Liberals are depressed over work of Pope Benedict and traditional re-integration

Robert Mickens of The Tablet has a sour piece in "America" on Pope Benedict and Vatican II, of course some people might not share his pessimism about the present situation.

"A young professor at the Legionaries of Christ's university in Rome, Fr Mauro Gagliardi, gave a clue of what to expect.

The Fraternity of St Pius X can offer the Church an important contribution in applying the 'hermeneutic of continuity' that must be applied to the documents of Vatican II," he said.

This apparent reference to Pope Bendict's hermeneutic for interpreting the Council is imprecise -- as Fr Joseph Komonchak and others have clearly pointed out -- but it is not altogether mistaken. And Fr Gagliardi is not just any professor in Rome. He was recently named as consultant to the papal liturgical ceremonies office and mixes in the circles that are currently in favour in the Vatican. He said, "The 'Lefebvrists' have a spirituality and charism that can be a richness for the life of the entire Church." This certainly is the view of Cardinal Castrillon and probably reflects, at least in some measure, the Pope's thinking, too.

There is no question that Pope Benedict wants the SSPX back in the Church. Up to now he has done everything to accommodate them on their terms. He will do so on the interpretation of the Council, as well. The two CDF documents in 2007 (on the nature of the Church on 29 June and on evangelisation on 3 December ) have already begun paving the way for this. The Lefebvrists will argue, and the Pope will agree, that, in substance, we have the same doctrine after Vatican II has we had before. All "changes" were merely stylistic or operational, but not theogical -- i.e. none of the changes were essential, so none have to be adopted. The Vatican and the SSPX will also say, together, that much of the Council was badly misinterpreted by theologians and bishops in the post-conciliar period, and they will even cite the long list of theologians the CDF condemned to prove that Rome never caved in. Despite everything to the contrary (i.e. the fact that the SSPX does not really buy or live Vatican II), they will find a way together to finagle a formula that helps them profess "true fidelity and true recognition" of the Council (in light of the constant Tradition) but allows them to continue living as if Vatican II never existed. There are already a number of "Ecclesia Dei" communities in communion in Rome (off-shoots of the SSPX like the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter) that currently do this.

The formula that is produced will be just as disingenuous as the invented nonsense of "two forms of the one Roman Rite".

H/T to DT and Fr Ray Blake.

Be a hero on the Hudson - fun game

I highly recommend this 'Hero on the Hudson' game for a laugh:
Press left direction button to put plane nose down, press right to put plane nose up. Bon chance!

Cardinal Castrillón says full communion with SSPX will come

Thursday, January 29, 2009
Cardinal Castrillón:
Relevant declarations to Corriere della Sera
Excerpts of an article published today in Italian national daily Corriere della Sera:

"[Card. Castrillón:] Full communion will come. In our discussions, Bishop Fellay recognized the Second Vatican Council, he recognized it theologically. Only a few difficulties remain...[sic]"

Maybe on Nostra Aetate, the declaration which represented a turning point in the relationship with the Jews?

"[Card. Castrillón:] No, that is not a problem. It involves discussing aspects such as ecumenism, liberty of conscience...[sic]"

Full interview here

Not only that but madcap Bishop Williamson of SSPX has apologised to the Holy See for his ridiciulous holocaust denial comments.

On another matter, Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro, chief of Human Life International’s Rome bureau said his Curial source told him that they are currently busy working out the practical arrangements for a fully regularized Society of St. Pius X.
See here.

In light of then Cardinal Ratzinger's comments to the bishops of Chile this may not prove intractable at all:

Certainly, there is mentality of narrow views that isolate Vatican II and which has provoked this opposition. There are many accounts of it which give the impression that, from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and that what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II.

The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero. The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of superdogma which takes away the importance of all the rest.

This idea is made stronger by things that are now happening. That which previously was considered most holy – the form in which the liturgy was handed down – suddenly appears as the most forbidden of all things, the one thing that can safely be prohibited. It is intolerable to criticize decisions which have been taken since the Council; on the other hand, if men make question of ancient rules, or even of the great truths of the Faith – for instance, the corporal virginity of Mary, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the immortality of the soul, etc. – nobody complains or only does so with the greatest moderation.