Society Of St. Pius X (SSPX) Facing Showdown With Vatican

Pope Benedict XVI waves during his weekly general audience on April 11, 2012 at St Peter's square at the Vatican. AFP PHOTO / ALBERTO PIZZOLI

By Alessandro Speciale
Religion News Service

(RNS) When Pope Benedict XVI chose in 2009 to lift the excommunications of four bishops from a conservative schismatic group, few would have thought the news would generate headlines worldwide.

But Benedict's gesture received outsized attention when one of the four bishops, Richard Williamson, did a television interview and denied that millions of Jews had died in gas chambers at Nazi death camps. Not only were Jews outraged, but so were more than a few Catholics.

As the Vatican worked to reassure Jews that Williamson's views were not its own, steps were underway to achieve the real goal of Benedict's move: full reconciliation with the traditionalist group, known as the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), and an end to the most significant schism within the Roman Catholic Church in a half century.

Now, after more than two years of secret negotiations, the SSPX is due in mid-April to give its response to the Vatican's final offer for reconciliation, which was delivered last September.

Regardless of whether the group accepts the pope's olive branch -- and his insistence that SSPX give some sort of recognition to the modernizing reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) -- the outcome is bound to have a profound impact on Benedict's papacy and on the larger Catholic Church.

While the group remains small, with around 500 priests and a few thousands followers around the world, the issues at play are at the core of the Catholic Church's identity in the modern world. And success or failure could impact Benedict's legacy.

The SSPX rejects most of the reforms of Vatican II, which revolutionized Catholic doctrine on everything from relations with other Christian churches to interfaith dialogue to the role of rank-and-file lay Catholics. The Lefebvrists (as the group is known after its founder, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre) charge that the Catholic Church turned its back on centuries of traditions and precepts, and is now too accommodating toward the modern world.

But for Benedict, reconciliation with the SSPX is not just a matter of doctrine.

"Pope Benedict has staked a lot on his attempt to heal this breach; it will be one of the things that will mark his pontificate," said Antoine-Marie Izoard, a French Vatican analyst with the I.Media news agency.

Nevertheless, warns the Rev. Nicola Bux, a consultant at the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the pope's gamble should not be read in "political" terms of left vs. right.

"He has worked with patience and meekness, as a Christian would, believing that this division can be overcome," Bux said.

In fact, Benedict has dealt with the Lefebvrist issue for decades. As Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict tried to avoid the group's formal split with Rome in 1988. A year after his election as pope, in 2006 Benedict reinstated the ancient Latin Mass that is still cherished by the Lefebvrists, saying it could exist together with the modern Vatican II Mass.

Benedict's conciliatory moves toward the SSPX have been received with suspicion -- and sometimes bitter resentment -- by many in the Catholic Church who fear that some of the Vatican II reforms could be put in doubt if an agreement is reached with the traditionalists.

The pope, who has often said Vatican II should be viewed in "continuity" with church history, took the criticisms personally. In an unusually personal letter addressed to all Catholic bishops in March 2009, he complained of having been "treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint," for his "gesture of mercy" towards the SSPX bishops.

Having invested so much, both personally and publicly, in reconciliation with the Lefebvrists, Benedict has so far received mixed messages from the group.

In a sermon last November, their leader, Bishop Bernard Fellay, said that the SSPX felt "obliged to reject" the Vatican's offer, citing doctrinal reasons. In recent months, he's signaled that his position may have mellowed, but the group has clearly stated that it will not accept Vatican II reforms -- even as it was one of the original conditions for reconciliation set out by Benedict himself.

According to Gianni Gennari, a theologian and former priest, even the pope himself is now disillusioned with the Lefebvrists.

"He held out his hand," Gennari said. "Now he wants to make it clear that it is them who do not want an agreement."

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[Fred Forrett]

11:20 PM on 05/01/2012

Vatican II was a "pastoral" council not a "doctrinal" council. So this article is wrong when it states that the council "revolutionized Catholic doctrine."
Liturgical changes are NOT doctrinal changes. Furthermore, varied interpretations of documents that were meant to be clarifications are not doctrinal changes either. In fact some of these so called "varied interpretations" were actually intentional misinterpretations by American theologians to promote their personal "progressive" beliefs.

[GlassMask]

11:56 AM on 04/19/2012

Ah, what an interesting bunch... I went to St. Pius X catholic school from kindergarten thru 5th grade, which is a big part of why I'm an atheist today.

[glitterpet]

07:42 PM on 04/17/2012

It's nothing more than a power struggle between the SSPX and Opus Dei (which is a favorite of the Pope).

SSPX wishes a return to the good ol' medieval times before Vatican II and to ultra Catholic orthodoxy; Opus Dei represents a deliberate attempt to construct an alternative modernity, one that engages modern culture while at the same time is resolutely loyal to Catholic doctrine. Chilli or chollo . . .who really cares . . neither group is enlightened!

