New orientation adopted by recent SSPX Chapter
Nov 8, 2018 17:05:57 GMT
Post by Admin on Nov 8, 2018 17:05:57 GMT
[An interesting commentary regarding a recent internal memo from SSPX Headquarters on the seemingly-new framework that the
Superior General can operates within.] Translated and adapted from here.
November 7, 2018
Correctio Marcelis gives us an analysis on the sensitive subject of the position of the Society of St. Pius X in his relations with Rome after the General Chapter of the summer of 2018.We publish it gladly, because it exposes with a rigorous clarity what we think on this site of the maneuvers of the General House of Menzingen: this one pursues gently its way towards the rallying, hiding to the priests and the faithfuls, by artifices varied, which occurs without their knowledge. The study reveals in particular that the orientations adopted by the recent Chapter contravene the statutes of the Fraternity! Demonstration…
This expression "without prejudice to ...", sibylline for many, appears in an internal circular of the General House of the SSPX that Bishop Williamson commented in his Kyrie eleison of October 27 [...].
The paragraph containing this phrase is worded as follows:
The website Initiative Saint-Marcel procured and published this text in its English, Spanish, Italian, French and German versions.
The phrase "without prejudice to the prior convocation of a Chapter" is thus rendered:
" Without damage… "
... ambiguities and irregularities of Menzingen!
Correctio Marcelis gives us an analysis on the sensitive subject of the position of the Society of St. Pius X in his relations with Rome after the General Chapter of the summer of 2018.We publish it gladly, because it exposes with a rigorous clarity what we think on this site of the maneuvers of the General House of Menzingen: this one pursues gently its way towards the rallying, hiding to the priests and the faithfuls, by artifices varied, which occurs without their knowledge. The study reveals in particular that the orientations adopted by the recent Chapter contravene the statutes of the Fraternity! Demonstration…
This expression "without prejudice to ...", sibylline for many, appears in an internal circular of the General House of the SSPX that Bishop Williamson commented in his Kyrie eleison of October 27 [...].
The paragraph containing this phrase is worded as follows:
4a. It is up to the Superior General to decide whether to have contact with the Holy See. It is to him, with prudence and when the hour dictated by Divine Providence has come, to consider a modification of the canonical status, without prejudice to the prior convocation of a Chapter.
The website Initiative Saint-Marcel procured and published this text in its English, Spanish, Italian, French and German versions.
The phrase "without prejudice to the prior convocation of a Chapter" is thus rendered:
in English by: without prejudice to the prior convocation of a Chapter.
in Spanish by: sin perjuicio of the convocatoria previa of a Capítulo.
in Italian by: fatta salva the preventiva convocazione di a Capitolo.
in German by: was die vorherige Einberufung eines Kapitels nicht ausschliesst.
in Spanish by: sin perjuicio of the convocatoria previa of a Capítulo.
in Italian by: fatta salva the preventiva convocazione di a Capitolo.
in German by: was die vorherige Einberufung eines Kapitels nicht ausschliesst.
To compare these formulations in four languages, we see that the English, Spanish, and Italian expressions are very close to French "without prejudice", and convey the same vague and ambiguous meaning of the turn, classified by the common people in the esoteric jargon of the law.
On the other hand, German "nicht ausschliesst" is more precise, and well rendered in French by: "which does not exclude the prior convocation of a Chapter". It is certainly the most faithful formulation to the thought of the editors.
The Chapter stripped of its control over the rapprochement with Rome
If, therefore, one does not "exclude" to convene a Chapter, it is because the Superior General of the Fraternity can summon him as well as not summon him.
In the conduct of the process of normalization with Rome, the superior is henceforth totally free with regard to this procedure, which was not the case before.
Moreover, if he decides to convene it, nothing specifies the extent of the power of the Chapter in the circumstance: "deliberative", that is to say, decision-making power? or simply "advisory", notice without binding authority? The formula used "prior convocation" does not settle the question, aggravating the uncertainty about the exact role of the Chapter in the case where it would indeed be seized of the file of the standardization envisaged.
[...]
Having validated by the July Chapter a new "line" - which modifies the one adopted in 2012 -, it was cleverly transferred to the Superior General the power to engage the Fraternity in a new canonical status negotiated with Rome, and it was allowed to this person in charge of dispensing, if he considers it preferable, from the prior agreement and even from the mere consultation of the Chapter.
Of course, we tried to keep the appearance of legality: in theory, there was nothing to prevent the 2018 Chapter from modifying the course of action adopted by the 2012 Chapter, ... just like the Chapter. of 2012 was itself entitled to reform the previous rule "no practical agreement with Rome without doctrinal agreement" set by the Chapter of 2006. We know the formula: "what one Chapter has legitimately done, another can to undo it so legitimately ".
There is nothing wrong with the formal plan, for the Chapter is indeed the sovereign organ of the fraternity. But on the merits on the other hand ... what a path traveled in twelve years in the reduction of the measures of prudence with regard to the "generous" advances of conciliar Rome!
