Showing posts with label Preamble. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Preamble. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Institute of the Good Shepherd: Ecclesia Dei Imposes Commissar Administrator for New Election

(Bordeaux / Rome) Nine months after the elections for the appointment of a new Superior General and a new General Council of the traditional Instituts du Bon Pasteur and the subsequent internal conflict is now before the decision of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. The Commission, which is under the Institute since 2006, has appointed a provisional administrator, who has a mandate of six months. Its mission is to prepare new elections for the governing bodies at this time and carried out under his supervision. The Institute of the Good Shepherd was made up of former members of the Society of St. Pius X. and established that because they no longer wanted to endorse their canonically irregular status.

The Institute, based in Bordeaux, is in contrast to the SSPX, recognized as a society of Apostolic Life of Pontifical Right of the Church in 2006 and placed under the Ecclesia Dei Commission.

In spring 2012 a visitation of the Institute by the Ecclesia Dei Commission came to the election of the Institute. The visitation by the then-Secretary of Ecclesia Dei, Monsignor Guido Pozzo, had caused quite a stir and considerable unrest in tradition-bound circles. It had been put out as an example within the SSPX, as a reason why the Brotherhood should not agree to any agreement with the Holy See. Rome had demanded and required of the Institute an appropriate consideration of the Second Vatican Council in priestly formation, to reconsider the categorical exclusion of the celebration of the New Rite and to recognize the Catechism of the Catholic Church in its 1997 edition as the authoritative compendium of Catholic doctrine.

At the General Chapter on 5 July, a new Institute's director was chosen for younger members, who were critical of the Roman terms. The New Superior General, Father Roch Perrel, however, was a choice that was disputed by the founders and former Superior General, Father Laguérie, due to procedural deficiencies in Rome. In one of his first acts as prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller appealed which took place on the 30th of July 2012 and ordered the repeat of the elections.

This recent decision of Rome dealt at first sight with neither of the two warring sides fairly. They also denied the claim of Abbé Philippe Laguèrie to continue to be the rightful superior general. Elections under Roman supervision will provide clarity and bring peace back to the Institute. Long periods of time are considered problematic, in which ambiguity and uncertainty prevail: first nine months until the decision of Rome and now another six months to the elections. The majority of the Institute, it was possible, despite the adverse circumstances, to be faithful to the the founding charism with the necessary peace and serenity. This solid foundation made possible the growth in the Institute by new entrants and seminarians in the last few months.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi Image: Institut du Bon Pasteur Translation: Tancred AMGD

Monday, October 15, 2012

Obéissance or Explusion -- Bishop Williamson Receives Ultimatum

(Menzigen)  The break, indicated since October 2011 between Bishop Richard Williamson and the Society of St. Pius X has come to an end phase.  The General Superior of the Society of St. Pius X, Bernard Fellay, should have issued an ultimatum to his English colleague in the office of Bishop.  With the document he demanded that Msgr. Williason, within ten days, accept the legitimate authority of the General Superior.  This was reported by Andrea Tornielli.  Should Bishop Williamson continue to maintain his disobedience,separation would be the logical consequence.

The relations between the General Superior and Bishop Williamson has been in a dive since the previous year.  Williamson is the most famous and combative opponents of the General Superior and his efforts in preparing to reconcile with the Holy See.  The seriousness of the quarrel was shown with the reconciliation talks between the Society and the Holy See was shown in Autumn of 2011, as Msgr. Fellay called all superiors of the Society to Albano Laziale, in order to inform them about the "Doctrinal Preamble" of the Holy See, and to discuss continued procedures.  The General Superior demanded Msgr Williamson then not to participate in the Council.  Actually, the insubordinate Bishop did not come to Albano Laziano near Rome.  Since Spring of 2012, the General Superior told +Williamson not to give any more lectures, to act pastorally or to act in the distribution of Sacraments.  At the General Chapter of 2012 Msgr. Williamson was again not invited.

Then the definitive moment of clarity took place, according to which Msgr. Williamson active in Brazil definitively against the will of the Society.

Because of Williamson's 2009 statements about the "Shoah", Rome was given observable stomach pains about a reconciliation with the Society and also to his recognition and acceptance as Bishop.  The exclusion of +Willaimson from the Society did not directly affect the reunification talks with Rome, but would certainly be taken with lightening toward recognition.   After that it became known that the other Bishops had written a severely critical letter against their General Superior and against unification with Rome, and  the Congregation of the Doctrine and the Faith explained that the position of Bishop Williamson, Tissier de Mallerais and de Gallereta would be handled independently in a possible unification.

