SSPX: No News During This papacy

Father Lombard informed everyone today there are going to be no news in the matter of the SSPX, and the file will be transmitted to his successor.

It makes sense and in fact, a last – minute agreement wouldn’t have been smart. The SSPX priests who would have had to approve might have felt they are put under pressure (“accept this now, now! Or face tough action from the next Pope”), and the Pope himself would have exposed himself to the right remark that he acts now to escape from the unavoidable polemics following such an act.

Perhaps it is now the time to say that this almost messianic expectation of an agreement isn’t healthy. On the contrary, it creates a climate by which an agreement is seen more and more as indispensable, irrespective of its content. Besides, an agreement now might as short-lived as the rest of this papacy.

In my eyes, those who love the Society should train themselves to the exact contrary: resignation that they will die before an agreement is reached, and tranquil confidence an agreement will come when both the time and the content are right.

Fellay & Co. know what they are doing. They will not endanger the organisational autonomy of the Society or its doctrinal integrity, but will work an pray for the end of this unsavoury situation as soon as possible.

Mundabor

About these ads

Posted on February 21, 2013, in Catholicism, FSSPX and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 3 Comments.

  1. For quite some time, I have believed that Fellay would take the agreement. As time passes, I am not so certain.

    While I was there, the Society clearly had two basic factions. The American/English/Non-French contingent and the French contingent.

    The first group tended to be very staunch in their opposition to V2, and they were also more likely to regard the Novus Ordo, at least the banal, pathetic vernacular versions with their corrupted translation of “pro multis” as “for all”, as “invalid”. They were far more rigid and uncompromising.

    The French contingent was more open to V2 being acceptable, if one would only interpret it in light of Tradition. Rarely, if ever, did I hear a French member utter the word “invalid” when referring to the Novus Ordo in any form, vernacular or Latin. Even the Archbishop himself was extremely cautious, until the mid to late 1980s, and he refrained from pronouncing such a condemnation. As noted, he became much more condemnatory as time progressed.

    This has been borne out over time. The American/English/Non-French contingent has tended towards a more divided and confrontational path. Hence, one of the Americans separated to form his own seminary in Colorado without any visible bishop. Two others (who were members of the nine) were subsequently ordained by “sede-vacantist” bishops in the Archbishop Thuc line. Another of the nine, also a sede-vacantist, separated from them, and he received ordination from another bishop. I could go on, but you get the picture.

    The French who have separated have tended toward reconciliation. Pere Aulagnier, the FSSP, along with about four or five others, now have Pontifical Right communities with seminaries. They opted for the offer from Rome. This was completely in line with their thinking regarding V2.

    I think the remaining French contingent has clearly drifted more toward the uncompromising approach.

    Best wishes!

    • I always thought, and continue to think, that Fellay would have signed an agreement – and would always ask his priests to sign it – that allows the SSPX to criticise V Ii without expecting the Vatican to “convert” to them and recite the mea culpa. I am perfectly fine with that, and I think most SSPX priests would.

      What changed the dynamic last year was Pope Benedict’s sudden change of the text of the preambolo, with the request that they accept V II as fine. This will never happen, and I think the Holy Father changed the cards on the table at the last minute not hoping they would accept, but hoping they would split.

      M

  2. I inadvertantly use the word “ordained” when referring to the three members of the nine. I meant consecration as bishops.

    Just a note of clarification!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,973 other followers

%d bloggers like this: