Perseverance in prayer.

Let us continue to persevere in prayer
for our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI,
for Bishop Fellay and
the Society of St. Pius X.
We must trust in God working through the Holy Father.

Deus, in adjutorium meum intende;

Domine, as adjuvandum me festina.

Incline unto my aid O God;

O LORD, make haste to help me!

Bishop Fellay.

An edifying presentation by Bishop Fellay.

Bishop Fellay speaks.

Our hearts and prayers support him.
 

Prayers for the Reconciliation of the Society.

Fr. Franz Schmidberger.
The hour is grave.

During this time we remember in our Masses and prayers:
the superiors, priests and faithful
of the Society of St Pius X
and its allied religious communities.
Fr Schmidberger has always been a
man of the Church with a great love of "Romanitas".

Letter from Fr. Schmidberger.

Dear faithful,

On 16 March in Rome Cardinal Levada, Prefect of the Congregation, gave the Superior General of our Fraternity, Bishop Fellay a letter with statements in which we are asked ultimately to react more positively to the doctrinal preamble of September the 14th than we had done so far.

As a final deadline for a response is given the 15th of April 2012. Surely you have heard this already wholly or partially from the media. We have thus arrived at a crucial point.

Even if the letter strikes an unpleasant sound, there are legitimate hopes for a satisfactory solution. If this solution would be reached it would considerably strengthen all the orthodox forces in the church. If not it would weaken and discourage these forces. So it is not primarily about our brotherhood, but for the good of the Church.

Therefore we ask for the eager, insistent and imploring prayer of all our faithful and all Catholics, that God through the redemptive suffering of His only begotten Son, will lead His Church through this crisis and give her in the Holy Resurrection of Jesus life new strength and new prosperity.

Stuttgart, 22 March 2012

Father Franz Schmidberger,
District Superior

Source: Fr. Finigan

SSPX and the Holy See

Vatican City, 16 March 2012 (VIS) - Given below is the text of a communique relating to the Society of St. Pius X, released this morning by the Holy See Press Office.

"During the meeting of 14 September 2011 between Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and president of the Pontifical Commission 'Ecclesia Dei', and Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X, the latter was presented with a Doctrinal Preamble, accompanied by a Preliminary Note, as a fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See. This defined certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church Magisterium and 'sentire cum Ecclesia' [means: thinking with the Church].
"The response of the Society of St. Pius X to the aforesaid Doctrinal Preamble, which arrived in January 2012, was examined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before being submitted to the Holy Father for his judgement. Pursuant to the decision made by Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop Fellay was, in a letter delivered today, informed of the evaluation of his response. The letter states that the position he expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems which lie at the foundation of the rift between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X.
"At the end of today's meeting, moved by concern to avoid an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X was invited to clarify his position in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI".

From the Website of the Holy See

+ + +

Update:
(Radio Vaticana):

"Bp. Fellay is invited to clarify his position, in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI, from now until April 15."


[UPDATE - 1500 GMT]
In an article on today's events, Salvatore Izzo reports the following for Italian news agency AGI:

The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Joseph Levada, delivered [the content of the communiqué] to the Superior General of the Society, Bishop Bernard Fellay, in a conversation that lasted for over two hours ... . During today's meeting in the Palace of the Holy Office - in which the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Abp. Luis Francisco Ladaria, and the Secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, Mgr. Guido Pozzo, also took part, while Bp. Fellay was joined by his assistant Fr. Nelly - a complete rupture was avoided by the Holy See, making it clear that Benedict XVI still expects a recomposition.
From the blog: Rorate Caeli

The new UK SSPX: Bequest SiSi! Request NoNo!

In August 2007 we were informed by letter
that we had been nominated to receive
half of the residue of the estate of
the late Mrs. Margaret Patricia Kingon-Rouse, R.I.P.


(Click on documents to read them)

There were legal complications involved with the property which formed the estate.
The last time we had information about the Will was last August.

In the latest issue of the SSPX Newsletter
(November, 2011),
the District Superior,
Rev. Paul Morgan wrote:

"Similarly, we are indebted to the late Mrs Patricia Kingon-Rouse of Herne Bay whose bequeathed property now allows the Fathers to have a base for their apostolate there. May she rest in peace."

I understood from this announcement that the legal complications had been overcome.
Therefore I telephoned the new London Executor and asked about the present status of the Will.

I was told that the Will
did not legally bind the SSPX
to honour Mrs. Kingon-Rouse's request
and that it was decided that
although I was named in the Will
the SSPX had decided that Papa Stronsay
would not receive the half share of the remainder of the estate
as had been requested by the deceased.

