No Compromise On Vatican Ii: Fellay

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' post='1939465' date='Aug 2 2009, 10:38 PM']They've already failed one recent "test" in obedience.[/quote]

It wasn't a test of their obedience. The Pope knows enough about the SSPX that I would be surprised if he thought for a moment that the SSPX bishops would not go through with the ordinations.

The ordinations were certainly illicit, but that is nothing new. The SSPX bishops have been ordaining priests illicitly for twenty years. Rome does not expect the SSPX to stop ordaining priests because of the beginning of talks which might last another twenty years.

Edited August 3, 2009 by Resurrexi

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1939473' date='Aug 3 2009, 12:52 AM']It wasn't a test of their obedience. The Pope knows enough about the SSPX that I would be surprised if he thought for a moment that the SSPX bishops would not go through with the ordinations.

The ordinations were certainly illicit, but that is nothing new. The SSPX bishops have been ordaining priests illicitly for twenty years. Rome does not expect the SSPX to stop ordaining priests because of the beginning of talks which might last another twenty years.[/quote]

[CatholicCid]

Well, for the sake of semantics, wouldn't Rome expect obedience?


I'm glad that the article isn't as dire sounding as the title. I thought it was going to mention an outright denial of VII, but glad that he calls for clarification of the documents.

The article also reminds me of a recent post by Fr. Z on [url="http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/08/sspx-bp-fellay-speaks-his-piece-dialogue-with-rome-etc/"]the 'emergency powers' the SSPX claim[/url] as mentioned by the OP article. If the SSPX does have "emergency powers", how can Rome clarify statements on VII? As usual, the good Father had some nice commentary tossed in his review of the article.

Edited August 3, 2009 by CatholicCid

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' post='1939480' date='Aug 2 2009, 11:02 PM'][/quote]

You do realize that nothing in the Vatican was done about the then-upcoming ordinations until the German bishops complained.

Edited August 3, 2009 by Resurrexi

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1939487' date='Aug 3 2009, 12:12 AM']You do realize that nothing in the Vatican was done about the then-upcoming ordinations until the German bishops complained.[/quote]

And before those SSPX ordinations, there was others. In that case the Vatican asked the SSPX not to stop the ordinations but asked they move them elsewhere. Which the SSPX in obedience followed. I believe this is a key factor in understanding what the Vatican thinks about the SSPX ordinations.

Edited August 3, 2009 by KnightofChrist

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1939473' date='Aug 2 2009, 10:52 PM']It wasn't a test of their obedience. The Pope knows enough about the SSPX that I would be surprised if he thought for a moment that the SSPX bishops would not go through with the ordinations.

The ordinations were certainly illicit, but that is nothing new. The SSPX bishops have been ordaining priests illicitly for twenty years. Rome does not expect the SSPX to stop ordaining priests because of the beginning of talks which might last another twenty years.[/quote]


Just because the Vatican expects them to go through with it doesn't make it any less disobedient. If it's illicit, then its an act of disobedience whether the Vatican knew it was coming or not.

To say otherwise is like saying that a child is somehow not disobeying their parents when they sneak out of the house to go do something wrong, simply because the parent(s) knew fully that they were going to do it.

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1939519' date='Aug 3 2009, 01:52 AM']Just because the Vatican expects them to go through with it doesn't make it any less disobedient. If it's illicit, then its an act of disobedience whether the Vatican knew it was coming or not.

To say otherwise is like saying that a child is somehow not disobeying their parents when they sneak out of the house to go do something wrong, simply because the parent(s) knew fully that they were going to do it.[/quote]

[Skinzo]

I doubt seriously that this is going to be settled anytime soon. I think the original offer made to Abp. Lefebvre was pretty generous and the SSPX are not likely to get better terms. One thing that interests me is that the SSPX are really seeking some hard and firm clarifications about Vatican II and I'm wondering if the Vatican might issue some document which offers just that? And if that happens, might not some "progressives" be infuriated and cause a real fuss?
The major problem I see with the SSPX is that they are so used to sitting in judgment on the popes since Vatican II, it will be almost impossible for them to retreat from that stance. Their whole reason for being is that they believe Vatican II itself is fatally flawed. And it is not possible for Rome to accept that.

