| | | OFFLINE | | Post: 24.789
Post: 7.314 | Registrato il: 28/08/2005
Registrato il: 20/01/2009 | Administratore | Utente Master | |
|
Father Z has bept a running count of various FSSPX distrrict superiors who have spoken out about the status of FSSPX negotiations with Rome and who appear to indicate that the FSSPX has substantially accepted the formulation proposed by the Vatican for the society's full recponciliation with the Church of Rome. Rorate caeli blogspot now offers one of the least unequivocal of those assessments, though it chooses to use a noncommittal title for the piece.
Important: FSSPX priest speaks
about recent developments
May 5, 2012
Left photo, Fr. Pfluger at last Sunday's lecture; center, the young Fr. Pfluger (right) assisting Mons. Lefebvre at a liturgy.
Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, FSSPX, is the First Assistant of the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X. He was the main speaker at a conference promoted in Hattersheim, Hesse, Germany, last Sunday, by the Actio Spes Unica association, during which he talked about Rome, the FSSPX, and the future.
The following is a translation of the official summary of the conference from the original German:
Agreement with Rome
despite doctrinal questions
'Nothing new' is how one could describe the first half hour of the lecture given by Fr. Niklaus Pfluger at this year’s Spes-Unica-Sunday, as the First Assistant of the Superior General of the SSPX recalled once more how the relationship with Rome has developed in recent years.
But then the conference hall in Hattersheim (Germany) got more and more excited as Fr. Pfluger unexpectedly started to unveil the events of the past years that have led to the present situation. And he also announced that these events prompted Bishop Fellay to set aside the principle that had previously guided negotiations with Rome.
The Pope’s desire for a solution
“No practical solution without doctrinal agreement” was the principle upon which the Society had started the talks with the Holy See. But the negotiations since 2009 have revealed that the different positions regarding central questions of doctrine cannot be bridged. [A fundamental problem with this formulation - reiterated many times in this summary - is that the four points disputed by the FSSPX about Vatican-II are not about fundamental Christian doctrine, but rather, new pastoral orientations for the Church.]
Recent weeks have revealed that the Pope is so interested in a canonical solution for the Society that he is ready to seal a deal, even if the Society does not recognize the disputed texts of Vatican II and the New Mass. Should the Society, however, refuse an agreement even under these circumstances, then new excommunications are a possible outcome.
The freedom to continue working in freedom
Under these circumstances the Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, does not consider it possible to reject the Pope’s proposal. It would be tantamount to a lapse into Sedevacantism if one would still isolate oneself from the Pope’s wish, if this wish does not entail acknowledging false doctrine.
It also is a matter of prudence/wisdom not to cut all connections with Rome. One should keep at least one door open, even if at this moment there seems to be no proximity in doctrinal matters.
It is, of course, a pre-condition that an agreement will cover the assurance that the Society will be able to disagree from Rome’s positions in disputed matters and that it will have the freedom to continue her work in her entire apostolate. Part of an autonomous status would also be the right to criticize the Council and Modernism.
[I believe this was something that Rome agreed to in previous reconciliations with smaller offshoots of the FSSPX which decided to re-enter into full comunion with Rome in previous years.]
The offer to Archbishop Lefebvre and historical parallels
By way of support for Bishop Fellay’s decision, Fr. Pfluger recalled the way of action of Archbishop Lefebvre in 1987 and 1988. At that time the Archbishop proposed a far-reaching proposal for an agreement with which he wanted to arrive at a pragmatic interim solution which would have benefited the whole Church.
The arrangement that the Archbishop was willing to sign at that time demanded far more concessions from the Society than what Pope Benedict demands at the moment. [Lefebvre did sign the agreement negotiated by then Cardinal Ratzinger in 1988 but reneged on it less than a month later when he decied to proceed with ordaining four new bishops against the express order of John Paul II.]
Moreover, one has to realize how much false doctrines have spread throughout the Church. Even if a theological conciliation between Rome and the Fraternity would have been achieved, it could not be expected that by a word of command from the Pope all false doctrines would suddenly disappear from the face of the earth. [True, the same way that not anything that the Vatican-II Popes - John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI - could say has managed to truly neutralize the false Vatican-II interpretations propagated by the progressivistgs, much less the deplorable anti-Catholic practices of cafeteria Catholics.]
Fr. Pfluger points to parallels in the history of the Church: after the condemnation of Arianism, this false doctrine was still spread widely for quite some time, in some regions even for many decades. And even fifty years after the Council of Trent, the Archishop of Milan asks Rome for advice, for almost all of his clergy have wives and children. What is he to do? – The response from Rome shows how the Church reacts with wisdom and common sense in such situations: if he cannot replace the clergy, then he simply has to keep it.[Except that Benedict XVI has also been very clear that he would much rather have 'better priests than more priests', and that dissenting bishops and priests should look to purifying themselves individually first before focusing on proposing institutional reforms that would be meaningless without prior personal purification.]
The relentless reinforcing of Tradition
The acknowledgement of the Society would, after all, be an official confirmation of the importance of Tradition, something that would be very important and influential throughout the Church. And it would rectify the injustice of her stigmatization.
Is there not a danger of hostile local bishops using the arrangement to fight and impede further working of the Fraternity? Against this foreseeable argument the First Assistant holds the development of recent years: the movement in the direction of Tradition – and mainly the wish of young priests to say the Old Mass – has become unstoppable, despite intimidation and oppression.
