Friday, January 20, 2012

Lefebvrians: Why is the Vatican's proposal being kept "secret"?

Can the Vatican’s “proposal” to the Lefebvrians remain a secret? 

In France (homeland of Archbishop Marcel François Lefebvre, excommunicated by the Holy See) the secrecy surrounding the “Doctrinal Preamble” which the Catholic Church sent to the traditionalist order to end the schism, continues to arouse debate.
 
Religious information channels such as the Catholic newspaper La Croix and the religious information website Baptises are posing the question of whether “a question that concerns everyone should not be discussed by everyone.” 

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith delivered the text - which forms the basis for reconciliation - to the Society of Saint Pius X, without making it public. Controversy in France is now focused on the decision of keeping the document secret.

The Vatican’s official communiqué merely says that “said Preamble states a number of the Catholic Church’s doctrinal principles and criteria for interpretation, that are necessary in order to guarantee loyalty to the Church’s Magisterium and the “sentire cum Ecclesia” (thinking with the Church), whilst leaving the study and theological explanation of single expressions and formulations present in the document of the Second Vatican Council and the successive Magisterium, open to legitimate discussion.”
 
According to Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of Saint Pius X, the discretion shown is normal in any important procedure and ensures seriousness.

“The Doctrinal Preamble that was delivered to us happens to be a document which, as the accompanying note indicates, involves the need for certain clarifications and modifications. Mgr. Bernard Fellay commented. This is not the definitive text. We will shortly be sending a reply to this document, in which we will frankly point out the doctrinal positions we believe must absolutely be maintained. Since the beginning of our talks with the Holy See (and our interlocutors are well aware of this), we have been constantly preoccupied with trying to present our traditional approach with utmost sincerity. According to Fellay, Rome’s discretion is also down to the fact that this text, even in its current form and in need as it is of many clarifications, risks being opposed by the neo-liberals who do not acknowledge the simple idea of a discussion regarding the Council. This is because they believe this pastoral Council to be unquestionable and “non negotiable”, as if it were a dogmatic Council.
 
Despite all these precautions, the conclusions reached during the meeting of Superiors of the Society of Saint Pius X in Alban, on 7 October, were published on the Internet by different but agreeing sources.

Fellay pointed out that “Indiscretions are always present on the Internet. It is true that this Doctrinal Preamble cannot be given our approval, although there is space for a “legitimate discussion” of certain points made in the Council. It terms of how wide this margin for discussion is, the proposal I will make in the coming days to authorities in Rome and their reply will allow us to evaluate the possibilities we are left with. Whatever the result of these exchanges is, the final document that will be accepted or rejected will be made public.”
 
A group of French scholars, including Christine Pedotti, Anne Soupa, Thierry Jaillet, Gilles Marmasse, also recognise that the choice of secrecy shows consistency: this is about Vatican and Society of Pius X leaders concluding a process of reconciliation; only afterwards will they reveal which concessions they have chosen to make. 

But leaving it up to leaders to reach a solution violates the “sensus fidei”, that is, the ability of the faithful to perceive the truth of the faith. Rome is perfectly aware of the positions of the Lefebvrians, “and it is based on this accurate knowledge that Cardinal Levada presented the Doctrinal Preamble to Mgr. Fellay.”

Essentially, we would never have received a proposal that we could not have shared. The statement, made by the spokesman for the Society of Saint Pius X, Abbot Alain Lorans, during an interview published in the French weekly Catholic newspaper Famille chrétienne, does not leave much room for interpretation. Catholic news agency Adista, emphasised that the secret document will have to be signed if the order is to rejoin the Catholic Church: a few pages of “non negotiable doctrine.”
 
The hardest hurdle to overcome will be the Lefebvrians’ adherence to the Magisterium of the Second Vatican Council, which was completely rejected by the Lefebvrian traditionalists. The agreement with Rome, according to Lorans, would permanently solve the Society’s canonical situation, but above all, is that “it would give tradition, which has often received disdain or been oppressed over the course of the past 40 years, its right to “citizenship” within the Catholic Church”: a process which was begun by Benedict XVI with his Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum on the Tridentine Mass. And if, upon close examination, Mgr. Fellay decides to agree to the Preamble, “the fraternity will certainly be favourable towards this.” 

Lorans is certain of one thing: “Some insist that the points in the Council that are problematic could be discussed without this questioning their belonging to the Church. This would create awareness that these controversial texts do not require the adherence required by dogma.”

“Others,” on the other hand, “insist that this Doctrinal Preamble should require full respect of the Council, its authenticity and the legitimacy of its teaching. These people believe that just the thought of the Second Vatican Council being discussed seems “a little too much”.” 

The Lefebvrian spokesman admits that there is a big difference between the note that the Secretary of State published back in 2009, before talks began with Lefebvre’s followers (which stated that “The necessary condition for a future recognition of the Society of Saint Pius X is a full recognition of the Second Vatican Council and the Magisterium of John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI himself”) and the communiqué sent after the meeting on September 14th (which leaves “the study and theological explanation of single expressions and formulations present in the documents of the Second Vatican Council and the subsequent Magisterium open to legitimate discussion”).