For the General Superior of the Society, there the question in any case is not the mental state of Rome, rather the continued disobedience which Bishop Williamson shows to date.  The sedevacantist fringe of the Society has exerted a process of eroding on the Society for months.  In the USA there is in place a new type of "Society", which is now describing itself as the "true" Society of St. Pius X.  Its members insist that Msgr. Fellay is the legitimate successor of Archbishop Lefebvre,  whom they never the less refuse to obey, and who wish to enact in miniature, the situation between the Society and Rome.

Link to katholisches...

Friday, September 28, 2012

No Settlement With the SSPX

The stated terms which were personally addressed by Pope Benedict XVI -- as the Pope well knows -- unacceptable to the Society. 
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais

(kreuz.net) On June 30th the Pope sent a personally addressed and signed letter to the Society of St. Pius X.

This is according to Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais on 16 September in the Prior6y of the 1,200 population town Faye-d'Anjoy in the west French Department Maine-et-Loire.

The corresponding points of the report appeared transcribed in the French forum 'lefebvristes.forum-box.com'.

The Terms

The Papal document was addressed to the General Superior of the Society, Bishop Bernard Fellay.

The Pope wrote within that in order for there to be possible a "complete settlement" in the Church, the Second Vatican Council and the post-Conciliar Magisterium must "really" be accepted.

"There won't be any settlement"

For Msgr Tissier the demand to recognize the Second Vatican Council is unacceptable and with it the conclusion of the discussions with the Vatican:

"We could accept it in any case."

The Pastoral Council contains many texts in which one finds good things:

"But that is not the kernel of the Council."

The Society could not sign the current proposal of the Dogmatic Preamble forthwith.

Yet Msgr Tissier believes that the Vatican will also be "stubborn" in the future to make the Pastoral Council toothsome to the Society.

Link to kreuz.net....


Photo: © Jim, the Photographer, Flickr, CC

Monday, August 13, 2012

Wurzburg: Will This Diocese Have to Sign the Doctrinal Preamble Too?


Denial of the Council: The church paper of the Diocese of Wurzburg has distorted the secure secret of the Assumption into its opposite.

(Kreuz.net) The 'Catholic Würzburg Sunday News' is the church paper of the Diocese of Würzburg. Your editor is the old liberal Wolfgang Bullin.

What is the Assumption?

The actual number published a rabidly heretical interpretation of the Solemnity of the Assumption.

The doctrine was declared at first November 1950 by Pope Pius XII. in the Apostolic Constitution "Munificentissimus Deus".

The body of the church newspaper even quotes from it: "The spotless, perpetual Virgin Mary Mother of God, after she had finished their earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory."

Now it twists
.
This statement is turned into its very opposite, for example, the church newspaper maintains that the phrase is "problematic for many". But the problems are only the twisting of the diocesan sheet. This works with a little known distinction between soul and body: "Actually, a body does not mean corpus." [The distinction between Leib and Korper in German is something like the distinction between figure and person.]

That's right front is not rear

Then, they lied without batting an eyelid. When it means, "that Mary's body and soul went to God, so this is nothing other than what the Christian faith for all hoped for: that we human beings as a whole person, as an unmistakable I is taken after death to God."
From front to back, that's wrong.

The Mother of God is a special case

The souls awaiting the saints in heaven - with the exception of the Mother of God - await the resurrection the flesh and union with her, who are ​still in the ground with their dormant corpses or bodies.

This is something that the incompetent leaders of the 'Würzburg Catholic Sunday Journal" would have been able to read in every child's Catechism.

Rejection of Vatican II

The article provides an open rejection of the Second Vatican Council.

It can be found in the Church Constitution Lumen Gentium 68:

". In the interim just as the Mother of Jesus, glorified in body and soul in heaven, is the image and beginning of the Church as it is to be perfected is the world to come, so too does she shine forth on earth, until the day of the Lord shall come,(304) as a sign of sure hope and solace to the people of God during its sojourn on earth. "

In other words, what is applicable to the Mother of God, is not even for everyone else.

