Tuesday, December 18, 2018

General Superior of SSPX: “Rome Doesn’t See Us as Schismatic”



Interview with Fr. Davide Pagliarini, Superior General of the  Society of Saint Pius X  (FSSPX), in the Salzburg news.

(Vienna) "This Pope shakes us deeply," is the title of a detailed interview, the Salzburger Nachrichten published in its Saturday edition (15 December) with the new Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity. Pius X (FSSPX), P. Davide Pagliarni.

Pope Francis seeks dialogue, according to the daily paper: "How does the new superior general respond to the pope's approach?"

Fr. Pagliarini affirmed in the interview the position that the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, its founder of the Society "was never considered valid.”

Asked what the Society was expecting from Rome, as "Francis too" came to “approach it,” Pagliarini replied:

"We expect what each Catholic expects from the Church at his baptism. The divine revelation is complete and it is the task of the Pope to faithfully pass on this material of faith. The Pope must therefore put an end to the terrible crisis that has shaken the Church for 50 years. This crisis was triggered by a new concept of faith, which is determined by the subjective experience of the individual.”

On the relationship with Rome, the Superior General said:

"In fact, Rome does not consider us schismatic, but 'irregular'. However, I would leave the Society immediately if I did not have the peace of mind to work in and for the Roman Catholic Church.”

And the relationship with Pope Francis:

"The Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X is deeply attached to the successor of Peter, even if he embraces the errors of the Second Vatican Council."

Yet:

"One of the features of the present pontificate, however, shakes us deeply: the completely new application of the concept of mercy. This is reduced to a panacea for all sins, without pushing for true conversion, for the transformation of the soul through grace, mortification, and prayer. In his post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, the Pope gives Christians the opportunity to choose their own personal conscience on a case by case basis. This clearly contradicts the necessary and clear orientation to the law of God. We see in it an echo of Luther's spirituality: a Christianity without a demand for moral renewal, a subjectivism that no longer recognizes universally valid truth. "

Referring to the Luther Year 2017, P. Pagliarini said:

"Since the 16th century, the Catholic Church has approached the Protestants to convert them and to return them to the true Church. The year of Luther did not serve this primary purpose of returning the Protestants. On the contrary, these were reinforced in their errors. The reason for this is that since the Second Vatican Council, the Church has believed that every person can find God in his religion. This is a premise that reduces faith to a personal, inner experience rather than clinging to the divine revelation.”

At the Second Vatican Council, the Superior General emphasized that, while it was a “self-proclaimed" pastoral council, it did in fact "make serious dogmatic decisions," such as freedom of religion and ecumenism.

"Pope Benedict XVI. said that the differences between Rome and the Society of St. Pius X were a problem in interpreting the texts of the Council. One must only remember these texts themselves, then an agreement is possible. This is not our position. The fraternity of St. Pius X rejects everything that does not accord with the Catholic tradition in the Second Vatican Council.”

Specifically, he demanded:

"The pope must declare the decree on religious freedom as false and correct it accordingly."

The Italian born in 1970 in Rimini, Fr. Davide Pagliarini, previously District Superior of Italy and then Rector of the Society in Argentina, was elected General Superior of the Society founded in 1970 and the third successor to Archbishop Lefebvre at the General Chapter last July. His term of office is twelve years and lasts until 2030.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Salzburger Nachrichten (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

28 comments:

Constantine said...

How can an ecumenical Pontiff that sees all religions as equal see schism in anything? But more interesting is how Rome views the politics? It is, in fact politics that becomes the practical expression of doctrine, which is the real issue surrounding Vatican II. The doctrine is the same; the pastoral expression that changes the meaning of understood dogmas that is at risk.

JBQ said...

I don't believe that Francis believes that all religions are equal. He is committed to a blending of all religions to create a new one world moral belief. I think that he takes the best of each.

M said...

They don't see the Eastern Orthodox and Cardinal Kasper as schismatic either. So that's not saying much lol

Anonymous said...

Archbishop Lefebvre maintained that Rome is occupied by a Modernist sect. When do we ever see that the SSPX says this too anymore? They do not. They think it's a good thing that Modernists do not see them as schismatic, as if that really means something good (that is, if they even believe anymore that the hierarchy in Rome are Modernists, as the Archbishop did. Somehow I think not).