Here is the entire clause of the Will:

7. SUBJECT TO the payment of my debts funeral and testamentary expenses and the aforementioned legacies I give all the remainder of my estate not otherwise effectively disposed of by this Will or any codicil hereto to the Society of St. Pius X in Great Britain and request that one half of such residue of my estate be used for the benefit of the London Branch of the Society operating from St. George's House 125 Arthur Road London SW19 7DR who service Saints John Fisher & Thomas More Church Herne and for the remaining half share to be utilised for the benefit of Father Michael Mary and the community of Redemptorists at Golgotha Monastery Island Papa Stronsay Orkney Isles KW17 2AR. And I further request that Father Michael Mary put aside the sum of TWO THOUSAND POUNDS (£2, 000.00) for mass offerings to be used for the repose of the soul of myself and my family by birth or marriage and for the benefit of every holy soul in purgatory AND I declare that the receipt of the Treasurer or other competent officer for the time being of the Society of St. Pius X in Great Britain appearing to my Executor shall be a sufficient receipt to my Executor in respect of this residuary bequest

In March 2010 we received the £2, 000 for Masses.


I thought that we, Catholics and clergy,
held last requests as sacred prescriptions.

All that is legal is not moral.

If last requests are not honoured by
traditional priests
by whom will they be honoured?

As for the bequest's request
graciously made for us by our friend
Mrs. Kingon-Rouse, R.I.P. -
we are in no position to renounce it
but we accept that it has been taken from us:
we resign ourselves to this injustice.

In all things may God's Will be done
and may it teach us the lessons necessary for salvation:

For the desire of money is the root of all evils;
which some coveting have erred from the faith,
and have entangled themselves in many sorrows.
[1 Timothy 6:10]

Vatican Communiqué concerning the SSPX

Updates are at the end of the post.

VATICAN CITY, 14 SEP 2011 (VIS) - At midday today the Holy See Press Office released the following communique concerning the postion of the Society of St. Pius X:

"On 14 September at the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Joseph Levada, prefect of the congregation and president of the Pontifical Commission 'Ecclesia Dei'; Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer S.J., secretary of the congregation, and Msgr. Guido Pozzo, secretary of the pontifical commission, met with Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X, who was accompanied by Fr. Niklaus Pfluger and Fr. Alain-Marc Nely, respectively first and second assistant general to the society.

"Following the appeal of 15 December 2008, addressed by the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, the Holy Father decided to remove the excommunication against the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre. At the same time, he approved the opening of discussions with the society in order to clarify doctrinal problems and to heal the existing rift.

"In order to put the Holy Father's instructions into effect, a joint study commission was set up, composed of experts from the Society of St. Pius X and from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who met in Rome on eight occasions between October 2009 and April 2011. Their discussions, which aimed to identify and study the essential doctrinal difficulties in the controversial issues, had the result of clarifying the positions of the two sides and their respective motivations.

"While bearing in mind the concerns and demands presented by the Society of St. Pius X about protecting the integrity of the Catholic faith against Vatican Council II's 'hermeneutic of rupture' with Tradition (a theme addressed by Pope Benedict XVI in his address to the Roman Curia on 22 December 2005), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith maintains that the fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See is the acceptance of the text of the Doctrinal Preamble, which was handed over during a meeting on 14 September 2011. The Preamble defines certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church Magisterium and 'sentire cum Ecclesia'. At the same time, it leaves open to legitimate discussion the examination and theological explanation of individual expressions and formulations contained in the documents of Vatican Council II and later Magisterium.

"At the same meeting, certain suggestions were made for a canonical solution to the position of the Society of St. Pius X, with a view to achieving the desired reconciliation".

___________________

CNS: Although the Vatican did not give the society a deadline, in order to move toward full reconciliation, leaders are expected to study and sign the preamble "within a few months," said Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman.
The cardinal and bishop also discussed possible "elements of a canonical solution" for the society after "the eventual and hoped-for reconciliation," said a statement issued by the Vatican after the meeting.

Father Lombardi said, "Today the most likely solution would be a personal prelature," which is a church jurisdiction without geographical boundaries designed to carry out particular pastoral initiatives. It is headed by a prelate, who is appointed by the pope.

++++++

William Cardinal Levada

Catholic Herald: Fr Lombardi would not respond to questions about specific Church teachings and developments listed in the preamble, but said Church tradition has always held there are varying degrees of Church teaching; some require an absolute assent while others are open to interpretation.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Fr. Zed

WDTPRS:

In sum, the CDF has leaned far toward reconciliation with the SSPX, but it has placed a condition.

The CDF is signaling that some aspects of the documents of Vatican II are open to discussion.

They are talking about canonical solutions.

Pope Benedict is the Pope of Christian Unity.

********

Bishop Fellay

SSPX:

Interview with Bishop Fellay after the meeting with Cardinal Levada.

Bishop Fellay: This document is entitled “Doctrinal Preamble”; it was handed over to us for in-depth study. Hence it is confidential, and you will understand why I say no more about it to you. However the term “preamble” does indicate that acceptance of it is a preliminary condition for any canonical recognition of the Society of St. Pius X on the part of the Holy See.

