Please find the original NCR story below.
. . .
Pope Francis and the SSPX:
An Opportunity
An Opportunity
By PATRICK ARCHBOLD
By now, many of you have
probably seen the Tony Palmer video last week that was so exciting to many.
probably seen the Tony Palmer video last week that was so exciting to many.
At a Protestant conference,
Tony Palmer, an Anglican priest, brought along an iPhone video of greeting from
Pope Francis. The subject of the presentation and of the Pope’s recording was
unity of Christians.
Tony Palmer, an Anglican priest, brought along an iPhone video of greeting from
Pope Francis. The subject of the presentation and of the Pope’s recording was
unity of Christians.
In his remarks, Pope Francis
made the following statements to our separated brethren regarding the
separation: “Separated because, it’s sin that has separated us, all our sins.
The misunderstandings throughout history. It has been a long road of sins that
we all shared in. Who is to blame? We all share the blame. We have all sinned.
There is only one blameless, the Lord.”
made the following statements to our separated brethren regarding the
separation: “Separated because, it’s sin that has separated us, all our sins.
The misunderstandings throughout history. It has been a long road of sins that
we all shared in. Who is to blame? We all share the blame. We have all sinned.
There is only one blameless, the Lord.”
It is certainly true.
Regardless of the truth of Catholic doctrine, the Church has accepted its share
of the blame for the misunderstanding that were allowed to deepen and harden,
leading to centuries of separation.
Regardless of the truth of Catholic doctrine, the Church has accepted its share
of the blame for the misunderstanding that were allowed to deepen and harden,
leading to centuries of separation.
When I heard this, something
else written by Pope Francis’ predecessor came immediately to mind. In 2007,
along with the issuance of the “motu proprio” Summorum Pontificum,
Pope Benedict XVI issued a letter explaining his reasoning. In that letter, he
made the following statement.
else written by Pope Francis’ predecessor came immediately to mind. In 2007,
along with the issuance of the “motu proprio” Summorum Pontificum,
Pope Benedict XVI issued a letter explaining his reasoning. In that letter, he
made the following statement.
Looking
back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have
rent the body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical
moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s
leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression
that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the
fact that these divisions were able to harden. This glance at the past imposes
an obligation on us today: to make every effort to unable for all those who
truly desire unity to remain in that unity or to attain it anew. I think of a
sentence in the Second Letter to the Corinthians, where Paul writes: “Our mouth
is open to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide. You are not restricted by us,
but you are restricted in your own affections. In return … widen your hearts
also!” (2 Corinthians 6:11-13). Paul was certainly speaking in another context,
but his exhortation can and must touch us too, precisely on this subject. Let
us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith
itself allows.
back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have
rent the body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical
moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s
leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression
that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the
fact that these divisions were able to harden. This glance at the past imposes
an obligation on us today: to make every effort to unable for all those who
truly desire unity to remain in that unity or to attain it anew. I think of a
sentence in the Second Letter to the Corinthians, where Paul writes: “Our mouth
is open to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide. You are not restricted by us,
but you are restricted in your own affections. In return … widen your hearts
also!” (2 Corinthians 6:11-13). Paul was certainly speaking in another context,
but his exhortation can and must touch us too, precisely on this subject. Let
us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith
itself allows.
It strikes me that this may
be one of those critical moments in history to which His Holiness refers.
be one of those critical moments in history to which His Holiness refers.
With the breakdown of
discussion between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X at the end of the
previous pontificate, the public mood during this first year of the current
pontificate, and other internal events, traditional Catholics, both inside and
outside the Church, have felt increasingly marginalized. Whether fair or true, I say
without fear of contradiction that this is a prevailing sentiment.
discussion between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X at the end of the
previous pontificate, the public mood during this first year of the current
pontificate, and other internal events, traditional Catholics, both inside and
outside the Church, have felt increasingly marginalized. Whether fair or true, I say
without fear of contradiction that this is a prevailing sentiment.
This perception of
marginalization has manifested itself in increasingly strident and frankly
disrespectful rhetoric on the part of some traditionalists and their leaders.
marginalization has manifested itself in increasingly strident and frankly
disrespectful rhetoric on the part of some traditionalists and their leaders.
I have great concern that
without the all the generosity that faith allows by the leaders of the Church,
that this separation, this wound on the Church, will become permanent. In fact,
without such generosity, I fully expect it. Such permanent separation and
feeling of marginalization will likely separate more souls than just those
currently associated with the SSPX.
without the all the generosity that faith allows by the leaders of the Church,
that this separation, this wound on the Church, will become permanent. In fact,
without such generosity, I fully expect it. Such permanent separation and
feeling of marginalization will likely separate more souls than just those
currently associated with the SSPX.