Completely fallen from the faith

Pius XII. speaks in "Deus Munificentissimus" about the heretical authors such as the bishopric of Würzburg spreading such heresies, with the following judgment:

"Therefore, if God forbid anyone deny this truth, which has been defined by us, consciously, or dares to question it, let him know that he has dropped completely from the divine and Catholic faith. "

This scandal in the diocese of Würzburg can not easily be ignored.
Link to kreuz.net...

Thursday, July 26, 2012

New CDF Positive About Reconciliation With SSPX


Edit:It should be pointed out that the press is really eager to torpedo this deal and that certain comments from Archbishop Mueller, with respect to the level of mental agreement the SSPX is meant to have of the Second Vatican Council, have been sorely misquoted, or at least toned down in later statements.

Rome remains eager to hear the SSPX's response.

When Archbishop Mueller says that the Vatican Council is non-negotiable, he's referring to those parts which reaffirm the previous Councils. Being fixated on alleged "ideological" differences, +Mueller concedes, echoing Pope Benedict and Msgr. Nicola Bux that not all of the documents of the Council are of the same weight, and that the Vatican Council is not a "super Dogma".

The following is an excerpt from Louie Verrecchio, writing for Renew America, a very balanced and fair analysis of the situation, particularly in the following.

"There was no need to call a council merely to hold discussions of that nature," he continued. "What is needed at the present time is a new enthusiasm, a new joy and serenity of mind in the unreserved acceptance by all of the entire Christian faith, without forfeiting that accuracy and precision in its presentation which characterized the proceedings of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council."

This being the case, if one adheres to "the entire Christian faith" as expressed in the doctrinal pronouncements that preceded the Council; then clearly one must be walking on solidly Catholic ground. This, according to my understanding, is precisely where the SSPX stakes its claim.

If this be true, then it's reasonable for us to wonder what the nature of the discord truly is.

Look, no one disputes the fact that confusion surrounds certain aspects of the conciliar text. As the communique from the Vatican Information Service (VIS) stated at the outset of the discussions "[the Holy See] leaves open to legitimate discussion the examination and theological explanation of individual expressions and formulations contained in the documents of Vatican Council II and later Magisterium."

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

District Superior Announcement

Edit: This news is challenging. Father Schmidberger was also firm, but milder in his estimation.


Day of Reparation on October 27th for Assisi III
10-26-2011
Tomorrow, on October 27th, the Pope will be presiding at the interreligious meeting in Assisi. He called this reunion to commemorate the 25th anniversary of Assisi I.
Fr. Arnaud Rostand
The authorities in Rome are trying their best to explain that relativism and syncretism will be avoided. However, this remains a great scandal for the Church! It is a direct attack against the first Commandment of God: “Thou shalt not have strange gods before Me.”
In a spirit of reparation, I have requested our priests in the United States District, where possible, to publicly offer the Mass Pro Fidei Propagatione (For the Propagation of the Faith). I have also asked for exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, to be adored in a spirit of reparation for this public and grave offence. In some of our chapels where it may be more fruitful for the faithful, this day of reparation may be transferred to the following Saturday or Sunday. [please contact the nearest SSPX chapel for details]
The fight for the defense of the Faith continues, especially against the rising ecumenism of our times.
With my prayers and blessing, in the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
Fr. Arnaud Rostand

Saturday, October 1, 2011

SSPX Spokesman: If the General Superior Agrees, The Society Will Come Along

Thank the Society of St. Pius X that finally the Superdogma of the "Second Vatican Council" can be criticized.
A Very Happy Father Lorans


(kreuz.net)  The openness with which the Society theologians have discussed in doctrinal talks about the difficulties of the texts of the Second Vatican Council , have not endangered the most recent stage of the discussions of the doctrinal Preamble.

The Speaker of the Swiss General House of the Society of Pius X, Father Alain Lorans, said on the  21st of September for the French newspaper 21.

 The Congregation for the Doctrine and the Faith tailored the Preamble to accomodate the objections of the Society's positions critical of the Council.

Catholics will be Recognized as Catholics Again

An agreement with Rome and with the regularization of the canonical status of the Society is something Father Lorans thinks is "not so critical".

It's much more important to give back the Traditionalists their liberties as Catholics again.

That was begun with the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum'.

The Society Holds Tight

It is clear for Father Lorans: If the General Superior of the Society, Msgr Bernard Fellay, agrees to the Preamble, the Society will come too.

