The double-standard of ecumenism Traditionalists not welcome

[Dawn Marie]

The double-standard of ecumenism
Traditionalists not welcome

From the heart of where the Society of St. Pius X was born of the Roman Catholic Church, another salvo has been fired against the priestly society, and by none other than the local ordinary, Bishop Charles Morerod of the Swiss diocese of Lausanne, Geneva and Fribourg.

Bishop Morerod published a decree on January 20th,[1] stating that because Society priests are considered suspensio a divinis:[2]

…it is forbidden to the priests of the Priestly Society of St, Pius X to use Catholic churches and chapels for all priestly service, particularly for the dispensation of the sacraments.

This declaration is even more troubling when we realize that it comes just after the bishop ecumenically affirmed in the same decree:

If such a pastoral necessity arises, Catholic churches and chapels can be made available to faith communities of Old Catholic, Evangelical Reformed, Lutheran, Orthodox and Anglican churches.

So once again, we witness the double-standard of ecumenism through the application of “ecumenical hospitality”.

Suffice to say that it is unnecessary to once again address the issue of the true canonical status of the SSPX’s priests – which would be likened to beating a dead horse - particularly as this is actually not the crux of the matter. In fact, although Bishop Morerod makes this a sticking point for his decretal stance, he actually provides the main reason why the SSPX is typically blackballed quoting Pope Benedict XVI:

 

...the fact that the SSPX has no canonical status is not based ultimately on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons.[3]

Thus here we see the fundamental problem and the cause of Bishop Moreord’s prohibition of the SSPX.

This incident also provides another example of the continual inconsistency of how ecclesiastical authorities treat the Society of St. Pius X. While the SSPX has in the past been granted permission to publicly celebrate Mass in the major and minor basilicas of Rome,[4] the basilica of Lourdes,[5] and other noteworthy places, yet its priests find themselves locked out of a quaint Swiss chapel! Meanwhile we find that heretical Christian sects, such as the Orthodox, Lutherans, Anglicans, and Baptists,[6] as well as Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists and pagan religions[7] are allowed to use Catholic sanctuaries – even altars – all under the aegis of ecumenism.

As comical as this tragic contradiction is, Bishop Morerod has unfortunately provided an even more serious one. In response to an outpouring of criticism for his proscription of the SSPX, His Excellency published a clarification on February 4th in which he justifies his “ecumenical hospitality” to the Orthodox (who are not in communion with the Catholic Church) and the lack thereof towards the Society of St. Pius X (which he deems is in some sort of limbolistic “partial communion”):

 

 

First of all, differently from the Orthodox or Protestants who can use the churches of the diocese under certain conditions and in case of need (for instance, because they do not have a nearby church, or due to construction in their own church, this possibility often being reciprocal), the priests of the SSPX present themselves as Catholics. The dialogue with the SSPX is not properly speaking "ecumenical", but an internal dialogue…

(...)

…The difficulty proper to these priests, compared to Orthodox priests or Protestant pastors, is that their ministry in fact contributes - perhaps not in their intent - to divide the Catholic Church from the inside.[8]

So ironies of ironies – it seems that the SSPX would fare better if it were to declare itself a schismatic sect (which it certainly is not) rather than continue insisting that it is completely Roman Catholic. Thus the Society is being penalized for its loyalty to the Catholic Church and remaining inside her, instead of outside!

Perhaps though, the most sorrowful aspect of this entire affair is that Bishop Morerod is well-acquainted with the Society of St. Pius X, having been one of the members of the Rome-SSPX Theological Commission. Thus he not only knows the SSPX on a personal level, but also what the priestly society stands for: the Catholic Faith. We may also presume that he is at least precursory acquainted with the Society’s position on its canonical status – and that it has been proven correct on at least two occasions (despite years of denial from ecclesiastical authorities)[9] – and thus the common accusations made against the SSPX should not be taken at face value.

Despite that Bishop Morerod is a Dominican (and hence possesses a Thomistic background), nevertheless should we really be so surprised to see how the errors of Modernism have affected his thinking, which is merely a consequence of the post-conciliar era?

 

It is easy to harbor bitterness and resentment against such petty prohibitions as recently laid upon the SSPX by Bishop Morerod. However, it was Archbishop Lefebvre himself – who like His Divine Master was loaded down with contempt – preached that traditionalists should avoid these sentiments in this battle for the Faith.

The Archbishop’s successor as Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, re-emphasized this salient point recently during an ordination sermon in regards to the fulfillment of the priesthood:

It is hard sometimes, when we see the enemy, when we feel that we are in a painfully tight spot, to forget our discomfort and to throw ourselves into Christ’s Passion for those souls, for them too. “Bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28); this is the law of the Gospel. Perhaps then our best reaction to Bishop Morerod’s recent actions against Tradition is to offer some intercessory prayers to St. Thomas Aquinas, that the light of Objective Truth as contained in the Summa may eventually pierce through and eventually dispel the modernist clouds of confusion that presently occupy his mind.

