The Bishop's Weekly Column from the Parish Bulletin

OUR LADY OF FATIMA

CATHOLIC CHURCH

Anyone for "Ecclesio-vacantism" ?

August 6th, 2006

Fr Philippe Laguérie

A few weeks ago we referenced the case of Fr Philippe Laguérie a former member of the SSPX ousted by Bishop Fellay in 2004. Father ministers to a large group in Bordeaux, France. He recently issued his bulletin for the month of August in which he wrote about the re-election of Bishop Fellay as superior general of the SSPX for another 12 year term. What follows is in essence a summary of his editorial.

Noting the election of the two new assistants, Laguérie, also observes (somewhat dryly) that the chapter chose to maintain at whatever cost... "continuity". Whilst stating that such a choice is understandable, he suggests that the Society runs two risks: on the one side there is a fear and a sense of insufficiency on the part of the SSPX which is characterized by a spirit of "protectionism" (the Society closing in on itself) which could lead to its demise or even schism; the other is a feeling of inner malaise within the Society which is imposed on priests and laity alike (by the superiors obviously) which leads Father to wonder if the Society can find the strength to continue its mission and its future within the bosom of the Roman Church.

He continues by saying that Bishop Fellay's true opinion with regards to Rome is still unclear, particularly since he has adopted a rather contradictory position over the last few months (doubtless in an attempt to keep together the two factions: the dealers and the no-dealers). Clearly Fellay's position has been reinforced in the wake of the election but (and this is news to me at least) Laguérie says already there is talk (in the Society one has to suppose) of another chapter (!) to discuss the plan for an agreement with Rome.

Interjection: to my mind this seems highly unlikely given the substance of the recent communiqué from the SSPX and the "Rosary crusade" about which we wrote in the last column.

Laguérie mentions a newspaper article in Il Giornale (which I have never bothered commenting on before since I consider it another Italian rumor designed to sell a few extra copies) in which it was suggested Rome has privately offered the SSPX a deal but no response has been forthcoming.

Interjection: I am disinclined to believe this story since just before the chapter Fellay was on record as saying Rome had "gone off the boil" with regards to the SSPX pending the outcome of the July chapter. Right after the chapter the word from the SSPX was: "Rosary crusade for the Pope". Where in all of this does a secret proposal from Rome fit in ? Why would Rome offer anything now since supposedly Rome needs to convert first ?

To support the theory, Laguérie mentions Cardinal Ricard (of Bordeaux - ie. Laguérie's local bishop - who is also the president of the French Bishops' conference) who said in late May, