Attached is a google translation of the article appearing on pius.info
Cardinal Meisner: SSPX must accept pope and council fully
Saturday 25th August at 2012 09:00 Clock
Cologne’s Cardinal Joachim Meisner (picture) insists that the SSPX, the Magisterium of the Pope and the Second Vatican Council fully recognizes.
These included the decrees on religious freedom, the relationship with the Jews and the current form of the liturgy, according to a Friday (24th Aug) published article on the Internet platform “direktzu.kardinal-meisner.de”.
Read here what Cardinal Meisner has demanded the answer to this and the Brotherhood.
A return of the SSPX in the communion of the Catholic Church presupposes also that it was withdrawing its accusations against the pope, he was not orthodox.
“Who doctrinal statements wholly or partly rejects can not, in the full communion of the church are,” said Meisner.
He points out that the Pope has repeatedly expressed his appreciation for the Jewish faith and the importance of dialogue between Christians and Jews expressed. So I Benedict XVI. World Youth Day 2005 in Cologne, visited the local synagogue and quoted his predecessor John Paul II: “whoever meets Jesus Christ meets Judaism.”
Comment : One of the three points, which has recognized the SSPX in the opinion of the cardinal, is this to say:
1) Freedom of religion: What the Cardinal mean? If religious freedom is understood as the Church has always taught, then it is no problem for the fraternity to recognize it. According to the perennial teaching of the Church can and must be a state non-Catholic religious tolerance tolerate (and they also worship admit), as the dissenters – this is constant teaching of the Church long before the Council – should not be forced to believe in Christ. (Thomas Aquinas, Summa theol. II-II q10 a8 & a11)
When Cardinal Meisner with religious freedom means those pernicious attitude, which is basically nothing more than a revival of free thought and of Freemasonry, then rejects the Brotherhood from this fiercely. This religion teaches that everyone should therefore freely choose his religion, because all religions are equal paths to salvation are. This not only violates the 2000 year old teachings of the Church, but directly against the word of Christ, who says: “I am the way, the truth and the life NO ONE comes to the Father but by me.” (John 14.7). To ensure that all non-Christian religions are excluded as ways of salvation. According to Pius XII. Although people can be saved in other religions, but that is due to God that every human being personally targeted. according to what he could know the truth and what is not (see the innocent erring conscience) Impossible, however, a religion that rejects Christ, to God. This is one of the church and condemned the gospel contrary heresy.
The Cardinal should therefore clarify this first point, what he means: either the tolerance of other religions, which is derived from the freedom of the act of faith, to which no one may be compelled or the heresy that religion follow necessarily from the equality and equal rights for all religions (see the message of religion Assisi meeting: All religious leaders on the same level).
2) The relationship with the Jews. Again, it is not clear what the cardinal said. The declaration ” Nostra Aetate “, which is addressed in the relationship to Judaism, has not changed the traditional teaching of the Church. In the article the FAQ (frequently asked questions) to the SSPX it is therefore:
There is a lot of misconception , Vatican II did in the Declaration ” Nostra Aetate “the Jewish people granted a” way of salvation without Christ. ” The Second Vatican Council openly profess the doctrine of tradition when it writes: ” As the Holy Scripture testifies, Jerusalem did not recognize the time of her visitation, and the Jews have to a large extent not received the Gospel, yes, quite a few to have opposed its spreading. … Together with the prophets and the same Apostle, the Church awaits the day that is only known to God, on which all peoples with ONE voice of the Lord and “serve him shoulder to shoulder on. … Namely, the Church believes that Christ, our peace, reconciled through the cross, Jews and Gentiles, and has in itself made from two one. “(Nostra Aetate 4) (FAQ: How the SSPX is to Judaism? )
An “appreciation” (see Cardinal Meisner) for the Jewish people has been the Apostle Paul when he says: “Brothers! Salvation of the Jewish people is the desire of my heart and the object of my prayers for them. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God. ”
Of course, the conversation and dialogue with our Jewish fellow citizens is of paramount importance. But precisely this theological dispute, the Brotherhood wants, when she writes in her policy statement to Judaism:
The main feature of this new beginning will be that the discussion is not overshadowed by recriminations, but in the common study of those texts is that both the Jewish people and the Catholic Church holy: the writings of the fathers and prophets. From these it is necessary to answer the crucial question: Is Joshua min Nazareth (Jesus Christ) of the Ketuvim and Neviim (prophets and writings) announced Mashiach (Messiah) or not? (See FAQ )
So it is also not clear what the cardinal demands of the Brotherhood. If he means that the Brotherhood will seek the amicable conversation and dialogue with Judaism, then there is no objection, on the contrary, faith comes by hearing! If this means is that the Brotherhood is to say (contrary to the teachings of Vatican II), there was for the Jewish people a separate path to salvation without faith in Jesus Christ, then the Brotherhood and this is clearly in accordance with the tradition of the Holy Scriptures and decidedly reject.
3) The new form of the liturgy . The Brotherhood has never denied that the Church has the right and the power to change the form of the liturgy and to determine The liturgy is so much more developed from the tradition. There are also no attachments to appearance, such as incense, Latin, altar, etc., which the Brotherhood move to reject the conciliar Mahlfeier.
The reason is much more comprehensive and essential: The Brotherhood rejects the conciliar Mahlfeier because the sum of their changes are no longer the most holy sacrifice of the Mass of the church meets, but much more of Protestant theology, after which the show is a “meal with Jesus.” The language, the people’s altar, the overemphasis of people (“Liturgy is the service of God in man”) are the tangible expression of this non-Catholic theology.
The Brotherhood rejects the post-conciliar Mahlfeier from so because they essentially no longer corresponds to the teaching of the Church. Luther taught first the theory of the “Mahlfeier” means which the Council of Trent veruteilt explicitly: “Who says the fair will offered to God not true and proper sacrifice [...], let him be anathema”
Pius XII. this teaching just for our time proclaims anew, saying: ” It is different to the way of truth [...], who fraudulently claimed that it was not only a victim but also a sacrifice and meal fraternal communion. ” (Mediator Dei)
Thus, even before the introduction of the post Mahlfeier sentenced by the same teacher. Not only is it wrong to call the show as a meal, but “to say maliciously,” the exhibition is “sacrifice and meal at the same time.”
Also so that the shape of the grinding liturgy is unique to the traditional teaching of the Church in contrast. (Even if a priest can personalize the Mahlfeier so that his faith in the atonement is expressed and he performs the act as the Atonement). The Brotherhood notes this contrast and decides according to the teachings of its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, – who “has delivered what he himself has received” – for two thousand years of liturgy of the Catholic Church.
That is, at this point there is ambiguity: the new liturgy was handed the Atonement of Jesus as opposed Mahlfeiher. The decision must therefore be in Übereistimmung with the perennial teaching of the Church.