I’m not sure if the timing has anything to do with Pope Benedict’s U.S. trip, but the schismatic traditionalist Society of Saint Pius X chose this weekend to announce its disappointment in the pontiff and its decision not to seek closer ties to Rome now. SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay wrote in a “Letter to Friends and Benefactors” (here in French) that Benedict had not budged in his support for the Second Vatican Council despite his decision last year to allow wider use of the old Tridentine rite Mass in Latin.
“The time for an agreement has not yet come,” Fellay wrote. The decree on the old Latin Mass was “not accompanied by logically co-related measures in the other areas of the life of the Church … Nothing has changed in Rome’s determination to follow the council’s orientation, despite 40 years of crisis, despite the deserted convents, abandoned rectories and empty churches.”
The letter is dated April 14 but was only published on Saturday by the SSPX information service DICI. Here’s our story and here’s a partial English translation of Fellay’s statement at Rorate Caeli (hat tip to Father Z for that).
Fellay signalled his continued estrangement from Rome in February when he accused the Vatican of caving in to “foreign pressures” when it issued a new wording of the Latin prayer on Good Friday. In a FaithWorld post on that statement, I wondered out loud whether any or many SSPX parishioners would drift away from their churches to attend Latin Masses in their local parishes. From scattered comments I’ve heard since then, it seems that few if any of the people attending the (admittedly also few) old Latin Masses now seem to have defected from the Lefebvrist ranks.
Fellay isn’t the only one who might feel let down by Benedict. Michael Sean Winter had an interesting piece on Slate about “How Pope Benedict has disappointed the Right.” He recalls how conservative Catholics welcomed his election in 2005, only to find he didn’t crack down the way they hoped he would.
What do you think? Has Benedict been as conservative as you expected him to be?
Trackback
99 comments so far
Previous | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
The only reason I am disappointed is that rather than addressing the sexual abuse problems in a deeper fashion BEFORE coming to America, Pope Benedict had to be “reminded” the problem still has not be fully addressed by the secular media. This made him (following the footsteps of Pope John Paul II) look like a reactionary rather than a spiritual LEADER.
- Posted by Vincent BemowskiIt is difficult to be critical of the pope. He is the representative of Christ and the Head of the Roman Catholic Church. That said, one must look at the Masses said here in the US. The music was terrible, the form of the mass was illicit. No one, not even the pope can change the words of consecration. Christ did not die for all. The merits of his blood could have saved all, but He Himself gave us the proper form to use. Pro Multis means for many not all…..Rome continues to allow error after error. No small wonder it will become the seat of the anti christ…
- Posted by steve sThis pope is outstanding. These are very difficult times, there is a lot of deceit flying around, but he is proclaiming the Gospel and returning to the quality teaching of the early Church Fathers.
- Posted by DerekAs for the schimastics (SSPX, etc), I had an interesting discussion with some a short while ago. I asked why they did not accept Vatican II. They stated it was governed by freemasons, etc. Oh, well that’s ok then is it. What about the words of Christ ‘I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’. No matter how, who, or what decided the teachings agreed in Vatican II, those same teachings should be obeyed.
Rebellion is rebellion no matter how you want to dress it up!!
If the SSPX is wrong now for practicing Catholicism as it was for centuries than the Catholic church was wrong before Vatican II before it decided to be more like the “secular world” and throw open her windows
Either the SSPX, SSPV, and CMRI are wrong now or the church was wrong then. I will side with the faith, morals and traditions that brought forth such wonderful saints and martyrs who would rather die for the faith rather than compromise with the world around her like the church has decided she must do these past 40 years
Just look at the mass, the sacrifice of the mass whose very words were changed and have 4 variations or so to please the Protestants, and that is all you need to see just how far she has fallen
Call these traditionalists, those who dont have the money the church has, whatever you want, I call them courageous and only wish they had a chapel near me and my family as they are to be admired
What did JPII stand for? Anything that he should be fast tracked to Sainthood? Why was he so “loved” by the modern world? Possibly because he compromised the faith so badly, the same deposit he was supposed to uphold
- Posted by VivianGod bless this Pope, and God bless the Roman Catholic Church.