... Today, for the sake of objectivity, I must acknowledge that in the doctrinal preamble there is no clear-cut distinction between the inviolable dogmatic sphere and the pastoral sphere that is subject to discussion. The only thing that I can say, because it is part of the press release, is that this preamble contains “certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation of Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church’s Magisterium and to "sentire cum Ecclesia" [thinking with the Church]. At the same time, it leaves open to legitimate discussion the examination and theological explanation of individual expressions and formulations contained in the documents of Vatican Council II and of the later Magisterium.” There you have it; no more and no less. (For more click the SSPX link above.)

Alas! waters are murky now, the devil will be fishing

It was a great disappointment to read Fr. Regis de Cacqueray's Monday statement made with the approbation of Bishop Fellay; at a time when we needed give no opportunity to the devil.

The content of the statement is not the particular issue here; the SSPX has been able to discuss this matter with the Holy See since the beginning of the year.

What is wrong is this:
Barely two days before the Holy See presents its considered judgment to the Society, Bishop Fellay, jumping in first, approves an SSPX judgment against the person of the Holy Father; without even waiting for the Holy Father to speak through His representative.

A very serious issue, Assisi, has been abused here, and used as a smoke-screen as if to distract from a fundamental fact.

The fundamental fact is, that whoever the true Pope may be, it is necessary for Catholic bishops and priests who accept him, to have hierarchical submission to that Pope of the here and now, irrespective of the other grave theological or moral issues of the time.

Fr. de Cacqueray's statement and Bishop Fellay's approval of it reads as an unworthy tactic. Why didn't the bishop say it himself: si si, no, no?

The issue of the day is fronting up to submission to Peter.

The successive resolution of all other serious Church matters until the end of time, follows after, and only after, submission to Peter, Benedict XVI, the Vicar of Christ.

Fr. Michael Mary, F.SS.R.

N.B.

FSSP Chapel, Guadalajara, Mexico

Matthew Bellisario has posted about the SSPX protest Guadalajara, Mexico.

SSPX Says Protest Against FSSP Chapel In Mexico is Justified!

I really am taken back by the press release from the SSPX on this whole ordeal concerning the FSSP in Guadalajara, Mexico, where they disrupted a Mass by their loud protests and so forth. The SSPX admits that there was an SSPX priest present at the protest and they admit that there were at least 80 people outside the FSSP church during Mass. After dancing around the issue in the main body of their press release, they followed up with an addition at the bottom which reads,

"NB from USA District: the act of reparation made at the FSSP's chapel was justified (regardless of the priest's private disposition), because the Fraternity of St. Peter officially supports false ecumenism via their May Protocol."

So there you have it folks. Straight form the horses mouth. The SSPX have now officially claimed that the FSSP are supporting false Ecumenism!
Here is the link to their press release. Read it for yourself. As we can see, the story was not made up, and all the facts that have been presented thus far in my first article have been corroborated by eyewitnesses and the SSPX themselves. Below is a picture of the FSSP Chapel where the protest happened.
Matthew Belissario

__________

TRANSALPINE REDEMPTORIST COMMENT:

We know SSPX priests who would be very sorry to read the N.B. of the SSPX USA.
Let us continue to hold that this SSPX USA statement does not reflect the opinions of the whole SSPX; just the leadership of one SSPX District.

That statement is either a proud refusal to offer a humble apology
or it is the true expression of schismatics.

We hope that it is just a bold expression of pride;
but if it is not, let us also place an N.B. on the page:

N.B.
Throughout Her history,
mobs of "pious" schismatics have used violence
against the One True Church
showing themselves to be doing the work of Her enemies.

Countless of Her Faithful children have been martyred,
often by religious zealots:
the "pious" who believed themselves to be true Christians
armed with the "Truth" in the cause of God.

But here is the dividing line between
truth and error:

The Catholic Faith has ever conquered by the Cross:
not by the Sword, (nor with the mob nor by the spray can).

The Catholics are the Friends of the Cross;
The Infidels are the Friends of the Sword:

let each choose the Cross:
With the courage to say sorry;
with humility, meekness and self-denial.

The business of enemies

St. Peter's Church - the graffiti is visible on the grey wall

Matthew Bellisario has reported a physical attack on the FSSP Chapel of St Peter Apostle in Guadalajara, Mexico, by a priest and members of the SSPX base in the same town. In the Comments Box Fr. Puga of the SSPX is named as leading the "mob". Catholics don't attack Catholic churches, that is the business of Her enemies.

A brief reply to Brendan

+

Thank you for your comment, Brendan, where you concluded:


“Granted, the liturgy of 1962 has been greatly freed by the 2007 motu proprio but you could have regularized yourself after the Episcopal Consecrations of Archbishop Lefebvre. What you say now of Summorum Pontificum, the FSSP said basically of Ecclesia Dei.
What changed?”



