Speaking Of Reconciliations . . .

by Jimmy Akin

in Other Christians

Catholic News Service has a story about the meeting that Pope Benedict had this Wednesday with curial officials about the possibility of reconciling the Society of St. Pius X.

EXCERPTS:

More than 20 heads of congregations and pontifical councils attended the Feb. 13 meeting, which was to be followed up by a similar session in late March. No details of the February meeting were made available by the Vatican press office.

Several Vatican sources said that while Cardinal Castrillon strongly supported a solution based on these points opinions were sharply divided among curial members on any concessions to the Lefebvrites.

One Vatican source who participated in the February meeting of curial heads said he thought the pope wanted to make one big push for reconciliation at the beginning of his pontificate.

"I think it’s now or never for the Lefebvrites. As time passes, an agreement will become much more difficult," he said.

GET THE STORY.

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!


What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy

{ 23 comments }

Inocencio February 17, 2006 at 12:48 pm

This is from http://www.cwnews.com
The plan met some resistance. Informed sources say that Cardinal Francis Arinze, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, insisted that the SSPX should be required to acknowledge the validity of the documents of Vatican II and the post-conciliar liturgy.
Sounds like things are getting very interesting.
After reading the postion of the SSPX we can only pray and leave it to the Holy Spirit to heal this wound.
http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=42289
http://www.sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q6_vaticanII.htm

jimroche February 17, 2006 at 1:25 pm

The position of Cardinal Arinze is very interesting.
As a possible next Pope his slightly negative approach may encourage the SSPX to resolve the issue now.
Of course in Bishop Williamson they have their own version of “bad cop”
Let’s hope nobody miscalculates.

Maureen February 17, 2006 at 3:12 pm

Sounds like we all need to spend some knee time on this, not to mention that “rosary every day till the feast of the Chair of Peter” thing.
Ut unum sint….

Vivian February 21, 2006 at 6:27 pm

What about some prayers for the Vatican as well as it was they who pushed these devout catholics out of the church with their liturgical experimentation and clown masses
All these people want to do is worship God in a way that has been done for centuries and have a sound catechism for their children and not this all faiths are equal nonsense
My mother always said those who live in glass houses should not throw stones and you can call them schismatics or whatever, but you have to respect them for holding fast to their faith and not pedophiling hundreds of thousands of innocent children
God bless our church

bill912 February 21, 2006 at 6:44 pm

No, I don’t respect them for their disobedience.
I presume you have evidence to back up your accusation that the Church is ” ‘pedophiling’ hundreds of thousands of innocent children”? Or are you just engaging in calumny?

Inocencio February 21, 2006 at 7:59 pm

Vivian,
Can you point to one document from the Vatican instituting “clown masses”?
Anyone who did was disobedient, just like the SSPX.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

bill912 February 21, 2006 at 8:03 pm

“All faiths are equal” IS nonsense. Who are you hearing it from? It’s certainly not taught by the Church.