[trekie70]

06:10 PM on 04/17/2012

Hard to believe there is a group more archaic than the Vatican. I say do away with Opus Dei as well if Benedict is at all serious about the RCC entering mainstream society.

[peterochocinco]

02:23 AM on 04/18/2012

He's more interested in bringing mainstream society back to the Church than being relativists to attract mainstream... that's what Protestants do. There's nothing wrong with Opus Dei either.

[trekie70]

04:40 PM on 04/19/2012

Opus Dei is known for its adherence to extreme rituals, such as self-flaggelation(sp?). There is too much wrong with the RCC to reverse the Protestant Reformation. Why would I want to join a church that helps aid and abet the escape from punishment of child molesters by simply moving them elsewhere? Thanks but I'll take the mainstream over the RCC any day, as will the vast majority of Americans.

[YeOldeSnark]

05:38 PM on 04/17/2012

This Sunday was supposedly the "deadline" for the SSPX to respond or be excommunicated and cast into the outer darkness by Benny16. Here is his chance to cut bait and free himself of these embarrassing fascisti nutcakes, or be lumped right in there with them.

[Watching rock grow]

11:35 AM on 04/19/2012

Fascists? Wasn't Benny16 'forced' to be a member of Hitler's youth goon squad? I like your Benny16 moniker thanks.

[phal4875]

12:09 PM on 04/17/2012

This whole story sounds more like warring nations than some religious group. Should the United Nations step in and try to get a peace treaty signed?

[Ferdinand Berkhof]

10:21 AM on 04/17/2012

Vatican, SSPX, RCC - aren't they all anachronisms?

[MorallySuperiorAtheist]

09:24 PM on 04/16/2012

I picture a Thunderdome-like Fight to the Death, with midgets and chainsaws and each church leader in a bungee-corded harness. Don't you?

[trekie70]

06:06 PM on 04/17/2012

Works for me. ;-)

[VinZenTexaN]

06:13 PM on 04/16/2012

Society Of St. Pius X (SSPX) Facing Showdown With Vatican. Yes Ratzinger you belong in jail

Several thousand years ago, a small tribe of ignorant near-savages wrote various collections of myths, wild tales, lies, and gibberish. Over the centuries, these stories were embroidered, garbled, mutilated, and torn into small pieces that were then repeatedly shuffled. Finally, this material was badly translated into several languages successively. The resultant text, creationists feel, is the best guide to this complex and technical subject.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.

If forgiveness is divine, why is there a hell?

Organized religion is like organized crime; it preys on peoples' weaknesses, generates huge profits for its operators, and is almost impossible to eradicate.

Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day; give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.

[Catholic cat]

06:30 AM on 04/21/2012

Gibberish? - take a look at what you have just written, and then say that you are not trying to inspire ant-Catholic hatred.

Your wrote - 'Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day; give him a religion, and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish.' Nonsense! Why then did Christendom become the most advanced society in the world? It is became is was based on Christian teachings, Now Europe has become all secular and atheistic and is sinking fast.

[VinZenTexaN]

12:38 PM on 04/21/2012

Sorry technology help humans not Christianity ! Try again . . .

God and religion are neither necessary nor sufficient for man to be good.

The possibility of a god does not increase the possibility your religion is true

The more tightly you cling to your faith, the looser your grip is on reality.

You say I'm a sinner for denying, i think that you're a sinner for not thinking for yourself.

The inspiration of the bible depends on the ignorance of the person who reads it

Without God, life is everything.

Religion does three things quite effectively: Divides people, Controls people, Deludes people.

[MesKalamDug]

02:14 PM on 04/16/2012

In the eyes of the Vatican the thoughts and opinions of lay people are irrelevant. But a schism among the clergy matters.

The SSPX may have lay supporters - few or many - but they are of no interest. What matters is the purity of the church - seen by them as meaning the ordained clergy. Theoretically, and perhaps even in reality, they believe their authority rests on the apostolic succession - upon what the apostles told the first bishops and the bishops have been passing on ever since. If bishops fall into serious errors that is a major difficulty that must be resolved.

[powercosmic]

01:48 PM on 04/16/2012

Now that the world has been subjugated by the Oil Lobby and the Corporation, the Vatican is ready to reassert its "inquisition-style" ways, this is but one step towards that end.

As our modern systems go into failure-mode it will be necessary to be able to reassert the power of the church in theocratic terms, since it is slipping into irrelevance.

The idea of "Economic growth" and "wealth creation" are stupid ideas that have held sway for about 160 years, this is mainly because the Oil Lobby wanted to increase demand for oil, so prices would follow. Now that their agenda has succeeded and the world is prisoner to their game, its time for them to take TOP-DOWN CONTROL also.

[Clevelandinwi]

06:41 AM on 04/16/2012

Why do the Catholic Church and 'common sense' never, ever, come close to each other?