In fact, this movement is now so strong that the Fraternity will be able to resist such claims from modernist Bishops. [Moreover, under the Personal Prelature that Rome appears to have proposed as the canonical status for the FSSPX, the society is answerable directly to the Pope, like the Opus Dei is, and not to any local bishop.
The audio file of this conference is available for download from de.katholon.org/audio/audio.php?file=pfluger/pfluger_abkommen (Translator's note: this text is really not as comprehensive as the speech given by Father Pfluger itself and it lacks the tone of the address. If you understand German, please take two hours to get a good picture of what is going on between Rome and Menzingen).)
I have not been visiting the main site of the FSSPX lately, since I go straight to DICI, their information site, but I like their new modern look, as seen
in their home page. It has the advantage of highlighting DICI itself on the left side of the page for a preview of the latest news posted and a quick link to the site:
I took the liberty of reproducing the DICI photo as a slightly larger inset because it is presented as a teaser for the DICI report on the Pope's recent trip
to Mexico and Cuba (it shows him looking out of the helicopter at the Cristo Rey monument in Guajanato on his way to the monumental Mass held at
the foot of Mount Cubilete, on which the statue was built). DICI reports regularly and objectively on the most significant developments in
the Catholic Church.
Earlier, Rorate caeli posted a translation from the German of a letter written by the superior of the FSSPX district in Germany in the May issue of the district magazine. The letter also seems to anticipate reconciliation with Rome, though carefully hedged in its statements. One must remember that public statements made by the FSSPX have at least three distinct audiences - the world outside the society, the society members themselves, and those who have provided financial support to the community all these years. So we may not expect less unequivocal statements until Pope Benedict XVI makes his decision. The editorial appears on pp. 2-3 of the 60-page magazine, and is untitled.
Editorial
by Fr. Franz Schmidberger
Superior of the Piusbruederschaft, German district
Translated from
May 2012
Dear friends and benefactors, dear faithful,
"We hold fast, with all our heart and with all our soul, to Catholic Rome, Guardian of the Catholic faith and of the traditions necessary to preserve this faith, to Eternal Rome, Mistress of wisdom and truth.
"We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.
In this statement of Abp. Lefebvre from his epochal declaration of 21 November 1974 are contained two inseparable fundamental principles:
On the one hand, the rejection of the spirit of the Council, of some of the declarations of the council and of some of the reforms that arose from the Council – and we have devoted ourselves with all our force to this task since the foundation of the Fraternity in 1970.
On the other, unbreakable relations with Rome, insofar as it portrays eternal Rome. We cannot expect, however, that after the conciliar and post-conciliar collapse, everything will be perfect again in the Church Militant in one day.
The Church has in her bosom both saints and sinners. Amongst her human imperfections can even be counted errors, even if they do not directly oppose the revealed truth. A Church Militant filled with saints only is the heresy of Jansenism, which has been condemned expressly by the Magisterium.
Of course every Christian has the duty to fight sin and error, each according to his possibility and his position in the Church; however, we must always start with ourselves and align our lives with the principles of the Catholic faith.
During and after the Council, the following slogan has been cited time and time again: Ecclesia semper reformanda est – the Church is always being reformed. This statement is ambiguous and was shamefully abused by those who want 'reform'.
It is only Catholic when we mean that the Church is always to be reformed in its members, the life of faith and morals must always be renewed, and even the discipline of the Church sometimes has to be adapted to new circumstances. But the structure of the Church is God-given and cannot be altered nor “renewed” by man.
Let us then not forget, in the heat of battle, the first principle of Abp. Lefebvre: the Church was founded by Christ on Peter. To him he entrusted the keys of heaven, to him he gave the mandate to feed the sheep (Mt. 16, 18ff; Jn 21, 15ff). [Why then did Mons. Lefebvre decide to defy John Paul II after he had already signed an agreement to be reconciled to Rome in 1988?]
And the field of the Church may be filled with weeds, so full that one can hardly see the wheat – but the Church has the promise of eternal life; the Lord is with her all the days until the end of times (Mt. 28, 20).
It is His Church, not ours. We do not have the right to dispose of her. We cannot see the Church in a too human, too political, or too diplomatic way. However much St. Athanasius, in the fourth century A.D., saved faith in the divinity of Christ, however much he safeguarded the survival of the Church – he was but a tool of Divine Providence, with which the promise of the Church’s perpetual existence was to be accomplished. Had he flinched from this mission, God would have called upon another tool.
And it is like this with Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of Saint Pius X that he founded: the founder and his work have significantly contributed to upholding for the Church the true Holy Mass, the doubt-free sacraments, and the deposit of the faith during stormy times.
And yet, the great confessor-bishop, the priests that he ordained, the bishops that he consecrated, they are but unprofitable servants(Lk 17, 10), who are in the service of Divine Providence and promise. How much grace, greatness and joy lay in this being allowed to serve!
And yet, the tools do not possess the promise of eternal life, but the Church does, as the Mystical Body of the Lord. And this is why we hold fast, with all our heart, to eternal Rome, and why we want to be neither heretical, nor schismatic, but simply Catholic.
If Rome now calls us back from the exile to which it expelled us in 1975 with the abrogation of the [canonical] approval [of the Society], and even more in 1988 with the decree of excommunication, then that is an act of justice and without doubt also an act of authentic pastoral care by Pope Benedict XVI. And for that we are grateful.
With priestly benediction in the risen Lord and His most Holy Mother.
Father Franz Schmidberger
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 07/05/2012 02:58] |