Human beings do not work on the level of the Law alone. If they did it there would never have been the Great Schism with the East; nor the revolt of the Protestants; and nor the crisis leading up to and following the 1988 Consecrations. There are always many factors involved in breakdown: scandals, miscommunications, human motives, injustice and mistrust. Each of those words is laden with wounds that are too painful to open; and revisiting them does not help in forging the way forward. Suffice it to say that as Cardinal, Pope Benedict said that we were treated as “lepers” in the Church, which is a fair statement about the ecclesial climate. However, there were brave souls who did reconcile in 1988, other didn’t for various reasons. What changed?


Since 1988 for one thing there is a new Pope who gives very clear messages and who desires to do everything possible for traditional Catholics. The last Pope probably wanted these improvements too; but, in the climate, the lepers either never heard or didn’t believe their ears. I think that it is better to leave the past with the affirmation that here and now, in 2009, there have been sufficient gestures from the Holy See to re-establish a new relationship of charity and trust.


The words of the Letter of Pope Benedict to the Bishops explaining the Motu Proprio made this pertinent avowal: “Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. ... This glance at the past imposes an obligation on us today: to make every effort to enable for all those who truly desire unity, to remain in that unity or to attain it anew.” By this, he announces the need for further efforts on the part of the Church hierarchy which I read as an appeal for a reciprocal effort on our part. A new attempt on the part of the hierarchy demands that we too forgive the past and rebuild in a better climate.


In the Motu Proprio the Pope began building bridges by giving far more than was ever expected. Yes he allowed each and every priest in the Latin rite to offer the old Mass; but he went further, giving the whole of the old ritual; and, even more, he officially recognised that the Old Mass was never abrogated; (-that alone was a profound gesture; a balm to the wounds of many old Fathers). Understanding the situation, Benedict XVI, is addressing the different levels that have contributed to this division: The interpretation of Vatican II according to tradition, justice for the old Rite and reform of the Church in many areas. By this wide ranging activity he has laid a foundation upon which a lasting reconciliation can be built. Priests of good will must recognise this and co-operate; it is an obligation. Whatever about the time between 1988 and 2007, where, for some, there was an impossible climate; since the Motu Proprio, I am not aware of anything that could now excuse a priest from refusing to live within the structures of the Church.

Fr. Michael Mary, F.SS.R.

--------------------------------


Brendan has left a new comment on your post "A brief reply to Brendan":

Fr. Michael Mary, thank you for your reply. Please understand that my question was not meant as a challenge or deceptive. I understand your position more clearly now.

Where the French are so French!

A friend sent us this link:

In light of the recent events in Rome, vis-à-vis the lifting of excommunications… and the ensuing media frenzy… French TV presented the following program on Sunday evening.

Some of the people on the programme are:

Bishop Podvin,

representing the French Bishops' Conference

Father Ribeton,

representing the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter

Father Lorans,

representing the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X

Father de Tanouin,

representing the Good Shepherd Institute

If you speak French, you will enjoy this program

-- with the CANONICAL, THEOLOGICAL, and PASTORAL issues discussed by professionals.

You need a broadband connection and 90 minutes.....

but well worth it.

And the French are so French!

click below here on the link:

http://www.ktotv.com/cms/videos/fiche_video.html?idV=00043235&vl=video_a_la_une

News of Great Joy !

"...Based in the faculty expressly granted to me

by the Holy Father Benedict XVI,

in virtue of the present Decree,

I remit

to

Bishops Bernard Fellay,

Bernard Tissier de Mallerais,

Richard Williamson,

and

Alfonso de Galarreta

the censure of

latae sententiae excommunication ...

Rome,

from the Congregation for Bishops,

January 21, 2009.
Card. Giovanni Battista Re

Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer

send their heart felt congratulations

to Bishop Fellay

and

all the members

of

the Society of St Pius X

on the

"benevolent and courageous act"

of our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI.

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI

The Benevolent! The Courageous!
Long may he reign!

Reply to Fr. Morgan

In the December Letter from the District Superior of the SSPX in Great Britain, Fr Paul Morgan, (opposite) criticises the community of Papa Stronsay. I make a reply.

1. Father speaks against our 'practical agreement' with the Holy See.

He insists on “a solution to the doctrinal issues before there can be any practical agreement with the Roman authorities.” He says: “The Superior General alludes to the unacceptable situation of those communities who have sought a practical agreement prior to the major issues being addressed. In this regard we cannot but think of the community of Papa Stronsay here in Britain.”

Rather than make his own submission to the Holy See, what Fr. Morgan advocates is to play a waiting game with the Pope, the Church and ultimately with God. This is a dangerous idea full of dangerous possibilities for his own soul and for the souls of those he is leading.

The ambiguities of the Second Vatican Council remain to be clarified, this is certain. But far from denying the bi-millennial tradition of the Church, Pope Benedict XVI is acutely aware of the need to reconcile the Second Vatican Council with tradition. How exactly to do so remains the poignant question of our day. It is a question that will not be solved easily nor soon – this we can gather from the manner in which the Church has dealt with problematic declarations of councils in the past.