A Superior General with expanded powers, but now "framed"
At the end of this "sliding" from Chapter to Chapter, we reach theoretically a high concentration of power in the hands of the Superior General, Father Pagliarani, to the detriment of the Chapter.
But this new Superior accepted - deal of his election, who knows? - to be placed under the supervision of the two former Superiors General, Bishop Fellay and Father Schmidberger, returned to the government of the Fraternity as "Advisers" aggregated to the General Council, two new posts created "in accordance with the common law of the Church "has been clarified (because the statutes of the Society are silent on this point, ... and they have not been modified by the Chapter of July, at least to the best of our knowledge!).
On the legal side, it's not very clear ... but let's move on!
With two former superiors at his side, including a bishop, and another bishop as First Assistant, it is unlikely that the Superior General, a simple priest, could act in an absolutely independent way ... the relationship of authority (human, will it say? we ...) in the Council not being frankly in his favor.
And as in this Council of three members, which in fact counts five, the supposed "non-accordists" do not seem to predominate, we guess quite easily the rest ...
A violation of the statutes of the fraternity
A Superior General with expanded powers, but now "framed"
At the end of this "sliding" from Chapter to Chapter, we reach theoretically a high concentration of power in the hands of the Superior General, Father Pagliarani, to the detriment of the Chapter.
But this new Superior accepted - deal of his election, who knows? - to be placed under the supervision of the two former Superiors General, Bishop Fellay and Father Schmidberger, returned to the government of the Fraternity as "Advisers" aggregated to the General Council, two new posts created "in accordance with the common law of the Church "has been clarified (because the statutes of the Society are silent on this point, ... and they have not been modified by the Chapter of July, at least to the best of our knowledge!).
On the legal side, it's not very clear ... but let's move on!
With two former superiors at his side, including a bishop, and another bishop as First Assistant, it is unlikely that the Superior General, a simple priest, could act in an absolutely independent way ... the relationship of authority (human, will it say? we ...) in the Council not being frankly in his favor.
And as in this Council of three members, which in fact counts five, the supposed "non-accordists" do not seem to predominate, we guess quite easily the rest ...
A violation of the statutes of the fraternity
Moreover, in its implementation, this evolution is not exempt from two serious complaints:
- On the one hand, to want to refocus the power in the hands of the Superior General, it has resulted in stripping the Chapter of a competence that is recognized by its own statutes, namely the mission to verify that "the Brotherhood applies (...) its statutes and endeavors to keep its spirit" (§ V, 2). If henceforth, according to the circular quoted above, "it is up to the Superior General" ... "to examine a modification of the canonical statute", without having to convene the Chapter - or if he calls it, without being bound by its position - the supreme authority of the fraternity is in fact deprived of an attribution codified by the Founder in the original statutes, and consequently inalienable in the state (It would have been necessary to modify the statutes, what the Chapter of July did not do, always to know!)
And how could it be that a canonical attachment to conciliar Rome is not an event likely to give rise to the control of the Chapter under its statutory prerogatives? How could such an attachment be decided by the Superior General alone (supported by the Council) without examination by the Chapter of its conformity with the "spirit" of the statutes, in other words with the requirements of the defense? faith placed by Archbishop Lefebvre at the very heart of his priestly work?
Thus, both under the terms of the statutes, that the own will of the Founder, the guidelines adopted by the 2018 Chapter are at best questionable, and most likely tainted [with] nullity.
- On the other hand, the new division of powers organized by this Chapter of 2018 can not validate retroactively the "fault" of Bishop Fellay who in September 2015, in June 2016, and March 2017, decided alone to accept the jurisdiction Rome on the sacraments, without seeking the authorization of the Chapter as it was required at that time under the rules set in 2012, since it was a "normalization" - partial certainly ... but indisputable - from the canonical position of the Fraternity in relation to Rome.
That the members of the Chapter themselves have cooperated inadvertently, by lack of motivation, or by conscious acceptance of Bishop Fellay's "coup de force", does not remove the offense committed, which must at least be recognized. if not sanctioned in due course.
In provisional conclusion ...
This analysis was conducted on the basis of only known and published documents through the aforementioned Eleison Comments, and by reference to the text of the Society's statutes available on the Internet (La Porte Latine website).
Any supplement or clarification coming from the competent authorities, and likely to correct or qualify the assessments made, would of course be welcomed eagerly.
As it stands, it must be borne in mind that the ambiguities of the communication of the General House on the fundamental point of relations with Rome, and the deficiencies found in the observance of the statutory provisions, can only to confirm the priests and the faithful in their worries about the future of the fraternity.
Correctio Marcelis
As it stands, it must be borne in mind that the ambiguities of the communication of the General House on the fundamental point of relations with Rome, and the deficiencies found in the observance of the statutory provisions, can only to confirm the priests and the faithful in their worries about the future of the fraternity.
Correctio Marcelis
[Red font emphasis - The Catacombs; all other emphasis in the original]
