SSPX to B16: We’re REALLY just not that into you


Monday, October 1, 2012
By Bryan Cones

In a failure for one of Pope Benedict’s highest ecumenical priorities, it seems likely that the Society of St. Pius X–the Lefebvrites–won’t be signing back up for full communion with the Holy See. While a final letter from SSPX head Bernard Fellay is expected some time soon, two leaders of the movement have indicated they could not sign the document of principles the Holy See requires, which more or less says they accept the legitimacy of the Second Vatican Council.

With the 50th anniversary of the council’s opening coming up, the pope won’t have reunion with the SSPX to celebrate, despite the generous overtures he has made toward them, including the liberalization of the use of the pre-Vatican II liturgy. Luckily, one of Pope Benedict’s non-negotiables has been Vatican II’s recognition of Judaism, and the SSPX just can’t accept the teaching that God’s covenant relationship with the Jews continues.

The SSPX ceased being Catholic long ago, setting themselves up as a the church of the pure, the way the Donatists did so many centuries ago. In other words, they became sectarian–the true opposite of “catholic.”
The departure of a few hundred thousand members is one thing; the departure of millions quite another. Let us hope that Pope Benedict might now turn to reconciling the 30 million disaffected Roman Catholics in this country, or the 3 million in his own native Germany who have officially left the church by refusing to pay the state-collected church tax. Bishops there have decided to deny those Catholics access to the sacraments if they don’t pay up–not, I think, the best approach.

Get AQ Email Updates

12 comments on “SSPX to B16: We’re REALLY just not that into you

  1. tradical on said:

    ” … SSPX just can’t accept the teaching that God’s covenant relationship with the Jews continues. …”

    Now just where the Halifax does it say in the documents of V2 that the Old Covenant wasn’t abrogated?

  2. He seriously needs to take off the rose-colored glasses and smell the coffee. Hello ? Are you that blind to the reality around you ?

  3. Wow,
    Talk about propaganda and misinformation.

  4. “The SSPX ceased being Catholic long ago…”

    You almost have to be amused at the hypocrisy of these self-appointed “experts” who confidently proclaim the SSPX to be “non-Catholic” — in direct contradiction of the Pope himself, who, in Summorum Pontificum referred to the situation with the Society as an internal matter within the Church. Not to mention the lifting of the “excommunications”, which would make no sense in relation to non-Catholics. But perhaps my charge of hypocrisy is unfair… maybe he’s just incredibly stupid, which is sad but I think not quite as insulting.

    Somewhat less amusing is the absolutely insane assertion that Catholics must reconcile with a false religion that is defined by its rejection of Christ. One simply cannot simultaneously be Christian and accept as valid a religion that explicitly rejects Christ; in other words, you can’t be both Christian and anti-Christian. Of course, in fairness to the “Jews” (that is, those who call themselves such despite their rejection of the fulfillment of God’s covenant with their ancestors), Protestants in their rejection of the One Church founded by Christ are also at least somewhat anti-Christian as well

    Now, regarding Mr. Cones’ final failure to grasp reality — if Pope Benedict can’t arrive at an agreement with a relatively small group (the only accurate statement he made about the SSPX) of actual, believing Catholics, what chance does he have with a horde of nominal “Catholics”, many of whom would just as soon call themselves Protestants if they perceived any material advantage in it? After all, as most of these people explicitly reject even points of Catholic doctrine that were not diluted, abandoned, or muddled by Vatican II, this would be a very small step.

  5. What the USCatholic writer here says is ugly to no end.

    No, Glornt, you are not being unfair.

  6. The underlying problem is the extreme antipathy of the German Bishops’ Conference [and State] to SSPX and the pressure they are exerting on BXVI with the added advantage of +Williamson providing a great excuse for them. Such antipathy exemplified by the utterings of ++Mueller upon the subject of SSPX – which renders a fair hearing prejudiced.

  7. The covenant with the Jews has been fulfilled. If it hasn’t then Jesus is not the Messiah.

    • Exactly. “Not revoked” is not the same thing as “still in effect”. The Jews were the Chosen People, but this implies they were chosen for a specific purpose. That purpose was to bring into the world Our Savior. This was accomplished. Some of them accepted Him, and from these Jews arose the only legitimate continuation of Old Testament Judaism, which is the Catholic Church. Those who rejected (and those who continue to reject) Him (or His Church, as in the case of Protestants and the Eastern Schismatics) are adherents of various false sects, some of which have appropriated the label of “Judaism”. It makes no sense to refer to these people as being “Chosen”.

  8. Of course, there ins the prophesy that the Jews will convert en masse before the end of the world. So if you really wanted to stretch the idea to its extreme limit, I guess you could say that God’s covenant with the Jewish nation still has “unfinished business” if you will. Of course, I’m talking of the Jewish nation, not the Jewish religion, and again, this is stretching the idea.

  9. Yeah, good luck with those 30 million disaffected Catholics who for the most part, probably don’t know or care what is in Vatican II documents or, for that matter, what the Church teaches on anything else. Because they haven’t been taught the truths of the Faith for over 40 years. But they ARE sick of homosexual priests preying on children and lesbian nuns who run Catholic schools and do their best to ruin the Faith of little children, and pastors who care more for money than souls.

Leave a Reply