We are thinking specifically of the Council of Constance (1414 - 1417) and some of the texts of this council that Pope Martin V could not confirm. Nor did he feel the authority to condemn them. Specifically, these were declarations that a General Council is superior to the Pope, that periodically a General Council should assemble and check on the Pope, etc. The three Popes who followed the Council of Constance had quite a lot just to try to undo this mischief, and the full effect was only felt at the next General Council of Basel / Ferrara / Florence... Only part of the theological problem was addressed at the Council of Florence (25 years later), but the issue was really completely solved only at the First Vatican Council in 1870 - more than 400 years later!

Imagine for a moment that you were a traditional Catholic living in 1418; you disagreed with the teachings of the Council of Constance; and Pope Martin and his successors were not resolving matters...

Taking the SSPX approach you would have to wait 400 years before joining the structures of the Church.

Is that God's will? Does that sound like the Catholic approach?

This idea is a soft introduction to schism.

2. Fr Morgan also reports that I openly claim “that the SSPX and its supporters are outside the Catholic Church and in danger of losing their souls.” This is false.

a. I believe that the SSPX as a group of priests are outside the structures of the Church. This is clear. SSPX priests are not submitted to the Holy See, nor to Local Ordinaries or Ordinaries. Objectively this is dangerous to salvation. Subjectively it is another matter.

b. I do not hold any opinion about SSPX supporters (as a group or as individuals) being inside or outside the Church. I have no set opinion about their salvation.

c. I hold that a person may attend Mass in a SSPX chapel in good conscience if he does it without adhering to any schismatic mentality.

Fr. Michael Mary, F.SS.R.

Supplied Jurisdiction or Fresh Bread Through the Back Window

Confiteor: Why did Fr. Michael Mary state that "the SSPX" advised him that there is no supplied jurisdiction for religious superiors taking vows, when Bishop Fellay affirms that the SSPX would never give such advice?

Fr. Michael Mary: I am sorry that I am not very free in answering that question. I have returned to the person whom we first consulted about Jurisdiction. He now says that he considered that talking with us about the matter would have been useless and would have started an endless fruitless diuscussion. And that he was sorry that we interpreted his silence as approval.

Confiteor: Why did it take (apparently) 20 years for Fr. Michael Mary to discover that there is a "problem" with jurisdiction?

Father Michael Mary: I want to state that I do not condemn the position of the SSPX since it was our own position for 20 years. During most of these years, it is my opinion that I, personally, and traditional Catholics in general, tended to live a 'Practical Sedevacantist-Catholicism'. I want to state that this is my own personal take on the matter and that it does not reflect the ideas of others in our community. But this is my own personal understanding of the last 20 years.

Martin: What is this 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism'?

Father Michael Mary: This means living the Catholic faith as if there were no Pope or hierarchy to whom we were bound to be submissive and from whom we were bound to receive authorisation for our activities. It is when we accept that he is the Pope in name alone, but practically we reduce his authority over us to nearly nothing at all. For example, when the Archbishop consecrated the four bishops against the explicit will of Pope John Paul II. I think that this was 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' in action. When Catholic life had come to this state, jurisdiction is not even an issue. The issue was living to survive the madness that was infesting the Church. Was 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' right or wrong? I cannot answer and I do not judge it. It was the way many of us survived. There seemed to be no other viable alternatives for protecting the Faith. "We did what we had to do."

Martin: What has really changed over the last 20 years?

Father Michael Mary: Nothing really changed at all in our thinking, until 7 July 2007 when Pope Benedict XVI issued the Motu Proprio by which he proved beyond doubt that he was intent on 're-sacralising' the Church. It was like a miracle. (Perhaps, as in the vision of St Don Bosco, he is the Pope who is steering the Barque of Peter between the two pillars surmounted by the Blessed Sacrament and Mary Immaculate.) Consequently, as soon as you recognise that Benedict XVI is without doubt truly the Pope; a new dynamic of Catholic life came into play.

Martin: What's that?

Father Michael Mary: From the moment one recognises Benedict XVI as truly the Pope, 'Practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' gives way to 'Practical Papal Catholicism'; it is inevitable. Even though there be a war raging about us in the Church, we still have to make the move towards the Barque of Peter by abandoning 'practical Sedevacantist Catholicism' for 'Practical Papal Catholicism' where the Pope has primacy of jurisdiction over each one of us. We join ranks with him for our own salvation; and after that, we join ranks with him in the battle for the life of the Church. But I repeat, the above is my personal understanding of the last 20 years. It may not be the understanding of others. But I know that however one understands the last 20 years, something new has begun with Pope Benedict XVI and the tide has turned.

Martin: And Jurisdiction?

Father Michael Mary: When 'Practical Papal Catholicism' kicks in you soon see that it is necessary to obtain jurisdiction, from the Vicar of Christ, as soon as possible.

Martin: But what about supplied Jurisdiction?

Father Michael Mary: If you believe that Pope Benedict XVI is the Pope, then you need to have the authority that comes from him. It is that simple. Even with a crisis in the Church raging all about us. Even if you are going to be stoned by fellow traditionalists. No matter what you have to 'get with the Pope!'