Vivian February 22, 2006 at 10:35 am

Bill
When in Nostre Aetate we are told to “hold the Moslems in high esteem”, and we have McCarick of Washington calling God “Allah”. In Unitatis Redintegratio – the Decree on Ecumenism it is stated:
“Yet almost all, though in different ways, long for the one visible Church of God, that truly universal Church whose mission is to convert the whole world to the gospel, so that the world may be saved, to the glory of God.”
So now we “long for” one visible church. At the very beginning of its decree on ecumenism, Vatican II teaches that almost everyone longs for a truly universal Church whose mission is to convert the world to the Gospel. What is the truly universal Church whose mission is to convert the world to the Gospel? It is the Roman Catholic Church, of course, which alone is the one true Church of Christ. So what is Vatican II talking about then? Why is Vatican II teaching that almost everyone longs for one the truly universal Church of Christ when we already have it? What Vatican II is teaching at the very beginning of its decree on ecumenism is that people must long for the true Catholic Church because it does not yet exist! It is teaching that the true Church of Christ – the universal Catholic Church – does not yet exist!
If you doubt that is what it meant, what about the quote pope John Paul II’s own interpretation of this passage.
In his Homily, Dec. 5, 1996, speaking of prayer with non-Catholics:”When we pray together, we do so with the longing ‘that there may be one visible Church of God, a Church truly universal and sent forth to the whole world that the world may be converted to the Gospel and so be saved, to the glory of God’ (Unitatis Redintegratio, 1.).”
Again in Unitatis redintegratio (# 4):
“Nevertheless, the divisions among Christians prevent the Church from realizing in practice the fullness of Catholicity proper to her, in those of her sons and daughters who, though attached to her by baptism, are yet separated from full communion with her. Furthermore, the Church herself finds it more difficult to express in actual life her full Catholicity in all its bearings.”
Again, Here, in #4 of the same decree on ecumenism, Vatican II denies that the Church of Christ is fully Catholic! If this is so, then how can one even say the Apostles’ Creed: “I believe in… the holy Catholic Church.” You would have to say, “I believe in the not fully Catholic Church.” The reason for this ridiculous statement in Vatican II is that Vatican II rejects that the Roman Catholic Church is the universal Church of Christ.
“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, On Vatican II’s teaching on the Church: “Thus the Council Fathers meant to say that the being of the Church as such is a broader entity than the Roman Catholic Church…”
Therefore, if Vatican II’s decree on ecumenism denies that the Roman Catholic Church is the universal Church of Christ (which it does) by longing for such a Church to exist, it follows logically that Vatican II would also teach that”the Church” (i.e., the universal Catholic Church) is not able to fully realize its “Catholicity/Universality”, due to “divisions among Christians.”
The following in the same decree is even worse, in # 3 of Vatican II’s decree on ecumenism.
“Moreover some, and even most, of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too.”
The decree bluntly asserts that the life of grace exists outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church. This is directly contrary to the solemn teaching of Pope Boniface VIII in the ex cathedra Bull Unam Sanctam.
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302:
“With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one.”
One can go on and on-I would think you would want to read some of your Catholic books and learn your church history and what these 16 documents really say, as they are blatant in their meaning and not being “misinterpreted”

Inocencio February 22, 2006 at 11:10 am

Vivian,
Don’t forget the most important part of Unam Sanctam:
“Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff”
The popes authority includes validating ecumenical councils like Vatican II, promulgating canon law and guiding the Church.
Vatican II is part of Church teaching the moment the pope says it is. That is the protection of the Holy Spirit that Christ promised to send.
Christ Himself also prayed that the Church may become one in the Gospel of John 17:23
“I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.”
That prayer will be fulfilled at the end of time. Until then we have the wheat and the tares (Matt 13:24-30).
I would like to suggest that you also look at the history of the Church especially the councils.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

bill912 February 22, 2006 at 12:09 pm

Vivian, why did you address your long comment to me? Nothing in it addressed either of my comments.

Inocencio February 22, 2006 at 12:15 pm

Bill912,
Vivian was pointing out where the Church teaches all faiths are equal…except it doesn’t use those words…or teach that…but don’t let the actual text, teaching or Church authority get in the way of her “facts”.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

bill912 February 22, 2006 at 12:31 pm

Oh, that’s what that was. Thanks, Inocencio.
I’m still waiting with baited breath to hear her evidence on the Church ” ‘pedophiling'(didn’t know that was a verb) hundreds of thousands of innocent children”.

Inocencio February 22, 2006 at 12:44 pm

Bill912,
And for her to point to one document from the Vatican instituting “clown masses”.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

bill912 February 22, 2006 at 12:52 pm

Yeah, I want to see that one, too.

Vivian February 22, 2006 at 1:42 pm

Lets move on as some are very blind and not open to discussion on these subjects, and can only get in trouble, I have family who attend SSPX and I can say that hearing their side of the story, they are pious, sincere, devout Catholics who are in many ways better Catholics than we are, in communion or not and to all judge here and throw that schismatic label around is insincere. Was not Joan of Arc excommunicated?
At some point Archbishop Lefebvre will become a saint, as he stood up for something that he believed in, he was not looking to change the faith as other “schismatics”were, but to leave it as it was for centuries, it was John XXIII and Paul VI who were bent on “modernization”

bill912 February 22, 2006 at 1:55 pm

“Let’s move on as some are very blind and not open to discussion on these subjects.” Vivian, thank you for your tacit admission that you can’t defend your position.

