Unity with traditionalists

by Editor · March 25, 2009

A� pope can bend over backwards only so much before acknowledging a lost cause. So it appears with Pope Benedict�s endeavours to heal the schism with the ultra-traditionalist Society of St Pius X (SSPX).

In the space of 18 months, Pope Benedict made two significant reconciliatory gestures towards the SSPX. In 2007 Pope Benedict made the Tridentine Mass more widely available within the Latin Rite Church, and in January he lifted the excommunication imposed on the SSPX bishops two decades ago. Both concessions came at a cost to the pope in public esteem and good will. In his latest letter to the world�s bishops, the pope acknowledges that the criticism for these acts, born of good intentions, has caused him distress.

Some of the objections have indeed been gratuitous, especially the ignorant reaction which sought to tie the deplorable anti-Semitism of one of the four bishops to the Holy Father himself. Some critics, mainly those who fear that the rapprochement with the SSPX represents a defection from the (perceived) spirit of Vatican II, may have misunderstood the pope. And some criticism, such as that of Cardinal Walter Kasper over procedural matters, the pope seems to have affirmed by instituting corrective actions. Clearly the pope is also aggrieved over the poor advice he had been offered.

But what must hurt him most is the supercilious manner in which the SSPX bishops received his act of mercy. Before the metaphorical ink on the decree of the remission of their excommunication was dry, SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay insisted that further negotiations between his society and the Holy See would need to touch on teachings pronounced by the Second Vatican Council.

Bishop Fellay and his colleagues, it seems, labour under the curious fancy that the authoritative teachings of Vatican II are subject to negotiations. A less charitable interpretation of their response would suggest that the SSPX bishops are not genuinely inclined towards reaching full communion with Rome. Whatever the case, Pope Benedict has ruled out any compromise concerning the teachings of Vatican II when he says: �The Church�s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 � this must be quite clear to the Society.�

The pope has persuasively explained the diverse reasons for according such priority to reconciliation with the SSPX. But his deep desire to welcome back traditionalists must not be confused with weakness.

Pope Benedict has removed all obstacles he could from the path towards full reconciliation; the only remaining impediments reside in the hearts and minds of the members of the SSPX. If their collective conscience cannot accept life in the postconciliar Church, as is their prerogative, then they must say so.

Instead of expending time and resources on finding ways to full unity, the Holy See and the SSPX might well benefit from abandoning that path, and find a new methods of closer cooperation where appropriate, much as Rome has found means to exist in friendship with Protestant and Orthodox churches. But this will need to be clearly stated.

In the meantime, those of the faithful whose sympathies with the SSPX related to matters of liturgy and not to conciliar doctrines should be given reasonable and generous access to the sacraments in the Tridentine Rite, so long as the provision of the old Mass does not unduly disturb parish life. There no longer is, if there ever was, a need to view the Tridentine Mass as ideologically unsound, provided it can be untied from old disputes.

Locally, Johannesburg�s cathedral parish appears to provide a template for the integration of the Tridentine rite in parish life. May the Church benefit from that experience.