Footnotes 1 Cf. the original French version on the Lausanne, Geneva and Fribourg diocesan website. A partial English translation was published on the Rorate Caeli blog on February 2, 2013. 2 Latin for “suspended from divine things”, i.e.,, administering the sacraments or offering Mass, even in private. 3 In his decree of January 21, 2009 that lifted the excommunications of the SSPX’s bishops. 4 The most important examples were during the Pilgrimage of Tradition for the Jubilee Year in 2000. 5 As annually done since 2008. 6 E.g., a few years ago in Kansas City, Missouri, a Baptist church had a fire and without hesitation the lay administrator of nearby St. James Catholic Church offered the building for worship services. In contradiction to this “ecumenical hospitality”, there is the historic incident of St. Vincent de Paul Catholic Church - while the local ordinary (Bishop John Sullivan in 1980) categorically refused to sell this closed-down church to the SSPX, he was more than willing to try and sell it (twice in fact) to a Protestant group! 7 Two outstanding incidents are the Assisi I prayer religious meeting in 1986 during which a statue of Buddha was placed on the high altar in Basilica of St. Francis and prayed to by Buddhist monks, and the Hindu service carried out in the Fatima Basilica in 2004 – which sparked the SSPX’s pilgrimage of reparation in 2005. Of course, here in the USA was the Buddhist incident at the Grand Rapids basilica in 2004. 8 “Questions liees a la Fraternite Saint-Pie X: Mgr Charles Morerod clarifie un decret”; an English translation of the French original was provided by Rorate Caeli blog on February 4, 2013. 9 The liberalization of the traditional Mass and the lifting of the excommunication of its bishops. source

[Sue K]

thanks for the information. my husband attended the Angelicum in the early '70's, also called the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, in Rome.  He left because the professor priests were all teaching modernism.  They had all lost the faith. It is shameful.

[Michael]

I think this is indicative of the a greater strategy.  In order to successfully suppress the society and the faithful that attend its masses, it is necessary to instill doubt and division.  The limboistic state as it is described embodies this.  The SSPX can be full Catholics, if and only if, they accept the ever evolving interpretations of Vatican II.  If you read some of the statements by Cardinal Kasper or Cardinal Muller this seems to be the tactic.  The visible Church seeks to incorporate the separated brethren of the various protestant denominations and even other religions through the new definition of ecumenism, a "rediscovery" of ecumenism as Cardinal Kasper refers to it. 

Cardinal Kasper states, "Mission is an eschatological phenomenon in which the church takes up the cultural riches of the peoples, purifies and enriches them, and is thereby itself enriched and endowed with the full expression of its catholicity (Ad gentes 1 ff., 9 and passim). Similarly, in ecumenism the church enters into an exchange of gifts with the separated churches (UUS, 28, 57), enriches them, but also reciprocally makes their gifts its own, adds them to its catholic fullness and thus fully realizes its own catholicity (UR, 4). Mission and ecumenism are the two forms of the eschatological pathway and the eschatological dynamic of the church. "  

(http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/card...)

Or further Cardinal Muller:

"“With much clarity, the paradigm shift away from polemics and controversies constitutes the present and the future of ecumenism. Its core is this: We determine our relationship to each other no longer with regard to the differences that actually exist in the doctrine, life and constitution of the Church, but rather on the common foundation upon which we stand – ‘For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ … Know you not that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst?’ (1 Cor 3:11, 16). … ”  This from the head of the CDF.

Doctrine does not matter.  The path forward is not to defend the truth or dogmatic teachings but to seek mutual enrichment and to ever increase the size of the "big tent" of modernism.  It is reminiscent of the concept promulgated that the true Mass will be mutually enriched by the new mass, and vice versa.  It is mere Hegelianism, thesis+antithesis=synthesis.  This explains rumors of a "new" 1962 missal with new calendar, feast days, saints, and prayers.  All so very mutually enriching and traditional.  

 T he path being laid before the SSPX seems to be one of mere absorption.  Do not criticize Vatican II.  Do not hold to previous doctrine.  Scare the traditional laity into believing they are now not Catholic and less than heretical sects.  Come into the slush of ecumenism or be out in the cold.  It is sad really.  I pray that the bishops and priests of the society remain firm in their opposition to modernism and hold true to traditional Catholic doctrine and the vision of Archbishop Lefebvre.

[Dawn Marie]

Can you say what exactly is the Pontifical University(or maybe your hubby)?  We actually have quite of few (from the German Pontifical University) who come on here and strangely enough seem to be very interested in anything to do with Archbishop Lefebvre.

I always wondered who they are??? 

[Sue K]

Wikipedia says they are ecclesiastical universities directly under the pope's jurisdiction.  The Angelicum trained men for the Dominican Priesthood, I gather each pontifical university is for a particular religious order.  We aren't sure what the difference is between a seminary and a pontifical university for training for the holy priesthood, for example.

I wonder about the Germans. Are they priests or ex-seminarians? You probably already know The Rhine Flows into the Tiber, by Father Ralph Wiltgen, one of the early books on Vatican II.  My husband, a scholastic, thinks that much of the error in VII arose from false philosophy, esp. German philosophers e.g. Kant, Hegel, etc.

[Dawn Marie]

I got a quick lesson on Kant from a priest some months ago.  If I remember right he said that Kant was the professor of philosophy or maybe theology for Joseph Ratzinger when he was a seminarian.

Or at least that the future Pope was deeply influenced by Kant.

As for the Pontifical Universities I'm not sure exactly but I read somewhere that they are for seminarians studying for the priesthood.

[Michael]

Although an earlier article, it lends to the idea that the conciliar Church will continue to cast doubt that the faithful that attend an SSPX chapel are even Catholic.

Calgary bishop warns against rogue parish