Martin: Please explain it a little more.

Father Michael Mary: I am reminded of the morals question on 'stealing' in a case of necessity. The Second World War: Some British soldiers are hiding in a French village. They are in dire need of food and discover that the back window of the village bakery can be opened to give them access to freshly baked bread. Can they take the bread without this being the sin of theft?

Martin: Yes they can. There is necessity and taking the bread through the back window is the only way they can stay alive.

Father Michael Mary: Exactly. But then, after some period of time, the people in the village notice them. The war is not over, there are still many risks, but France is slowly being liberated. The Baker announces that he will give them all the bread that they need and that there is no longer any need to take it from the back window. He himself will even bring it to them.
Now everything is changed, and if not today, then very soon, taking the bread from the back window will be called, and will be, stealing.

Martin: Which means?

Father Michael Mary: For 20 years we have been living in a state of necessity where we lacked authorisation for what we needed, particularly for the Heavenly Bread, confessions, marriages and religious professions. We did as we could. We presumed authorisation for everything we needed. It was not the best situation, but we did what we did because we could not see any other way of surviving.
Then Pope Benedict XVI noticed us and in a clear voice he announced through the Motu Proprio that the old Mass was authorised and that he would give us all that we need and more: Mass, Ritual, jurisdiction for Confessions, marriages, religious professions and the exclusive use of the 1962 Missal in our communities. It is clear that he knows that the war is not over since he is himself working at restoring all things in Christ. He calls us to answer his call and accept the bread he offers us in abundance from his open arms.

Martin: So is this what you are saying: The Baker is the Pope, right? He knows there is a war going on and he is leading the way? He now offers us what before 7 July 2007 we simply took? To ignore him now and to continue taking through the back window is no longer acceptable, since it can't be right to take from behind his back what he wants to give us face to face?

Father Michael Mary: That's one way of putting it. And let me add, there are reasons for getting things right with the Church. This matter of Jurisdiction is a very serious matter. I remember a Doctor of Canon Law in the seminary, citing a case of a pre-Vatican II marriage annulment. It went like this:

A bishop's niece was being married in a neighbouring diocese. The bride invited her uncle, the bishop, to perform the ceremony. It was agreed. The uncle-bishop performed the marriage in the cathedral of the neighbouring diocese where even the local bishop attended to add solemnity to the occasion.

Some years later the marriage broke down. The marriage tribunal investigating the case discovered that the uncle-bishop did not ask for or receive receive jurisdiction from the neighbouring bishop (the local Ordinary) to perform the marriage; (he presumed it). And even though the local bishop was physically present, the Church declared the marriage nul through lack of jurisdiction.

Surely this would have been a case of 'human error and failure'? Surely the Church would have declared this to have been a case for 'supplied jurisdiction'. No it was judged to be a case of 'no jurisdiction.' The marriage was anulled. We were given this case as an example of the seriousness and necessity of having valid jurisdiction to perform valid acts. Perhaps some will say this is legalist, I do not argue. I say that it is an example that gives cause of concern for acting without valid jurisdiction when it can be had for the asking.

Confiteor: Why does Fr. Michael Mary now "accept" the possibility that F.SS.R. priests will celebrate the New Mass outside the monastery, presumably when they are on missions?

Father Michael Mary: No, No, No! In my reply to Brendan, I said that we have been assured that we need not celebrate the Novus Ordo Mass nor con-celebrate it. These assurances have given us the courage to do what we consider to be the right thing and seek reconciliation with the Holy See. So clearly we are not wanting to say the new Mass. However, if you accept the Pope you accept the Canon Law of the Church and therefore we must accept that the Canon Law does not give permission to forbid a priest from saying the New Mass. It does not mean that he will say it. None of our priest want to say it, none of our seminarians want to say it; and nor can they be forced to say it, ever! Not even on the Missions! But the Church does not allow superiors to forbid their priests from saying it. I was disappointed to see this statement of the facts misused before further enquiry.

Devotedly,

Fr Michael Mary, F.SS.R.

Interview Update

Dear Friends
In the form of interviews I want to clarify some of the different questions that have been asked of us about our life as a traditional religious community now that we are having our censures lifted by the Holy See.

Confiteor: I am saddened to hear about CATHOLIC being banned across the SSPX. Very, very sad.

Fr. Michael Mary: Yes, it is a danger for the newspaper. Catholic has been banned in all SSPX chapels in the USA and the United Kingdom. Fr Couture has also stopped it in the Philippines, India and Singapore. Both of our long serving agents in the United Kingdom and the United States have resigned. They have both been wonderful people very devoted to helping with the paper. They will always have our thanks and friendship; we know that it must have been a difficult decision to make.
This is the situation so far and it could get much worse. It means that already over 50% of our 4,000 Catholic subscriptions are lost since we do not have the names of those who receive the paper from SSPX chapels. Others have cancelled because of our decision to be reconciled with the Holy See.
This has prompted us to add a subscription button to this blog so that people who want to support us now, can take out subscriptions on-line using Paypal.
All is not lost. We have had a good number of people writing to us asking us to continue the paper since it is important for them. We are determined to do our best to continue. I can only hope that people who have received Catholic through their chapels will take out subscriptions either by writing to us or by using the button here on this blog.

