See preceding page for earlier entries on 2/14/12, particularly the post from Sandro Magister's www.chiesa, which provides some useful context for the FSSPX case, which, if all goes well, may yet provide the biggest Church news this year... Let us pray...
Rome and Econe on the verge
of reaching agreement
by Jean-Marie Guénois
Translated from
April 13, 2012
The signing of a document defining the relations between the Holy See and the disciples of the late Mons. Marcel Lefebvre is now expected to come in just a matter of days.
Officially, the Vatican is awaiting a response from Mons. Bernard Fellay, superior-general of the FSSPX. As soon as it is received in Rome - "within days, not weeks"*, Vatican sources have indicated - that response will be analyzed "as soon as possible". And if it conforms to expectations, the Holy See will announce quickly what would be a historic agreement with this 'integriste' sector of the faithful
['integriste' is the French word for fundamentalist or traditionalist].
*[Strange that Guenois does not seem to be aware that the FSSPX itself has said their answer was being delivered to the Vatican by this weekend.]
But unofficially, and most discreetly, representatives from both sides have been working 'to reach an accord'. In the past few weeks, the final 'settlements' have been finalized between Rome and Econe to formulate a response that would best comply with the 'clarifications' sought by the Vatican last March 15 to the previous FSSPX reply.
Thus, the final response of Mons. Fellay - weighed with extreme consideration and well prepared - ought to bring to a conclusion, for good this time, a very delicate negotiation which Benedict XVI himself launched shortly after he was elected Pope in 2005.
The Ecclesia Dei commission, now part of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican's most important ministry, has been in charge of this case. But it has also been followed personally by Benedict XVI, who wants an agreement to be reached.
Which is why persons well-informed about developments believe that a positive outcome is about to see the light.
Even at the cost of leaving in place profound differences about Vatican II. [The 'profound differences' would remain anyway, whether the FSSPX comes back to the fold or not. I've always considered that the best answer to the FSSPX's objections to Vatican-II is Benedict XVI's insistence on a hermeneutic of continuity - interpreting the innovations proposed by Vatican-II, such as ecumenism, religious freedom, and collegiality, as a renewal of the Church in continuity with Tradition. Doubtless, the Vatican-II 'spiritists', who advocate the hermeneutic of rupture will howl and yelp about this desired agreement, and find new motivation to accuse Benedict XVI of turning against Vatican II, but what else is new? Joseph Ratzinger can say to all of them, "I was there and I took part. You did not".]
But the Pope has assumed all such divergences to himself. He placed his Pontificate clearly on the side of
re-interpreting Vatican-II.
['Re-interpreting' is not the right word. Rather, Benedict XVI finally laid down the proper interpretation of Vatican II (hermeneutic of continuity and reform) against the prevailing but erroneous interpretation (hermeneutic of rupture, i.e, Vatican-II gave birth to a 'new Church') in the first four post-Conciliar decades when the 'spiritists' held sway.]
Benedict XVI has done so along two lines: by 'evacuating' the spirit of rupture that had prevailed from the 1960s, and avoid having the highest traditions of the Church compromised by its adaptation to the modern world.
Benedict XVI turns 85 on Monday. He is tired, and those around him do not deny it. He had to rest this week in Castel Gandolfo after his exhausting trip to Mexico and Cuba and the liturgies of Holy Week.
[Guenois has had a running theme in his recent articles that the Pope is in poor physical status because of his age, and he seems to get an inexplicable sadistic pleasure from rubbing it in every chance he gets! He makes it appear as though the rest in Castel Gandolfo was something that only took place this year, when in fact, the Pope has always done so after Holy Week, precisely to recharge, because the Holy Week liturgies are demanding for him.]
When he gets back to the Vatican Friday evening, he will have the Lefebvre case waiting on his desk. And it could well be one of the weightiest decisions of his Pontificate.
For
50 years [Surely not! Mons. Lefebvre signed the Vatican II documents in 1965; the FSSPX was not founded until 1970, after the Novus Ordo came into effect; and Lefebvre and his community were not declared by the Vatican to be schismatic until July 1, 1988, the day after Lefebvre consecrated four bishops 'to carry on his work after he died' despite specific instructions from John Paul II not to do so], the Lefebvrians have been in conflict with the Holy See over Vatican-II, and in formal juridical rupture since June 1988.