- Posted by Jeff Johnson, CollegevilleThe SSPX is not a “rebel” organization. It serves to safeguard the Deposit of Faith,
I’m a conservative Catholic. It would not matter to most conservatives whether the SSPX existed or not re: their possession of the Deposit of Faith within the Catholic Church. People give them waaaay too much credit. Rather, we have the Catechism of the Catholic Church, thank you very much.
Simple…those who step out in front of Peter step out in front of Christ no matter what they call themselves or how they whine.
- Posted by CKEcumenism has always been condemned by Scripture — read the New Testament. It has always been condemned by Church, mostly notably in modern times by Pius XI in Mortalium Animos.
Now why would Christ guide His Church one way for almost two thousand years, only to do a U-turn in Vatican II? Two possibilities:
1. Maybe Christ changed His mind, or maybe He wasn’t sure about ecumenism from the beginning; or
2. Maybe the institutional part of His Church went astray, as it did during the Arian and semi-Arian heresies.
- Posted by RichardI have studied proud men like Martin Luther who rebelled against churchmens’ abuses. Study Church history from the beginning to the present and you’ll see problems at every point. Luther said something to the effect that he could only follow his own conscience. Luther then repeatedly attacked and dishonored the pope and went about the “good work” of dividing the Church Christ heads. Bloody war and 30,00 denominations followed the protestant way. Therefore SSPX churchmen, comeback, reunite, and reform the Church from within to honor Christ’s prayer for Church unity.
- Posted by Thomas“Conservative.” “Liberal.” These political labels are applied only by those who have very little understanding of Ratzinger or Catholic theology
- Posted by Augustine“Catholics who have stayed in the Church after Vatican II (as opposed to those who left outright) have stayed loyal to the pope in droves. They show this whenever he travels, something I’ve just seen after covering the pope’s visit to Washington and New York for the past six days.”
I’d argue that it’s one thing to beat the drum and chant “Benedito, Benedito” (or in the case of his predecessor, to chant “JP II, we love you”) and quite another thing to “stay loyal to the pope in droves.” True loyalty involves more than giving lip service to the Pope while ignoring his Church’s teaching on the hard issues.
Obedience to the pope is rare among American Bishops as well as among American Catholics and obedience would be much better than a Rock Star Reception followed by living in de facto schism without formalizing it. At least the SSPX bishops have the guts to *admit* that they aren’t in union with Rome. Meanwhile, I pray for a happy death for the de facto schismatics inhabiting the USCCB.
- Posted by CerebellaUntil Vatican II is thrown into the ash heap and the Council of Trent, Vatican I and the Council of Florence are restored we have no Catholic Church. All we have is a Protestant version as was passed on by Luther.
- Posted by Gregory SchullerGod will damn all who have taken the early church Fathers and thrown all the work they did to make the Church the Universal Church of the world.
Look at the Novus Ordo mass and you look at a sham.
Love is the Beginning and the End, I Am the Alpha and Omega. If you believe Me, Believe also in My Father, if not, you are condemning yourself by your own “free will”.
Choose you this day whom you will serve.
The Pope is My choice, listen to him. Do as he does, for he represents Me, My Doctrine, My Love. The Spirit speaks through My Pope. Listen to the Spirit.
Peace and Mercy, Grace and Forgivenss.
- Posted by Bobo Hokutoi myself prefer the Tridentine Mass but I still attend on
- Posted by Henry DeBonisSundays with the Vatican 2 liturgy. Never,never will I leave the true church even though I prefer the old Rite.
The new Rite is still valid and the Pope,on whom the Church is built on (The Rock)is THE AUTHORITY to whom we
MUST LISTEN TO. To do otherwise is to DISBELIEVE ” The
Gates of hell will not prevail against us”.
Several readers accuse the media of making a mistake by calling the SSPX “schismatic” or “rebel” because, they say, it alone is defending the genuine Catholic faith. It is not the task of a secular news organisation to take sides on doctrinal disputes. It is clear, however, that the pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church and is its ultimate authority. If a group like the SSPX defies his authority, as Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre did when he ordained four bishops against Pope John Paul II’s warnings, is it not cutting itself off from the pope and the Roman Catholic Church? Isn’t that what schism means? And isn’t “rebel” a synonym for “schismatic”?