S.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1940006' date='Aug 3 2009, 05:55 PM']I doubt seriously that this is going to be settled anytime soon. I think the original offer made to Abp. Lefebvre was pretty generous and the SSPX are not likely to get better terms.[/quote]

While I would certainly do not think that any terms of agreement will be more lax than those to which the SSPX signed in 1988, I do not think that they will be any stricter either.

After all, the man who wrote the terms in 1988 is the same man who has the authority to decide the terms now.

Edited August 3, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Skinzo]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1940021' date='Aug 3 2009, 08:25 PM']I would certainly not think that any terms of agreement will be more lax than those to which the SSPX signed in 1988, I do not think that they will be any stricter either.

After all, the man who wrote the terms in 1988 is the same man who has the authority to decide the terms now.[/quote]

Yes, but as I believe you have pointed out elsewhere Ratzinger had a different status then. AND, that was TWENTY years ago and prior to the schism and the Bishop Williamson fiasco, to mention only two problems. Benedict XVI may be fed up and simply leave the matter to the CDF. He cannot be happy with the attitude of the SSPX since he has made major concessions to them, yet they continue to snipe at him in a disrespectful fashion and to fracture canon law whenever they are so inclined. They may find themselves faced with some sharp ultimatums. We will see.


S.

Edited August 3, 2009 by Skinzo

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1940042' date='Aug 3 2009, 06:51 PM']Yes, but as I believe you have pointed out elsewhere Ratzinger had a different status then. AND, that was TWENTY years ago and prior to the schism and the Bishop Williamson fiasco, to mention only two problems. Benedict XVI may be fed up and simply leave the matter to the CDF. He cannot be happy with the attitude of the SSPX since he has made major concessions to them, yet they continue to snipe at him in a disrespectful fashion and to fracture canon law whenever they are so inclined. They may find themselves faced with some sharp ultimatums. We will see.


S.[/quote]

Although the Pope probably wouldn't be writing the agreement, he would probably have to approve it. The SSPX most likely wouldn't be willing sign to anything stricter than the 1988 agreement, and I would bet that the Pope knows this.

By the way, The Bishop Williamson "fiacso" has nothing to do with the reunion of the SSPX with the Holy See. Whether 15,000,000 or 15,000 persons were killed during the holocaust has nothing to do with faith and morals.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Skinzo]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1940063' date='Aug 3 2009, 09:26 PM']Although the Pope probably wouldn't be writing the agreement, he would probably have to approve it. The SSPX most likely wouldn't be willing sign to anything stricter than the 1988 agreement, and I would bet that the Pope knows this.

By the way, The Bishop Williamson "fiacso" has nothing to do with the reunion of the SSPX with the Holy See. Whether 15,000,000 or 15,000 persons were killed during the holocaust has nothing to do with faith and morals.[/quote]

I agree that Benedict XVI would likely want to have the final say in any agreement which might be reached. I also agree that the pope knows that. What we don't know is the willingness of the Pope to be generous at this point given the outrageous behavior of the SSPX.
Sorry kid, but with respect to Bishop Williamson, it indeed has everything to do with "the reunion of the SSPX with the Holy See". Why?
Because Rome has made it quite clear that Bishop Williamson MUST "absolutely and unequivocally distance himself from his remarks about the Shoah if he is to be admitted to episcopal functions in the church." He has not done so. No one who denies the Holocaust is going to be welcome in the Church henceforth.
See: [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretariat_state/2009/documents/rc_seg-st_20090204_note-decree-cbishops_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretar...bishops_en.html[/url]

Acceptance of the fact of the Shoah at this point is pretty much like accepting the dawn. Only an idiot would deny it. But of course, this is the same Bishop Williamson who describes the "Sound of Music" as "soul rotting slush" which he considers almost "pornographic" !
See: [url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1137162/Does-outcast-bishop-denies-Holocaust-grudge-M-S.html"]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...grudge-M-S.html[/url]