M. Ray

Peter W said...

Lefebvre and his SSPX are splendid reminders of what can happen when 'religion' gets the better of a human being. From an ecclesiological point of view they are, despite the Society's collective cognitive dissonance, schismatic. Culturally, they are a museum piece.

Tancred said...

You’re an example of what passes for educated in a time of moral decay and decline.

Gerald May said...

Pope Leo VIII in his Apostolicae Curae declared the Anglicans and all its ministers and members to be schismatics. Where exactly has any Pope declared publicly and in writing that the SSPX is schismatic? Thus, you and I can call Anglicans, schismatic. However, opinions on the SSPX have no weight until the a Pope has made a definitive decaration in writing. It's odd that many liberal theologians consider real schismatics as "separated brethren" in the faith but orthodox Catholics as schismatic infidels.

Gerald May said...

There are modernists to varying degrees in the heirarchy, but it's a mixed bag, for there are also some orthodox bishops albeit in the minority. The SSPX also has a handful of friends in the Vatican. There is the faith but a lot of what goes on there behind its walls is dirty church politics.

Peter W said...

They refuse to accept in full some of the central documents of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council particularly Lunem Gentium, Gaudium et Spes, Nostra Aetate, Sacrosanctum Concilium and Dignitatis Humanae Nostrae. In refusing these documents they have clearly chosen to step out of the Catholic Church. They will never return to full communion because they will never fully accept Vatican II.

Constantine said...

"Lunem Gentium, Gaudium et Spes, Nostra Aetate, Sacrosanctum Concilium and Dignitatis Humanae Nostrae." are not teachings of the Church. Even the title "Nostrae Aetate" means "valid only in our times". Teachings are always and forever. Moreover, a Teaching cannot contradict the continual statements made over the 2000 since Christ was on Earth, and Natural Law. Natural Law is written in the hearts of all men of Men. All Men know it to be True. The perverse tolerance, and more than just tolerance, even acceptance, of Perverse lifestyles based on gay ideology and feminist ideology[inverted order of natural authority], is a Violation of these Laws. Dignitatis Humanae states that no one has a right to restrict or suppress by legal means, or even publuc pressure,one's alleged right to free expression, not only religious, or moral, but even if its just a passing personal opinion. This is the post-Vatican II perversion.

Tancred said...

But who are you to make such declarations?

Anonymous said...

So, Gaybrielle of Swindon has decided that the SSPX isn’t Catholic.

Who cares?

Gerald May said...

The documents you listed cannot be interpreted in contradiction with the Sacred deposit of faith-Tradition. The liberals and modernists interpret them in contradiction and attempt to call it doctrinal development but this cannot be the case bc it neglects the classical categories of development.

Peter W said...

Both Popes JP II and Benedict XVI made it perfectly clear the acceptance of all the documents of Vatican II was not an option but essential for all Catholics. These Popes taught unambiguously that Vatican II contains, safeguards and passes on the magisterium of all preceding General Councils of the Church.

The SSPX rejects this as do a number of cherry picking selective characters commenting on this blog. Those who refuse to acknowledge and accept the solemn teachings of Vatican II have chosen to disaffiliate themselves from full communion with the Catholic Church. The tired old mental gymnastics routine about Vat II being only a 'pastoral' council is a clumsy, lazy and disingenuous game played by the ideologs not people intent on
'sentire cum ecclesia.'

Peter W said...

Constantine,
Read my response to you a few days ago that you chose to avoid:

Constantine, you're talking nonsense about the Natural Law being evident to all, written into the hearts of all and accessible by reason alone. This argument was tacked on to Humanae Vitae to claim the artificial contraception was/is a violation of nature. That was flatly and emphatically rejected by 98% of Catholics world wide who made it abundantly clear that the claim of the HV authors was little more than an ambit claim to authority that was groundless. The curial tacticians then changed tack to argue that the formerly evident to all, written in the hearts of all Natural Law had to be interpreted and the only one who had to do this with authority is the Pope. Read all about it:(http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/HV25YEAR.HTM)

December 18, 2018 at 1:22 PM

Gerald May said...