There’s another way for a secular medium to look at this — what do Roman Catholics themselves say? There are about 1.1 billion Roman Catholics in the world and an estimated one million SSPX followers. If the SSPX really represents the true Roman Catholic Church, it has not been very successful in convincing other Catholics of its case. Catholics who have stayed in the Church after Vatican II (as opposed to those who left outright) have stayed loyal to the pope in droves. They show this whenever he travels, something I’ve just seen after covering the pope’s visit to Washington and New York for the past six days. Many of them have issues with Vatican II and they make their views known — but they’re not leaving en masse to join the SSPX. This makes it very hard for journalists to say they’ve all been duped. I’m not saying the Church is or should be a democracy and that numbers are all that count. But with such an overwhelming majority of Catholics staying in the Church, I stick with my description of the SSPX as schismatic.
- Posted by Tom HeneghanPope Benedict XVI has definitely suppassed the expectations I had back in 2005. I was optimistic, but I never dreamed that he would free the Traditional Latin Mass.
I support the SSPX and deny that they are “schismatic”, but I think it’s a pity they do not want to heal their relation with Rome just yet. As earlier commenters have said, the divisions in Traditional Catholicism must come to an end, and we should all rally around the Supreme Pontiff in his infighting with the liberal elements in the Roman Catholic Church, especially concerning the Good Friday Prayer, family values, and communion in the hand. Viva il Papa!
- Posted by crusader88Isn’t the first hallmark of fidelity to the Church obedience? How many times in the Church’s history have we seen the self-proclaimed defenders of Orthodoxy separate themselves from the Holy See only to founder and be destroyed? What is the use of outward orthodoxy and an attachment to the traditional liturgy if they aren’t matched by filial obedience to the Holy Father? I think Padre Pio had the right idea when his sister left the Church after the council. He immediately cut off ties and never saw her again. The SSPX have demonstrated that they are not Catholic in the most important regard–they refuse to submit to the lawful authority of the Holy Father.
- Posted by JosephMichael, you say I “put the schismatic/heretic labels on the wrong group. A Heretic is a baptized person who rejects an authoritative teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. A schismatic is a person who refuses communion with a true Pope or refuses communion with true Catholics.” I use “schismatic” because the SSPX ignored warnings from Pope John Paul II and ordained four bishops (including Fellay) without Vatican approval. Isn’t that “refusing communion with a true pope”?
- Posted by Tom Heneghanyou guys should really give him a chance. he can’t just undo 40 years of damage all at once because its probably gonna cause even more damage. its going to take time.
i have faith that the spirit is with him and the Lord is using him to fix His church.
- Posted by Gabriel EspinosaThe SSPX is not a “rebel” organization. It serves to safeguard the Deposit of Faith, tattered by the abuses of Vatican 2.The encycical
- Posted by Helen WestoverMortalium Animos, (Pius IX,)_ condemned, for instance, so called “ecumenical” gatherings and prayer. The latter have been the hallmarks of the postconciliar period.
Were it not pressure from the SSPX, we would not have access to the so-called “Extraordinary Form” of the Mass; which is simply the Mass of all ages.
All of you poor souls who label the validly and canonically established priestly order of the Society of Saint Pius X as schismatic are completely BLIND, IGNORANT, and UNCHARITABLE!!! How many of you have even done your homework? Have you read all the unbiased documents and literature out there written by the best canon lawyers in the world that state that the SSPX are NOT in schism?!!! NO! You’re blinded by Vatican and diocesan propaganda that seeks to destroy the Roman Catholic Faith. All over the world so-called Catholic bishops, priests, and heretical religious are selling and mowing down churches, monasteries, seminaries, convents, and schools. The Carmelite-run hospital where my daughter was born in Monrovia, CA has shut down. If you go to Quebec, Canada, many of the old Catholic Churches are now condominiums. Our present Holy Father, when he was cardinal, KNEW that the sodomite scandals were happening a long time ago! Everyone in Rome knew that!
- Posted by Z.N.