Father Lorans offers no information on the doctrinal Preamble.

He defers to the official statement of the Vatican.

The Preamble leaves "open justifiable debate, studies and theological clarifications of certain expressions or certain formulations, which are in the present texts of the Second Vatican Council and the subsequent Magisterium."

The Taboo Surrounding the Pastoral Council is Gone


Father Lorans stressed that the problematic points in the Second Vatican Council "may be discussed, without putting obedience to the Church in question."

This is so that the Vatican recognizes that these controversial texts necessary for approval are not the same as for dogma.

Father recalled the internal distinction between the statement of the Vatican Press service on the "Doctrinal Preamble" of September 14. and the note by the Secretary of State to the Society on the 4th of February 2009.

Back then it read:

"For future recognition of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X., a full recognition of the Second Vatican Council and the Magisterium of the Pope John XXIII., Paul VI., John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. is an indispensable condition. "

According to Father, there are two years worth of theological discussions between these two statements.

This had had enabled us to illuminate the doctrinal problems.

The question as to whether Rome had developed more in those two years or if the presentations of the theologians of the Society had anything to do with it is something Father Lorans is leaving open to question.

Link to kreuz.net...

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Pius Society to Meet Near Rome to Discuss Preamble

Edit: what's interesting to us is the location they chose. They chose a place close to Rome, they didn't chose Switzerland or Menzigen.

In zwei Wochen verhandelt die Bruderschaft

Italy. [kreuz.net] On the 7th and 8th of October the Superior of the Society of St. Pius X will meet in the Italian District office in Albano near Rome, to have discussions about the negotiations with Rome. This was reported by 'dici.org' on Friday. The Superiors were will be secluded from the public to discuss the Dogmatic Preamble they received from the Congregation of the Faith.

From kreuz.net...


Dici...

Related:

This Victory of SSPX isn't a Rome Defeat...

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

This Victory of The Society of Saint Pius X is Not a Roman Defeat

Edit: here's a summary of Messa in Latino's analysis of the Preamble by kreuz.net.

"I would like to say that the relativization of the Council, which allows this Preamble, represents an actual victory for the Society."
Bishop Fellay © Piusbruderschaft, dici.org


(kreuz.net) "I can tell you that I personally would have no problem with signing this preamble."

Enrico -- a contributor to the Traditional website 'blog.messainlatino.it' -- affirmed this yesterday.

He refers to the "Dogmatic Preamble", which the Vatican presented to the Priestly Society of St. Pius X for signing.

The Blog Recognizes the Text


The Society General Superior, Msgr Bernard Fellay, is awaiting a canonical proposal since Wednesday.

Enrico commented: "I would like to say that the relativization of the Council, which this Preamble allows, is actually representative of a victory for the Society."

This doesn't constitute a defeat of Rome for him.

Because: "The destruction of the Conciliar "Superdogmas" are put in a win-win situation, from which both can profit."

Enrico summarized the Preamble into two points:

- The Society must respect the Relevance of the Teaching Office.

- The Society must conduct themselves, as they have said, "very respectfully" and collaborate amicably with other parts of the Mystical Body of Christ.

Tremendous Novelty

Enrico addressed the concern that the Preamble's expressed requirement for a "religious submission of the understanding and the intellect' for texts of the ordinary Magisterium, could prohibit criticism of the Pastoral Council.

Actually, Enrico pointed to this as a "tremendous novelty".

Because the Preamble allows "the study and the theological clarification of various expressions and ambiguities in the documents of the Second Vatican council and legitimate discussion of the corresponding teaching office."

The Blog informs that this "legitimate discussion" is not only the interpretation of these documents, rather also allows the expression of them: "This clearly goes beyond a mere hermeneutic."

More than mere Hermeneutic

The article recalled the discussion of the former Prefect of the Congregation of Doctrine and the Faith, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, to the Chilean Bishops on 13. Juli 1988:

"The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma and deliberately preferred, to remain as a mere pastoral Council on a humble level.

But many use it as if it were transformed into a kind of Suerpdogma, that robs all other meaning."

And: "It it not tolerated that the Councils decisions may be criticized. While at the same time, if ancient rules or even the principle reality of the Faith -- like the corporal virginity of Mary, the bodily Resurrection of Jesus or the immortality of the soul, there is no criticism or it is protested with great reluctance."

Link to original...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...