Inocencio February 22, 2006 at 1:56 pm

Vivian,
Archbishop Lefebvre, in my opinion, like everyone who supports him assume an authority they do not have. At least for me please point out how you reconcile Arbp. Lefebvre act of public disobedience to the authority of the pope with the papal bull you quoted, Unam Sanctam.
And yes, if you are not going to present the documentation for your earlier comments, then lets move on.
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

Inocencio February 22, 2006 at 2:20 pm

Vivian,
“Was not Joan of Arc excommunicated?”
She was declared a heretic by an illegal court and she was allowed to recieve the sacraments of confession and Holy Communion before be put to death.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08409c.htm

Vivian February 22, 2006 at 7:27 pm

Bill
I am not sure exactly what you are asking me to prove, I think I proved quite clearly the confusion and havoc brought on by a council which clearly divided and not unified, and quote word for word how we are now taught to look outside the church for a morsel of truth, as Lumen Gentium teaches (note the word “subsist”. Why does one need to look outside the church for some morsel of truth in these false faiths if we , the One true Church have and contain all revealed truths? Quite the contradiction when one has a Pope who does quite borderline heretical actions
I will stop at that as then the name calling that those who are blind to what is going on around them will start. It amazes me that those who profess to enjoy the changes brought on by these past 40 years always acuse those who hold fast to traditions as being snobbish and nasty, but it is always those same people who are so quick to throw nasty names at those who only want to worship as saints and martyrs of yesteryear, and not as Paul VI and Bugnini his 6 Protestants have demanded us. Lex Orandi Lex Credendi, these past 40 years are nothing to be proud about I might add

bill912 February 22, 2006 at 7:53 pm

Okay, Vivian, for the third time:
1) You accused the Church of ” ‘pedophiling’ hundreds of thousands of innocent children. Do you have any evidence for this, or are you just engaging in calumny?
2) You accused the Vatican of authorizing “clown masses”. Can you point to one Vatican document that authorizes them?
Now I’ve got one new one for you: “I will stop at that as then the name calling that those who are blind to what is going on around them will start.” Please quote us an example of “name-calling”. (I mean, other than the commenter who wrote:”…those who are blind to what is going on around them…).

Vivian February 23, 2006 at 6:54 am

Bill
My answers are as follows:
1-Cardinal Law and Levada-either directly involved or involved in the coverup of this horrific scandal. One was given a cushy job in Rome and the other promoted and given recently given a Cardinals hat by 2 Popes in succession, while he is still being served with papers. Scandal? Should these men in question have been given such rites and promotions while still a cloud of horrific guilt hangs over their heads? Is that the message we are to send when our Lord made it clear that “better a millstone be hung over a mans neck who should harm one of my innocent children”. Then we have diocese after diocese selling off land to pay for these horrific coverups.Now you are not living under a rock now are you?
2. Clown Masses being authorized-well lets see, do we need to have a document authorizing it, or should we just change the mass, the mass that sustained all of the saints and martyrs for centuries with a canon never to be changed, and replaced with a mass that allows “innovations” and if I recall many different variations of expressions left to the priests and Bishops to decide. One does not need to insert the word “clown” into any document, just leave the instructions vague enough and those bent on changing the church will follow. As far as GIRM- do you think any Bishop has even read it or enforced it? If they have then we would not have liturgical abuses all over, and if they have then they are disobedient to their Pope, choose your medicine
I think that answers your questions quite clearly

bill912 February 23, 2006 at 7:17 am

Vivian:
1) Pedophilia refers to adult having sex with pre-pubescent children. The scandal I assume you are referring to was one of homosexual predators seducing teenage boys and young men, most of which occurred over 20 years ago. A few bishops messed up royally, in part because they heeded the advice of so-called experts instead of standing up for Catholic morality. The actions of a few bishops are not the actions of the Church, unless you are going to claim that the Popes knew what these bishops were doing and either approved or atleast allowed it. If you are claiming that, show us the evidence. I would still like to see your evidence for your numbers: “hundreds of thousands”.
2) The rubric of the Mass do not allow for “innovations”. But thank you for conceding that you can’t document your claim that the Church authorized “Clown Masses”.
3) Now, how about citing some name-calling, other than the name-calling you engaged in?

Inocencio February 23, 2006 at 9:33 am

Vivian,
I understand that you have this vision of Church history as being perfect before Vatican II. But there have always been problems. The Church is a Divine institution made up of human members. From the first century to today there have been heretics. The one thing that has stood firm was the Rock the Lord established.
The Popes do not run the Church the way you would, fine but that doesn’t lessen their God-given authority one bit. Amazing how much authority you give dead popes but not the living one.
The papal bull you quoted uses the strongest language in teaching us we need to be subject to the authority of the pope for salvation.
So please now answer my question. How do you reconcile Arbp. Lefebvre act of public disobedience to the authority of the pope with the papal bull you quoted, Unam Sanctam? I understand you think him a saint, but how is that not a grave scandal?
“We are called to be faithful, not successful”-Blessed Mother Teresa
Take care and God bless,
Inocencio
J+M+J

Previous post:

Next post: