Bernard Fellay, More Naiveté

I noticed the quick CNS piece on SSPX head Bernard Fellay. I couldn’t find the piece on the Swiss daily Le Courier, but ansa had a bit more.

Monsignor Bernard Fellay told the daily Le Courier on Thursday that the Council has caused the Catholic Church ”only damages”. ”The aftermath of the Council has been to empty seminaries, nunneries and churches. Thousands of priests have left their orders and millions of faithful have stopped being practicing Catholics and have joined sects”.

”If these are the fruits of the Council, they’re strange indeed”. The Society, he said, is not willing to negotiate on the Council when it begins preliminary talks on rejoining the Church on a number of doctrinal issues.

Strange fruit, what an interesting turn of phrase.

That being said, it is also interesting (but not surprising) that Monsignor Fellay is so focused on clergy and religious life.

I would share his concern about Catholics leaving for “sects,” common lingo for evangelical Christianity. I don’t know that we can blame Vatican II for the sheep-stealing policies of some Christians. In some corners of Latin America, the suppression of liberation theology has timed with more evangelical inroads. I could make a case for blaming John Paul II, I suppose. But reality would set in, and I’d have to acknowledge that the modern world is far more complex than a single naive correlation would suggest.

I’d say that the pope has another reason/excuse to slow down the speed of talks with the SSPX. Indeed, maybe it’s time to reach out to the Old Catholics, the Anglicans, Lutherans, and others who might be more receptive to the post-conciliar style. If these HoO folks are unreceptive to Rome and the four-thousand bishops of a council, plus the hundreds of millions of Catholics who don’t need to count seminary heads to know good fruit, I can’t imagine the Orthodox are going to be concerned about a group with lots of ideological baggage. If it’s progress toward unity we’re talking about, the pope should be a servant of that unity, and go where the indicators (perhaps the Spirit) are leading. It might work out better than being a pick-and-choose director of unity where his own culture and preferences might dictate.

When people are insistent on going their own way, sometimes it’s better to just let them go. Parents do it with adolescents all the time. Maybe the SSPX needs more time to ripen on the vine before returning to Rome.

About these ads

About catholicsensibility

Todd and his family live in Ames, Iowa. He serves a Catholic parish of both Iowa State students and town residents.
This entry was posted in Church News, Commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Bernard Fellay, More Naiveté

  1. Tony says:

    I would share his concern about Catholics leaving for “sects,” common lingo for evangelical Christianity. I don’t know that we can blame Vatican II for the sheep-stealing policies of some Christians.

    When the Catholic Church endeavored to become more Protestant after Vatican II, is it a huge surprise that many would reject it for real Protestantism rather than stay with a Protestant wannabe church?

  2. JC says:

    The vast majority of Catholics practice artificial contraception.
    How many people believe in the Real Presence?
    The Eucharist is desecrated every day in almost every parish in this country, because of mishandling vessels, improper vessels, spilled particles, unclean hands, etc.

    The majority of American Catholics voted for a man who is
    a) rabidly pro-abortion
    b) rabidly pro-contraception
    c) only has two kids
    and, after doing that in 2000 and 2004, they did it again in 2008.

    If Vatican II is so great, what exactly is the good fruit?

    If the Council was pastoral and not “dogmatic,” as both John XXIII and Paul VI said, why is there such demand that people accept its innovative teachings?

    Why should the Church “reach out” to ecclesial communities that support contraception, divorce and “gay rights”?

  3. Todd says:

    “How many people believe in the Real Presence?”

    Quite a lot, I think, possibly more than before Vatican II.

    “If Vatican II is so great, what exactly is the good fruit?”

    Scripture, ecumenism, liturgy in the vernacular, evangelization, RCIA, the permanent diaconate, reform in women’s religious life, to name a few.

    “(W)hy is there such demand that people accept its innovative teachings?”

    I’d say it’s more that detractors not reject its positions. The teachings are based on Scripture and tradition. People need to embrace both, not a hyper-evolved and narrow interpretation of them.

  4. Deacon Eric says:

    “Why should the Church “reach out” to ecclesial communities that support contraception, divorce and “gay rights”?”

    Why should the Church reach out to a schismatic group that is anti-Semitic, rejects a council of the Church, rejects religious liberty, grants its own “annulments” and defies papal authority?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s