I have also come to believe
that Pope Francis’ is exactly the right Pope to do it. In his address to the
evangelicals, he makes clear his real concern for unity.
that Pope Francis’ is exactly the right Pope to do it. In his address to the
evangelicals, he makes clear his real concern for unity.
So here is what I am asking.
I ask the Pope to apply that wide generosity to the SSPX and to normalize
relations and their standing within the Church. I am asking the Pope to do this
even without the total agreement on the Second Vatican Council. Whatever their
disagreements, surely this can be worked out over time with the SSPX firmly
implanted in the Church. I think that the Church needs to be more generous
toward unity than to insist upon dogmatic adherence to the interpretation of a
non-dogmatic council. The issues are real, but they must be worked out with our
brothers at home and not with a locked door.
I ask the Pope to apply that wide generosity to the SSPX and to normalize
relations and their standing within the Church. I am asking the Pope to do this
even without the total agreement on the Second Vatican Council. Whatever their
disagreements, surely this can be worked out over time with the SSPX firmly
implanted in the Church. I think that the Church needs to be more generous
toward unity than to insist upon dogmatic adherence to the interpretation of a
non-dogmatic council. The issues are real, but they must be worked out with our
brothers at home and not with a locked door.
Further, Pope Francis’
commitment to the aims of the Second Vatican Council is unquestioned. Were he
to be generous in such a way, nobody would ever interpret it to be a rejection
of the Council. How could it be? This perception may not have been the case in
the last pontificate. Pope Francis is uniquely suited to this magnanimous
moment.
commitment to the aims of the Second Vatican Council is unquestioned. Were he
to be generous in such a way, nobody would ever interpret it to be a rejection
of the Council. How could it be? This perception may not have been the case in
the last pontificate. Pope Francis is uniquely suited to this magnanimous
moment.
I believe this generosity is
warranted and standard practice in the Church. We do not insist on religious
orders that may have strayed even further in the other direction sign a copy of
Pascendi Dominici Gregis
before they can be called Catholic again. So please let us not insist on the
corollary for the SSPX. Must we insist on more for a group that doctrinally
would not have raised an eyebrow a mere fifty years ago? I pray not.
warranted and standard practice in the Church. We do not insist on religious
orders that may have strayed even further in the other direction sign a copy of
Pascendi Dominici Gregis
before they can be called Catholic again. So please let us not insist on the
corollary for the SSPX. Must we insist on more for a group that doctrinally
would not have raised an eyebrow a mere fifty years ago? I pray not.
Give them canonical status
and organizational structure that will protect them. Bring them home, for their
sake and the sake of countless other souls. I truly believe that such
generosity will be repaid seven-fold. Pope Benedict has done so much of the
heavy lifting already, all that is required is just a little more.
and organizational structure that will protect them. Bring them home, for their
sake and the sake of countless other souls. I truly believe that such
generosity will be repaid seven-fold. Pope Benedict has done so much of the
heavy lifting already, all that is required is just a little more.
Please Holy Father, let us
not let this moment pass and this rift grow into a chasm. Make this generous
offer and save the Church from further division. Do this so that none of your
successors will ever say, “If only we had done more.”
not let this moment pass and this rift grow into a chasm. Make this generous
offer and save the Church from further division. Do this so that none of your
successors will ever say, “If only we had done more.”
February 27, 2014 at 6:22 pm
Our Sweet Jesus on Earth? That is not what the pope is.
And it's not what I "claim" he said. It is there, word for word, on the official Vatican news site. Wait, don't tell me, he was misunderstood or mistranslated right? And it is relevant to the general topic of being more welcoming of the SSPX who, more and more, seem more in sync with Catholic tradition and dogma than Francis does.
February 27, 2014 at 6:36 pm
Dear JB. Why are you so stridently trying to change the subject of my response to a statement written by Mr Archbold?
February 27, 2014 at 6:39 pm
JB,
You ought, as a Catholic, to know how silly the Pope sounds when he formulates things, but that isn't heresy. You're just one of millions of people who are enjoying taking what Francis says in the worst possible way for shock value.
Here's one translation of the relevant quote from Francis:
"""" True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us. """
So, I think anyone with higher than a middle-school education will be able to see that Francis stinks at phrasing, but is not promoting heresy. It's his re-phrasing of II Cor 5:21. I've heard plenty of priests confuse homilies on that passage at least as bad as Francis, and no one called them heretics.
So, in this environment, everybody has to take a side, I guess, and be a Francis-basher or a Francis-apologist. I really don't want to do either one, but I had to point out how stupid, flat-footed, and/or disingenuous your take on Francis and sin is. Of course Francis isn't Lutheran. Give me a break. You can call him an idiot if you want, but don't call him a heretic.
February 27, 2014 at 6:41 pm
Dear JB. Take it uopwith Saint Catherine of Siena who wrote to Pope Gregory XI
I tell you, sweet Christ on earth, on behalf of Christ in Heaven, that if you do this, without strife or tempest, they will all come grieving for the wrong they have done, and lay their heads on your bosom…
Now, why don't you show some patience and let Mr. Archbold answer and stop trying to distract from my point.