S.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Skinzo

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Skinzo' post='1940123' date='Aug 3 2009, 08:27 PM']I agree that Benedict XVI would likely want to have the final say in any agreement which might be reached. I also agree that the pope knows that. What we don't know is the willingness of the Pope to be generous at this point given the outrageous behavior of the SSPX.
Sorry kid, but with respect to Bishop Williamson, it indeed has everything to do with "the reunion of the SSPX with the Holy See". Why?
Because Rome has made it quite clear that Bishop Williamson MUST "absolutely and unequivocally distance himself from his remarks about the Shoah if he is to be admitted to episcopal functions in the church." He has not done so. No one who denies the Holocaust is going to be welcome in the Church henceforth.
See: [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretariat_state/2009/documents/rc_seg-st_20090204_note-decree-cbishops_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretar...bishops_en.html[/url]

Acceptance of the fact of the Shoah at this point is pretty much like accepting the dawn. Only an idiot would deny it. But of course, this is the same Bishop Williamson who describes the "Sound of Music" as "soul rotting slush" which he considers almost "pornographic" !
See: [url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1137162/Does-outcast-bishop-denies-Holocaust-grudge-M-S.html"]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11...grudge-M-S.html[/url]



S.[/quote]

It is indeed true that, "in order to be admitted to function as a Bishop within the Church, Bishop Williamson must also distance himself in an absolutely unequivocal and public way from his positions regarding the Shoah, which were unknown to the Holy Father at the time of the remission of the excommunication." It is equally true that the SSPX can return to full communion with the Holy See with or without Bishop Williamson functioning as a bishop. In fact, it is likely that, when and if the SSPX is reunited, Bishop Williamson will be allowed only the functions of a mere priest.

That said, whether one accepts that between 11 and 19 million persons were killed during the Holocaust has nothing to do with one's communion with the Church. This is a fact. The Church has never made pronouncement that millions were used in the Holocaust, and she never will. This means that the faithful are free to believe whatever they want on the matter.

Though [b]I personally do think that about six million Jews and around 11 to 19 million persons total were killed in the Holocaust[/b], as a Catholic I will not impose that view on my fellow Catholics since the Magisterium has not ever made and will not ever make a pronouncement on the matter as it has nothing to do with faith or morals.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Skinzo]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1940144' date='Aug 3 2009, 11:09 PM']It is indeed true that, "in order to be admitted to function as a Bishop within the Church, Bishop Williamson must also distance himself in an absolutely unequivocal and public way from his positions regarding the Shoah, which were unknown to the Holy Father at the time of the remission of the excommunication." It is equally true that the SSPX can return to full communion with the Holy See with or without Bishop Williamson functioning as a bishop. In fact, it is likely that, when and if the SSPX is reunited, Bishop Williamson will be allowed only the functions of a mere priest.

That said, whether one accepts that between 11 and 19 million persons were killed during the Holocaust has nothing to do with one's communion with the Church. This is a fact. The Church has never made pronouncement that millions were used in the Holocaust, and she never will. This means that the faithful are free to believe whatever they want on the matter.

Though [b]I personally do think that about six million Jews and around 11 to 19 million persons were killed in the Holocaust[/b], as a Catholic I will not impose that view on my fellow Catholics since the Magisterium has not ever made and will not ever make a pronouncement on the matter since it has nothing to do with faith or morals.[/quote]

I agree the Church is unlikely to pronounce upon the subject. Nonetheless, she can make acceptance of the Holocaust a condition for anyone to function as an ANYTHING in the Church. It is within her disciplinary power to do so. You think Bishop Williamson might be allowed to function as a priest?? You keep grasping at straws. Think again. You're forgetting the case of Father Abrahamowicz, a priest of the SSPX who vigorously defended Williamson. Bishop Fellay expelled him immediately. At this writing it seems unlikely that anyone in the SSPX will be able to remain as a bishop or priest if they have the views of Williamson.

S.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Skinzo

[XIX]

I'm pessimistic that any kind of reconciliation would happen soon. A reconciliation would probably take a few centuries.

I don't know. It's very hard to get any kind of accurate read on what's actually happening between the Pope and the SSPX. They probably want it that way.