|
Post by guillaume on Feb 17, 2009 13:32:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Feb 17, 2009 20:13:24 GMT
Not encouraging. Thanks for posting the link, Guillaume.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 19, 2009 0:05:32 GMT
I understand from my occasional prowlings among the Rorate Caeli comboxes that Tissier de Mallerais is seen as the SSPX's chief theologian and that he wrote the official biography of Archbishop Lefebvre, so this is not a good sign. Does anyone with access to French-language sources know much about him?
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Feb 19, 2009 10:24:59 GMT
I have heard on the rumour mill during earlier deliberations between the Holy See and the Pixies that Tissier de Mallerais was a much more difficult hurdle than Richard Williamson. Indeed, on one occasion Tissier, Williamson and de Gallarretta united in opposition to a pro-reconciliation drive by Fellay and Schmidberger.
I believe Tissier's tone is much more serious than any problems coming from Williamson and indicative of a strong current of opinion among the SSPX and their supporters. It is also very unrealistic. Benedict XVI is not a young man and it is very doubtful they will receive similar sympathy from his successor.
There are several scenarios being painted - I believed the SSPX would split on a deal, but after reading Tissier I came to the conclusion there might not even be a deal.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 19, 2009 17:27:40 GMT
The point Tissier makes about their German seminary (the Bishop of Ratisbonne, where it is situated, has said if there is a deal he will order its closure and make them start afresh elsewhere) is a very serious one. Since they were not canonically invited into dioceses (as a religious order should be) but set up illicitly, the relevant bishops will have to give permission for their continued functioning in their dioceses if there is a reconciliation; if a bishop refuses to have a reconciled SSPX in his diocese they will be faced with disposing of significant assets and starting afresh elsewhere. This could be a major obstacle (unless they were actually given the same sort of autonomy as one of the Eastern Rites, which they were demanding but won't get as the motu proprio makes it clear the TLM is not a separate rite but a form of the Latin rite).
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Feb 19, 2009 23:08:05 GMT
If they got a personal prelature like Opus Dei, would it solve their problems? (I suspect not, because I think Opus Dei have been excluded from certain dioceses by the bishops — the late Bishop Murphy of Cork and Ross was an example. I take it that Rome cannot direct a bishop to allow something like Opus Dei or a similar structure for SSPX to operate in his jurisdiction.)
|
|
|
Post by guillaume on Feb 20, 2009 1:26:03 GMT
If they got a personal prelature like Opus Dei, would it solve their problems? (I suspect not, because I think Opus Dei have been excluded from certain dioceses by the bishops — the late Bishop Murphy of Cork and Ross was an example. I take it that Rome cannot direct a bishop to allow something like Opus Dei or a similar structure for SSPX to operate in his jurisdiction.) It is not the aim of the SSPX to be submitted to the Bishops. Read the last interview of Bp Fellay (on this terrific blog vivificantem.com). Maybe they would have a same kind of situation as the IBP, Institute of the Good Sheper. The authority they would depend on, would be only from the Pope. Not the Bishops, and to be honest, i won't blame them. Since when the bishops of the world are favourable of the Trad' movement ? Even ED communities struggle day and night to be recognize wildly, and so to attract as many souls as possible. There is NO ED communities which has a parish in this world, i think. Because the NO mass is the norm. The TLM is not. The TLM is "special", "extraordinary" and only dedicated to "strange" people (only joking on this one) who understood the mysteries of the Sacrifice and the importance of a proper liturgy to be presented to God the Father, by His Son, in atonement for our sins and the salvation of souls.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 20, 2009 12:31:25 GMT
Opus Dei is basically a religious order albeit unusual in some respects and headed by a prelate rather thean the orinary type of superior. The same rules would apply to it as to a religious order - i.e. it is not supposed to operate in a diocese without the permission of the bishop (though once a bishop invites it in it cannot be expelled by any successor in the see without very serious grounds for so doing). The difference between Opus Dei and the SSPX is that Opus Dei has not been intruding itself into dioceses without their bishops' permission whereas SSPX has, and even if the SSPX are reconciled to Rome the bishops where they currently operate are no more obliged to receive them into their dioceses than they are to receive Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans or any other order that applies. (The fact that the Cork and Ross diocese does not have Opus Dei is not a personal peculiarity of Bishop Murphy, nor does it only affect OD. From the late nineteenth century successive Cork bishops refused to allow the Jesuits into their diocese because they were afraid a Jesuit college would compete for vocations with their diocesan seminary -a refusal which had serious repercussions for Catholic secondary education in Cork.) Personally I think if the SSPX were reconciled it would be a breach of natural justice to force them out of dioceses where they had made long and significant financial and personal investments unless for good and serious cause; but as we know from long and bitter experience, it is extremely difficult to stop a bishop from doing something he has set his mind on, just because it is contrary to natural justice - and they do have good legal grounds for pointing out that the SSPX built on the basis of a defective and unrecognised title. Guillaume - the Pope cannot simply tell a bishop how to govern his diocese. The church is not simply a centralised dictatorship and bishops have canonical rights as against the Pope; how they use or misuse them is another matter. The only way to get round it would be to set up a parallel diocesan structure for the SSPX like the Eastern Rite eparchies in the USA, but as I said Rome has declared that the TLM is not a separate rite and I doubt very much if the SSPX and other traditionalists would have the numbers and resources to support something on that scale. The Pope seems to want a mutual enrichement and overlap between the two forms rather than the segregation which the creation of a separate rite would entail.
|
|