[Ferdinand Berkhof]

10:23 AM on 04/17/2012

Religion and common sense? Give me break.

[Catholic cat]

06:27 PM on 04/15/2012

Vatican II changed nothing so SSPX you have nothing to fear by coming home.

Why do you think the media and the Huff Post hate today’s Catholics? Because we stand alone facing down a sea of iniquity with no armaments but charity and prayer.

[Glenn123]

01:42 PM on 04/16/2012

amen

[powercosmic]

01:50 PM on 04/16/2012

"no armaments but charity and prayer"

Oh you must be one of the true sheep, your sincerity and gullibility is pure gold for the Corporation.

[Catholic cat]

01:14 PM on 05/02/2012

You are the gullible one

with prayers

[John D Fitzmorris Jr]

11:10 AM on 04/15/2012

I have often wondered why Benedict placed so much emphasis on this group. Maybe it is because he believes that the bishops and priests of SSPX possess valid orders and, therefore, there are bishops and priests out there beyond the Pale of the Church officiating over valid ordinations and Eucharists. Still, it makes no sense to embarrassingly grovel to a splinter group who is treating the Pope as if he were their equal - after all they believe he is an anti-pope. Why he did not let them wither on the vine is beyond me?

[cminca]

10:06 AM on 04/16/2012

Real estate and tithes

Follow the money

[Trismegistus22]

11:12 AM on 04/16/2012

Do a little study on "authenticity" of holy orders. It is a bit arcane; but can be quite instructive.
To be consecrated as a bishop one needs to be consecrated by another bishop. They usually go for three, just in case. And any bishop can ordain someone to holy orders. Now there is a big kerfuffle if any of this happens without proper permission; but the sacrament is administered nonetheless. Just as the eucharist can be administered by a sinful priest.
One can trace his own ancestry of holy orders by following the documentation. By far and large, for example, the orders of the Church of England are as valid as those of the Church of Rome. "Conversions" are re-ordained, again "just-in-case" but also to demonstrate power.
Pope Benedict is condemning those priests who advocate a wider scope of priestly ordination, including women and to allow marriage. And there are bishops with valid orders who are more open to a less restrictive approach. They operate independently of the Vatican and cluster under the name "Old Catholic Church". Google and see if any are in your vicinity. I think they have been ex-communicated. And, of course there are the recently consecrated Chinese bishops. Valid orders but not approved.

The fact that he is making such as effort to keep the more conservative elements within the church suggests that It would seem that he is trying to steer a middle course but definitely on the more conservative direction.

[Glenn123]

01:52 PM on 04/16/2012

Once the schismed bishops have passed away, the group no longer has the ability to perpetually sustain holy orders. The bishop is the only person who can confer the sacrament of holy orders. In the latin rite, the pope takes part in the selection of new bishops; so if the group is excommunicated from the Church, any election of future bishops without the pope's inolvment would not be legit.....ultimately, the "church" would wither sacramentally.

[Glenn123]

05:42 PM on 04/16/2012

"Basically you portray the "political" process quite accurately. However, the pope does not typically ordain bishops. The ordinary minister of holy orders, priest, is a bishop. The ordinary minister for the episcopate is a bishop. Three bishops are required by the liturgical law. But papal approval is not required for the sacrament to be valid and the grace of the sacrament is bestowed and valid."

Thanks for the clarification. I was unaware of that.

God bless.

[hazyafternoonsunshine]

03:58 AM on 04/15/2012

The great irony of SSPX is that, as protesters against Vatican II and the Church, they are technically modern protestants. They are paranoid and suspicious of outsiders. They are concerned with ritual, dogma, and appearances, but have lost touch with the Christ in Christianity. For them is is all about Latin, insense, pretty robes, altar boys, and the rituals of the Church. If you listen to the Homilies by the priests, you will ear all about anti-catholic this and that, but you will never hear about love, kindness, or forgiveness. They do not seek to aid or comfort the poor or participate in any volunteer activities that do not directly support their congregation. They are the brimstone and fire contingency of Catholicism.

[Kathleen Wagner]

04:02 PM on 04/15/2012

Thank you! I've been saying for years that the SSPX is just another Protestant group. It doesn't matter how lacy their vestments are: if they aren't willing to submit to Papal authority, they aren't Catholics.

[sunfirejewels]

12:35 PM on 05/21/2012

Have you ever attended a mass at a SSPX chapel? None of the priests I have ever heard are unkind or lack forgiveness. They teach that Love is the greatest charity. They teach the same things the church has taught for 2,000 years. It is not the ritual that is the most imporatn thing but the doctrine that seems to have changed by Vatican II. The rituals are the manifestation of the faith-when you change the faith, change what is taught as what happened after Vatican II that is the most important thing. Those who are not traditional do not understand how important the doctrines of the church are-it is not simply a preference for the Latin mass orver the Novus Ordo mass. That is not the main issue at all.