Confiteor: Do you now consider ties between the Transalpine Redemptorists and the SSPX "severed" from your end?

Fr. Michael Mary: There is somebody I have neither seen nor written to for over 20 years who now lives in Australia. He often used to say to me in his newly learnt English: ‘Friend lost, never was!’ I’m looking forward to meeting him again sometime and I know that nothing will have changed.
That is the school of friendship that has marked my life. It will not change now. I don’t sever ties at my end. Some people need to sever ties at their end; fine, I can understand that, but it is always unfortunate unless it is with the false friends of a strong morally bad infleunce; in which case it is an unhappy obligation.
So no, I will not sever ties with the SSPX unless I was ordered to do so by the Holy See; which would then become ‘an unhappy obligation.’ But why would the Holy See do that?
There are some great priests and faithful in the SSPX who have been our friends for over 20 years. If our submission to the Holy Father is the cause of certain people cutting ties with us then I can only leave doors open, hoping they misunderstood our actions; or acted in a moment of pique, or from human respect. If, however, it comes to the worst, and we are severed for good, I will say to myself, and unhappily: ‘Friend lost, never was!’.... and move on.

Confiteor: Are you at all in contact with Bishop Fellay?

Fr. Michael Mary: We had a very pleasant meeting with Bishop Fellay last 26 May during which we were able to discuss a number of important issues. We really appreciated that opportunity. I last wrote to Bishop Fellay on 29 June. I have not heard back from him as yet. But I cannot believe that he has felt it necessary to severe his ties with us.

Carol from CNS: What prompted the community to agree to join in communion with the Holy See?

Fr. Michael Mary: Pope Benedict XVI. The Holy Father's Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum and the letter that accompanied the document led to our monastery council seeking expert advice from outside our community. The advice we received led us to more closely examine our ecclesial structures and their seeming absence of jurisdiction. While the question of supplied jurisdiction for Confessions and Marriages has been widely discussed, we had not come across any discussions on this point of jurisdiction for the religious life. We have concluded in fact, that there is no 'supplied jurisdiction' for traditional religious superiors receiving vows; nor does their power to command link back to the Holy Father and to the power of the Keys.

If this is so, it means that the superiors do not have supernatural authority to command and organise their communities in the traditional understanding, where the voice of the superior is the voice of Christ. This is an extremely important point.

We asked the SSPX about this question and also the traditionalist Dominicans in France. Both agreed that there was no "supplied jurisdiction" for religious superiors.

Once we were clearly aware of this lack of jurisdiction for the organisation of religious life we found that we would be building on sand, not to mention burying our heads in it, if we continued to try to live religious life in this way.

We were unhappy with the responsibilities and possible consequences that we would be taking upon ourselves in commanding people without sharing in the authority that comes from Christ, through His Vicar and through the delegated superiors whoever they may be. Continuing on in the face of these realities seemed to be like 'playing house' and we didn't want to have anything to do with it.

Carol from CNS: Do you know of other traditional communities planning to reunite in the future?

Fr. Michael Mary: No I do not. But if the other traditional communities were to examine the question of jurisdiction for religious life, I think that eventually they would all want to build their monasteries on the rock and jurisdiction of Peter.

Religious life cannot work without both jurisdiction and the power of domination; it all comes from The Keys.

There is no valid reason for refusing to receive this jurisdiction from the Holy Father.

In his Motu proprio, Pope Benedict XVI assured us that we may continue to offer the Old Mass and follow the Rules of our religious communities. As our Father he has provided for all we need.

To traditional friends who say that we need more than this assurance from the Holy See, and that we first need theological discussions, I would reply that they should first begin studies at home on the need for jurisdiction to validate and govern religious life, because from my enquiries nobody has done it yet; there have been studies on all kinds of subjects concerning the ‘crisis in the Church’ but not on the absence of jurisdiction for religious life. For religious this is a fundamental.

Carol from CNS: What name will the community chose?

Fr. Michael Mary: We cannot call ourselves either "Redemptorists" or "the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer." The name has not been finally decided yet, but we would like to announce it on our blog for this Sunday, Feast of the Most Holy Redeemer, the titular feast of the Congregation (which is always kept for the 3rd Sunday in July).

Confiteor: CNS reports: ‘Because the group is not associated with the Redemptorist order, it will have to change its name.' Say it isn't so! Are you not Redemptorists, true sons of St. Alphonsus?

Fr. Michael Mary: In this question, Confiteor, we are caught both ways. If we were to enter the modern Redemptorist Congregation we would be taken over by them; we would have to be obedient to them. This would be an immediate danger for our community since we know that there are Redemptorists, (with every right to that legal description), who would be happy if we were suppressed. We did however ask them if they wanted to receive us with a special statute that would safeguard our existence. They declined.

