a statement of the General Chapter) instead of leaving Bishop Fellay and his assistants to work out a text later.

When the text comes out, Rorate will probably spin it by focussing on the fact that it leaves the door open (which, obviously, it will, since the SSPX is not sede).  But the door has always been open, so in this new text that will be nothing but boilerplate.  The part that will matter will be the part that says we're not going to cooperate with men who profess religious liberty etc.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10