Joseph Ratzinger was assigned by John Paul II at the time to negotiate with Lefebvre.
He has never accepted his failure.
{Guenois is misrepresenting facts by omitting to state what happened, specifically. Cardinal Ratzinger negotiated with Lefebvre before the illegal ordinations. He did in fact get Lefebvre to sign an agreement on May 5, 1988, that the Vatican would regularize the canonical status of the FSSPX and agree to the consecration of one bishop. For some reason, Lefebvre changed his mind and proceeded to disregard the agreement and ordained four bishops on June 30. Cardinal Ratzinger cannot be blamed for Lefebvre changing his mind after signing an agreement, nor would it seem that "he never accepted this failure", as Guenois claims, since the failure was not his at all. And this action of reneging by Lefebvre is something that the FSSPX has glossed over.] Nor, once he became Pope, could he accept the idea of a lasting schism in the Church.
One after the other, Benedict XVI used all the authority he has as Pope to bring down the obstacles in the way of full reconciliation with the Lefebvrians.
And if a final agreement is announced shortly, the Pope will have furnished all the essential groundwork:
- In 2007, the restoration of the traditional Mass according to the latest revision by John XXIII which was in use before the post-Vatican-II liturgical reform.
- In 2009, lifting the excommunications of the four bishops ordained by Mons. Lefebvre.
- In the same year, launching the doctrinal discussions with the FSSPX about their specific objections to the teachings of Vatican II.
The apparent checkmate of these talks a year ago had given the impression of a total checkmate in the negotiations. [What? The last discussions took place in October 2011, after which both sides announced that the Vatican would present the FSSPX with what one might call a formula for reconciliation. Which it did, and which the FSSPX leadership presented to all their district leaders in a meeting last December. There was never any talk of 'checkmate' at all!]
The doctrinal disagreement between the Vatican and the FSSPX over Vatican II is, in effect, abysmal.
It has simply been forgotten that the object of the discussions was not to find an agreement but to establish the list of differences and the reasons thereof. [I give up! Where does Guenois get these notions? Of course, the idea was to come to some agreement, but in the process of getting to that agreement, the differences would necessarily be fully ventilated and argued. The FSSPX could not have been fully intransigent with their earlier replies because the Vatican qualified them as 'insufficient' and requiring 'further clarification' - i.e., it did not slam the door shut on the FSSPX - even if, for obvious propaganda purposes, the FSSPX described the Vatican formulation as 'unacceptable' in some respects.]
It is therefore with perfect knowledge of the FSSPX position and without any ambiguity that Rome is prepared to seal a reconciliation with Econe, the FSPPX headquarters in Switzerland.
The FSSPX will probably be given the special status of a 'personal prelature', as the Opus Dei have, which gives them veritable autonomy in their own governance provided they observe the Catholic faith in communion with Rome. Their superior would be directly accountable to the Pope and not to the diocesan bishops wherever the community is located.
But the true 'revolution' that Benedict XVI seeks to leave in Catholic history lies elsewhere - and not at the periphery of the Church.
Already, two groups are poised to react furiously to regularization of the FSSPX within the Church. The so-called 'progressives' who see this as a challenge to the 'gains' achieved by Vatican-II. And the so-called 'ultras' among the Lefebvrians who see this as a betrayal and an unacceptable compromise with a 'modernist' Church.
The 'revolution' that Benedict XVI has in mind has a broader view of the Catholic Church. As a theologian, he has never accepted the progressivist view that with Vatican-II, the bimillenary Catholic Church had cut herself off from the culture and strength of her past.
Therefore, more than just a reconciliation with the FSSPX, this Pope intends this to be an internal reconciliation of the Church with herself.
Let us all pray that a positive agreement will indeed be reached with the FSSPX, that all the rosaries Mons. Fellay has asked his people to offer for the intentions of these talks have brought the graces of the Holy Spirit to work for a happy conclusion, and that our beloved Benedict may get this as a most unusual birthday/anniversary gift this year.