Now we know that it is God’s Will for us to live unambiguously separated from them.

In this case we must distinguish ourselves from them; this is quite normal and reasonable. In the Church there are all kinds of different orders claiming to be authentic descendants of their founders: for example Capuchins, Conventuals and Friars Minor are all the sons of St Francis of Assisi; they are distinguished from one another by their names.

We must do the same. For our own historical reasons we must distinguish ourselves from the group that claims the exclusive right to being called the ‘Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer’ and to be known by the nickname: ‘Redemptorist.’

Therefore, after 2 August 2008, we will try to no longer publicly call ourselves ‘Redemptorist’ or ‘Transalpine Redemptorist.’ (It may take a month or two longer since an old habit is sometimes difficult to break immediately!) It will take a further number of months to make legal name changes which can be a complicated matter. Eventually we will get there.

But frankly, while the change of name will be difficult in one way; it will also be a relief in other ways. We will no longer have to explain the difference between being 'Redemptorist' and 'Transalpine Redemptorist'; and we do not think it is necessary to have to carry the modern Congregation about with us. We will no longer need to feel associated with the modern Congregation. And although we will still pray for them in general, we will not feel a constant responsiblity to pray for their deceased members. For the past 20 years, at the Memento of the Dead in every Mass that we have offered, we have explicitly mentioned: 'all the deceased Fathers and Brothers of the Congregation'. In the Old Rule every deceased priest was supposed to receive 250 Masses for the repose of his soul and in practise this seems to have been greatly reduced or to have been dwindled away.

So in some ways the end of this assumed direct relationship with the Redemptorists is even a sweet release.

We have been advised that the Redemptorists do not have an exclusive right to every aspect of their name and that we will always be permitted to describe ourselves as ‘a community in the Redemptorist tradition’ and to claim that we too are the ‘sons of St Alphonsus.’

Seminarians return to Papa Stronsay

To answer the questions posted on Angelqueen, I make the following clarification.

Before the new seminary year began at the Holy Cross Seminary in Goulburn, Australia, I advised the seminary Rector of my reply to William of Norwich. On March 10th, the Rector replied:

“…I am very happy to hear that the Brothers will be coming back to Holy Cross to continue their studies. They are not only welcome, but very edifying for all of us. I am certainly not one of those narrow-minded persons who is unwilling to tolerate a difference of opinion on issues, and I am fully aware of the fact that as your own community, you the Redemptorists must make your own decisions, without in the slightest questioning the extraordinary wisdom, equilibrium and catholic sense of Bishop Fellay and his counsel. I am confident that these ripples will not affect our union in the combat of the Faith and for the conversion of souls, starting with our own. Please be assured of my prayers. …”

However, on the second day after their arrival in the seminary, one of the three Brothers was called to the Rector’s office. During the course of the interview the Rector suggested that possibly the only way to stop me from carrying out negotiations with Rome was by threatening to start up a breakaway community. This suggestion was also repeated at another time to all three Brothers.

I later received an email from the Society saying that if we made an agreement with Rome, our seminarians would not be welcome in any SSPX seminary.

Life is full of choices. The seminary and Society must make their choices. The much smaller Council of the Transalpine Redemptorists must also make its choices; from prayer, not pressure.

‘Let nothing disturb thee,

nothing afright thee,

all things are passing,

God alone suffices,

he who has God lacks nothing!’

(St Teresa)

To this day we have had two informal talks with a Redemptorist bishop who works with the Holy See. We have not had any formal discussions, but unwilling to leave our seminarians under pressure, and not wanting to be coerced, we decided that, under the circumstances, it would be better for all concerned if the seminarians were recalled to Papa Stronsay.

Fr. Michael Mary, C.SS.R.

Another House of God, and Gate of Heaven

On Saturday 19th January, His Lordship Bishop Bernard Fellay was at the Society of Saint Pius X’s new Church in Gateshead, near Newcastle, UK. Some of the Transalpine Redemptorists were also present, and played a large part in the ceremonies. The Ceremony was attended by many of the Society’s faithful coming from all over the UK, some from a great distance. The Church was named “The Holy Name of Jesus”. After the blessing and Pontifical High Mass, there were some refreshments, followed by Pontifical Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament.


His Lordship starts the blessing outside the new church.

Holy Mass

Many people were able to attend.

My Lord and my God!

Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament.

Closer to the Holy Priesthood

Christmas Eve, 2007 was a great day for our little Congregation as Rev. Br. Yousef Marie received the minor orders of Exorcist and Acolyte at the hands of his Lordship Bishop Bernard Fellay. God willing he will be ordained as Deacons in December 2008.

 

Rev. Br. Yousef Marie, C.SS.R. is ordained an acolyte as he places his thumb and index finger on the candlestick and candle.

Some of the seminarians who received the tonsure and minor orders at the front entrance to the seminary.