Peter, Lefevbre was a Vatican II Church father who signed off on all the documents. The wall in negotiations between Rome is over interpretation. If LG, GS,NA, SC and DHN, are interpreted as in contradiction with Tradition, attempting to square the circle, or say that A is now non A, then the SSPX will not accept it, however, if Rome will assert and promulgate these disputed documents as interpreted in perfect harmony with Sacred Tradition then, they (SSPX) will accept it. But, Rome is unwilling to do this and the Catholic free fall continues. When the big crash happens in the not too distant future the traditional doctrine, dogma,and teaching is there for a rebirth by the traditional orders and apostolates.

Peter W said...

The position of Rome, the Vatican II Popes and their successors is clear: All the documents of Vatican II are in harmony and continuity with the magisterium of all preceding Councils. It matters not what Lefebvre did, it's what his confused and ill catechised successors are up to. The Catholic Church is not going to accommodate itself to the whims of a sect such as the SSPX that disputes the documents of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council not the 2800 bishops who wrote them and applied their teaching to the local churches they served.
But, please don't be concerned or adjust your thinking, there's a fault in reality.

Gerald May said...

The neo-modernists keep using that phrase, that their new interpretation, which is seemingly a contradiction, is in continuity with Tradition. Pope Benedict said it often, but neither him nor any Resource theologian can explain how exactly it is the case. They just keep repeating the phrase ad infinitum, ad nausium.

Peter W said...

The onus is on you to document in detail where Vatican II is not in continuity with the Tradition of the Church and not in accord with the magisterium of all the Popes since John XXII as well as the 2800 Council Fathers.
It is you who are trotting out the mantra of ignorant denialism.

Tancred said...

This prayer by Cardinal Newman is everywhere and always the true teaching of the Church on the Jews, which contradicts Nostra Aetate. Can’t imagine anyone with any position of importance in the Church today, except maybe +Schneider, repeating it.

Not even the degenerates at Hermeneutic of Discontinuity claim there isn’t a fatal rupture here and just about everywhere else with the usual predictable results of decline, demoralization and pedo clergy like McCarrick ruling the roost.

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2010/09/cardinal-newman-and-jews.html?m=1

Tancred said...

Gaybriel the Fabulist wrote,

“Both Popes JP II and Benedict XVI made it perfectly clear the acceptance of all the documents of Vatican II was not an option but essential for all Catholics. These Popes taught unambiguously that Vatican II contains, safeguards and passes on the magisterium of all preceding General Councils of the Church. “

Actually, Benedict said the opposite, but you’re not a big facts man, and even Bergoglio admits they aren’t in schism.

Gerald May said...

That's like saying that 2+2=5, and now requiring that the onus is now on me to demonstrate it's falsehood. I think the onus is the other way around. But for the sake of the argument I'll give you one, for the sake of brevity, from a whole basket of things. Namely, prior to V2- LG, Catholic doctrine stated that the Church of Christ is identical with the Catholic Church, they are one and the same, the whole totality of Christ and not just one part. Post V2, now the current leadership in Rome interprets LG as meaning the Catholic Church merely, only subsists within the Church of Christ, thus, no longer being identical with the whole but only a part. I claim, this is not in continuity bc the Branch theory was condemned Ex Cathedra by the encyclical of Pope Pius the XI.

Tancred said...

Subsistere can be used to support or undermine EENS.

It’s Greek equivalent is Hpostizw.

Peter W said...

The venerated leader of the SSPX died as schismatic outside the Church. They will always follow their leader and rationalise their sectarianism by trumpeting the position that the Catholic Church is out of step with them.
Enjoy the duration at Econe, old chaps.

Tancred said...

You need to respond to things that people have posted in response to your dishonest posts or I’ll make sure you never post here again.

Peter W said...

You might give the same advice to your pals, Tancred, lest you present as selective.

Gerald May said...

Good point, and that Subsistere can be interpreted in perfect harmony with Tradition is the way out of the current crisis and shows that not all is lost. If only the next Pope...

Tancred said...

Yeah, well, you’re the enemy. Bye.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...