Sunday, July 23, 2006

More FSSP news

This morning I learned that the General Chapter of the Fraternity ended last week, with Fr. George Gabet reappointed as the North American District Superior, and Fr. Josef Bisig appointed as the Rector of Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary.

11 comments:

kcpriest said...

Is this good news or bad news? And on what merits?

Curmudgeon said...

This is good news. I don't know much about Fr. Gabet, but Bisig the person around whom the FSSP formed after the 1988 consecrations, and he is (as I understand it) committed to preserving the special purpose and charism of the FSSP against those who would try to dilute it.

Anonymous said...

Where is Fr. Jackson going?

Curmudgeon said...

I don't know. I'm just some layman in Kansas City.

Dr. Bombay said...

Who's trying to dilute the FSSP? Someone from within? Or is it just the Vatican?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Bombay said, "Or is it just the Vatican?"

Did not the "Vatican" create the FSSP, specifically JPII, for the special purpose of keeping priests trained in this rite?

Dr. Bombay said...

Yes.

And the Vatican also voided the FSSP elections in 2000 because they didn't like the outcome. (Only Americans are allowed to do that.)

And further, the Vatican said that priests of the FSSP couldn't be forbidden from saying the novus ordo. Too bad that doesn't go both ways.

Big Daddy said...

I'm not sure what your point is Doctor.

Should the FSSP priest be prohibited from celebrating the Novus Ordo?

And the Vatican also voided the FSSP elections in 2000 because they didn't like the outcome. (Only Americans are allowed to do that.)

Voided the election? What does that mean?

Curmudgeon said...

I think what people are saying is that the FSSP should be able to, if it saw fit, require its members to keep with their purpose and charism, which is exclusive use of the old rites. If you want to say the N.O., then the FSSP probably isn't the place for you: transfer to a diocesan seminary. It's not my place to demand such a rule, nor the place of any one else who isn't a member of their institute to demand such a rule, but they ought to be able to have that rule if they see fit.

And yes, in 2000, the Ecclesia Dei commission intervened, modified the FSSP statutes, and appointed the superiors that the Fraternity's general chapter had a right to elect (and to some accounts had already elected) themselves. Again, Google "Protocol 1411" for the details.

When the SSPX'ers cry out "Rome can't be trusted!" that incident is one of the main things they bring up. And sadly, they've got a good point there.

There were those (in the curia and in various chanceries) in 1988, and there are still those in 2006, whose goal is to gradually "mainstream" traditional orders and traditional laity--move them by degrees to the N.O. Permitting (and tacitly encouraging, or even coercing, bi-ritualism in this sense is dilution). That idea is obviously repugnant to clergy and laity who are living the old ecclesiastical life and raising their children in it. Those people aren't just slow to adapt; they're committed to preserving the old rites and living the counter-cultural Catholicism that goes with it. And judging from Mass attendance and vocations and family sizes, it's working. Let them keep going.

On the other hand, I'm not sure what Dr. Bombay means by too bad it doesn't go both ways? Unfortunately, it does go both ways. Many diocesan clergy who want to use the old Rites are forbidden to do so in public Masses, and because of the limit on the number of Masses they can say, practically cannot do so in their private Masses.

Big Daddy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Curmudgeon said...

Big Daddy can start his own blog if he wants to pick at us or try to cause a neo-Cath scene, or he can go hang out on Pete Vere's or one of Stephen Hands eight billion websites. This post is done.