PDA

View Full Version : Letter from the SSPX District Superior


Hartmann von Aue
03-04-2009, 01:24 AM
http://www.sspx.org/District_Superiors_Ltrs/2009_ds_ltrs/march_2009_ds_ltr_template.htm

District Superior's Letter to Friends & Benefactors

March 2009

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

The past few weeks have been full of news concerning the Society of St. Pius X.

You have surely read the letter that His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay wrote to the faithful regarding the lifting of the excommunications by Rome.

You must also have heard of the huge anti-Catholic campaign that the press has orchestrated in Europe at first, then in America and now throughout the world.

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, indeed, has released the so-called excommunications from the Episcopal Consecrations of 1988. That is the important fact. We would expect the Society of Saint Pius X to be attacked on its specificity — the defense of the traditions of the Catholic Church, the Latin Tridentine Mass, of course, but also and mostly the resistance that we have always shown to the Second Vatican Council. We would expect that we would be criticized and confronted on our opposition to Religious Liberty, or ecumenism and the like.

But no, it is easier as the proverb says, “Lie, lie, something always will remain”; we are harassed with false accusations of anti-Semitism. We have never been, and will never be anti-Semite, simply because of the New Testament Law, which is a law of Charity.

It is obviously manifest that behind this media operation, the aim is to discredit the Society of St. Pius X, but also and even primarily the Catholic Church and the pope himself. It is a press campaign to disrepute anything Catholic and whatsoever is done, even if only slightly, in favor of Catholic Tradition.

Under this pressure, on February 2nd, the Vatican Secretary of State has stated that despite the release of the excommunications of our four bishops, the Society of St. Pius X has no canonical status (according to them). It was then made clear that for future recognition of the Society of St. Pius X, a full acceptance of the Second Vatican Council will be absolutely indispensable.

We are grateful to the pope for the motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum of July 7, 2007. We have always expressed our gratitude to His Holiness. We are now also thankful for the release of the excommunications; we see these decisions as courageous and good signs. We have no fear in acknowledging that, no fear to convey our appreciation. As we have already stated, we hope that the motu proprio as well as the new decree will help to clear, in the eyes of many, the invalid condemnation of Catholic Tradition.

At the same time, we reaffirm what we have always said. We refuse to acknowledge the validity of the excommunications of 1988. We state repeatedly that the consecration of the four bishops by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was not illegitimate. On the contrary, we are more convinced than ever, that it was an absolute necessity to maintain the Tridentine Mass and to save Catholic Tradition. It was a meritorious and heroic act for the defense and safeguard of Catholic Doctrine and Liturgy.

Today, we express our gratitude and faithfulness to the positions and decisions of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. We declare our thankfulness also to the four bishops for accepting their episcopal consecrations, and for continuing to ordain true priests during the past two decades in order to, and only to, preserve Catholic Tradition.

We also reaffirm that the Second Vatican Council has broken away from the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church; in particular, but not exclusively, in the declaration Dignitatis Humanae on Religious Liberty, the constitution Lumen Gentium and the decree Nostra Aetate on ecumenism.

For years, we have asked for discussions about these doctrinal questions, for in conscience we cannot accept teachings contrary to what the Church has always taught. The only answer we receive has always been, “accept the Council!” When will the time come that we can start these essential and indispensable talks? This is certainly what we respectfully, but steadily plead for to Rome.

During these days of confusion, I exhort you to remain faithfully united. The devil always tries to divide, to inspire some fear that “the Society of St. Pius X is giving up” or on the contrary, “the Society is getting too hard…”

Unity in prayer and in doctrine is the only answer; the recent effect of offering to Our Lady so many rosaries is proof of that. Let not any attempted division undermine us;

But let us have confidence in Divine Providence, and in the graces which our Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay receives to lead us in this time of crisis.

May God bless you.

In the Immaculate Heart,

Fr. Arnaud Rostand

Józef Piłsudski
03-05-2009, 11:14 AM
I agree that the whole Bishop Williamson fiasco has been a great disservice to the SSPX. It is not neccessary for Williamson to open his mouth on such topics, especially when the mission of the SSPX is so important. It gives their enemies an excuse to attack them on an issue that doesn't even have to do with their vocation.

What I disagree with is the so called invalidness of the excommunications. The SSPX was not in a position that necessitated immediate consecration. For this reason, I've always been more comfortable with EF communities such as the FSSP and ICRSS. I believe these groups are doing a lot more good for the Church, by opting to work from within.

Hartmann von Aue
03-05-2009, 11:26 AM
What I disagree with is the so called invalidness of the excommunications. The SSPX was not in a position that necessitated immediate consecration.

How long should they have waited?

Without the SSPX would there even be any traditional congregations "officially" within the Church?

I doubt it.

To remove the excommunications after 20 years when there was no change in the relative positions shows that the Pope knew the original announcement of the latae sententiae excommunications was a mistake.

Józef Piłsudski
03-05-2009, 11:38 AM
How long should they have waited?
Until it became obvious that the Vatican wanted the order to die off. They acted way too quickly. They should have waited until after the death of the good Archbishop Lefebvre. Even after his death they should have waitied, until they had demonstrable proof that elements in Rome wanted to dismantle the order. The SSPX needed to suffer a little first, IMHO.

Since the SSPX did not wait, we have no clear evidence.

Without the SSPX would there even be any traditional congregations "officially" within the Church?

I doubt it.
I agee entirely. Like I said, I'm extremly sympathetic to the SSPX. I just wish they wouldn't distance themselves so much from the post-conciliar Church.

To remove the excommunications after 20 years when there was no change in the relative positions shows that the Pope knew the original announcement of the latae sententiae excommunications was a mistake.
I don't think so at all. I believe His Holiness knows that the Church is very sick, especially liturgically. It appears instead to be part of a greater course of events, beginning with the Motu Propio. Now His Holiness believes the SSPX to be an integral part of this mission and realized that Rome had to make the first gesture because the SSPX had become too entrenched in it's position. It was a great pastoral act.

Hartmann von Aue
03-05-2009, 11:45 AM
Until it became obvious that the Vatican wanted the order to die off. They acted way too quickly. They should have waited until after the death of the good Archbishop Lefebvre. Even after his death they should have waitied, until they had demonstrable proof that elements in Rome wanted to dismantle the order. The SSPX needed to suffer a little first, IMHO.

The evidence was clear enough. They had been suspended for years. If Lefebvre died without successors then that would have been a serious problem.

Since the SSPX did not wait, we have no clear evidence.

Well, how long?

I agee entirely. Like I said, I'm extremly sympathetic to the SSPX. I just wish they wouldn't distance themselves so much from the post-conciliar Church.

Well, then there was a necessity I think. As for the problems in the "post-conciliar Church" - what are the causes of that? Certainly not the SSPX.

I don't think so at all. I believe His Holiness knows that the Church is very sick, especially liturgically. It appears instead to be part of a greater course of events, beginning with the Motu Propio. Now His Holiness believes the SSPX to be an integral part of this mission and realized that Rome had to make the first gesture because the SSPX had become too entrenched in it's position. It was a great pastoral act.

I think he always regretted that it came to an announcement of excommunication.