February 27, 2014 at 7:04 pm
Harry, the concept of a "solid Novus Ordo mass" is logically akin to the concept of a "square triangle" or a "morally upstanding child molester." When are you NeoCaths going to understand that the Novus Ordo service, while it may occasionally enjoy bare validity, is inherently irreverent (even when committed in Latin according to its rubrics)?
February 27, 2014 at 7:40 pm
Quick note to Mr Seldon:
Yawn.
February 27, 2014 at 8:09 pm
Joyously off-topic: Proposed Lenten observance for Bornacatholic!
To abstain from the online use of the following terms:
"soi disant traditionalists" (including any and all variants thereof, e.g., "soi disant trads," "SDTs," etc.) (If that's too harsh, I would recommend the substitution of "self-described traditionalists," which gets the same message across, and preserves the acronym. The Easter Vigil will be here before you know it.)
"Online Trad Machine"
"captious"
"Sweet Jesus on Earth" (pace St. Catherine, non-use also effective in discouraging charges of papalotry)
"prolly"
"haughty"
"petit ecclesia"
"jake"
…well, wouldn't that be a mortification and a half? (I would have included "Rumpelstiltskins," but you only started using that one recently. And to restrict use of "the Bride" would be simply inhuman.)
Bornacatholic – sometimes a trad, sometimes an ultramontane, never Spartacus, always a pugilist. I salute you, sir!
(Fondly remembered: "Li'l Licit Liturgy," "Brick By Brick Bund," "Effete Ecumenism," "Nattering Nabobs of Negativism"… no, wait, that was someone else's…)
February 27, 2014 at 8:22 pm
Harry, I did not call him a heretic, as you falsely state. He conveyed a blatantly heretical concept, however, and that is very troubling. I'm not interested in "bashing" the guy but I'm also not going to sit by and let his very confusing statements that, if accepted as true, would do enormous spiritual damage to people and cause enormous confusion. Stop judging motives.
February 27, 2014 at 8:32 pm
(And, as it never hurts to add, my "Lenten observance" for Bornacatholic is intended in the spirit of good-natured joshing, based on years of enjoying his offerings as a mostly-lurker. God bless.)
February 27, 2014 at 8:33 pm
Bornacatholic,
Sorry, that won't cut it. Saint or not, CoS is not only wrong, she is DEAD WRONG on this point. Saints are not sources of infallible teaching or orthopraxis. Not everything taught by Aquinas has risen to the level of a teaching of the Church. St. Jerome was wrong about not including the Septuagint in the Bible he assembled – the first in the Church or the world. Citing CoS as justification for your own unauthorized theological leaps is unaccaptable.
Your passion does make up for a lot, though, but not all. Very clever to foist back on your critics's houlders responsibility for your own mis-speaking, rather than take responsibility for them.
Not only ultramontane, but proud of it and so much more!
February 27, 2014 at 8:35 pm
Harry,
I agree Pope Francis poorly phrases things from time to time, but his troublesome statements about Jesus and sin are far worse than merely poor phrasing. His words – as posted on the Vatican web site without clean-up or clarification, since last June – are more heresy than not.
As pope he must be accountable for his words and the impressions they leave. If not him, who? BTW, he even said a couple months back when brushing off an apology by someone who had criticized him publicly, that he needs criticism. He better understands criticism and accepts it, and therefore does not share the ultramontane views of either you or Bornacatholic.
February 27, 2014 at 9:12 pm
Dear Cyrillist. Talk about rhetorical fingerprints, huh? 🙂
It does my heart good to read your proposal but I think that such a task is beyond my limited ability and nearly limitless sinfulness.
I see others have, not good-naturedly, expressed a desire I not write as I do but my writing is a reflection of who Bornacatholic is, so, cut me a break; Y'all only have to read a few of the things I write whereas I have to live as Bornacatholic 24/7/365.
February 27, 2014 at 9:20 pm
Sorry, that won't cut it. Saint or not, CoS is not only wrong, she is DEAD WRONG on this point.
Dear bluesmom Tsk, tsk, tsk…fear of strong women is an unattractive trait.
As to the great Doctor of the Church, she is more alive today than when she was on Earth and the impressive list of those who have quoted her re Our Sweet Jesus on Earth (Bornacatholic excluded) is impressive.
O, and you prolly don't know that you are wrong about , Saint Jerome, do you?
I could write that he did accept the very books you claim he rejected but mere facts are so yesterday, aren't they? 🙂
February 27, 2014 at 9:21 pm
http://taylormarshall.com/2011/09/did-st-jerome-reject-deuterocanoical.html
February 27, 2014 at 9:23 pm
Imagine that, a Saint hearing the Church Jesus established to teach in His name…How ultramone 🙂