jump to navigation

SSPX to split? Bishop Tissier de Mallerais “indifferent” to regularization June 14, 2012

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Papa, SSPX, Tradition, Virtue.
trackback

Some very interesting and potentially revealing statements from one of the 4 bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais.  He claims he is indifferent to regularization with the Holy See.  I’m not entirely surprised, but I feel he does make one error:

One of the four bishops of the Society of St. Pius X has told a French weekly that negotiations intended to

de Mallerais

lead to full communion between the Society and Holy See leave him “indifferent.”

“The Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) has never left the Church,” said Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais. “It is in the heart of the Church. There where the authentic preaching of the faith is, there is the Church. This project of ‘officialization’ of the SSPX leaves me indifferent.”

“We have no need of it, and the Church has no need of it,” he continued. “We are already on the pinnacle, as a sign of contradiction, that attracts those noble souls, that attract lots of young priests, despite our pariah status. One would wish to place our lamp under the bushel for our integration in the conciliar world. This status that is proposed to us, of a personal prelature, analogous to that of Opus Dei, is a status for a state of peace. But we are currently in a state of war in the Church. It would be a contradiction to wish to ‘regularize the war.’” [Bishopr Tissier de Mallerais seems to imply that the SSPX has a choice in this process of regularization.  Bishop Fellay and press statements by the Holy See have indicated that is not the case – Pope Benedict is demanding a resolution – one way or the other – of SSPX’s canonical status.  I have seen statements from him and Bishop Williamson that criticize Bishop Fellay for “launching” this attempt at reproachment with Rome.  I don’t think that’s the case, I think Bishop Fellay is responding to demands by the Holy Father.  Could he have ignored them?  I don’t think so.]

Bishop Tissier de Mallerais added:

The irregularity is not ours. It is that of Rome. A Modernist Rome. A Liberal Rome that has renounced Christ the King. A Rome that had been condemned in advance by all Popes up until the eve of the [Second Vatican] Council …

It is certain that Benedict XVI has made some gestures in favor of Tradition. Especially by declaring that the Traditional Mass has never been suppressed and, in second place, by suppressing the so-called excommunication that had been declared regarding us following our episcopal consecration by Abp. Lefebvre. These two positive gestures drew bitter complaints from the episcopates towards Benedict XVI. But Pope Benedict XVI, while he is Pope, remains Modernist. [There it is.  That’s the crux of the issue.  It appears Bishops Tissier de Malleriais and Williamson simply do not trust Pope Benedict XVI or the Church at large while ruled by him due to his modernist tendencies.  I don’t know for sure about the third bishop, he’s been relatively silent.]

“It is true that the Pope is very pleasant,” the bishop continued. “He is a kind, polite, thoughtful man, a man who is discreet, but possesses natural authority, of man of decisiveness, who has solved many problems in the Church with his personal energy. For instance, problems of morality in this or that priestly institute. But he is imbued with the Council.”

Whether or not Pope Benedict XVI is modernist, which is something I’ve discussed on this blog in the past, the council will never be formally repudiated by him or any other pontiff, at least not for the foreseeable future (I’m talking centuries).  It is impossible for the Church to repudiate a council approved by the reigning pope.  That’s not to say that it can’t be downplayed, or that certain problematic aspects could not be ignored, declared pastoral, , explained away, or what have you, but the sort of formal, hat in hand, chest-beating groveling apology some in SSPX seem to demand of Rome is not going to happen.  I don’t think I should have to say that the triumphalism inherent in this desire is off-putting and seems beneath the dignity of the Church.

Now, I don’t know if much of this heated rhetoric may not be a form of gamesmanship, since I see repeated references to the personal prelature.  Perhaps SSPX is using a “good cop, bad cop” routine in order to get an Ordinariate, which I think would be much, much better for the Society and the Church at large.  Be that as it may, very soon the SSPX and those attached to it will have to make a choice. It’s a leap of faith.  Either you trust in the Holy Spirit and, to a lesser degree, this Pontiff, or you don’t, and you go formally schismatic.  Historically, the dark path of schism has not worked out well for any involved.  I just don’t believe that the Holy Spirit would will that a group go into formal schism.

I’ve been praying for an Ordinariate.  I’ve been praying that the SSPX doesn’t split.  I think that’s about all we can do.  Soon enough, we will know.

Comments

1. Yohannim Ben Kohannim - June 15, 2012

It will happen, the Fraternal Society of St. Pius the 10th will reunite with a Rome that never had authority to seperate her (SSPX). 500+ Orthodox priests and millions of Orthodox Laity will definintely have an impact on this church,this Pope this magisterium and this clutch of Bishops and Cardinals in the faux novus ordo post vat 2 church. Trust NO man but the One G-D only, HaShem and SSPX will be the worst nightmare of the Socialist-liberal, revisionist post vatican 2 psydo-catholics. Eventually G-D himself will undo the council from hell, vatican 2.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: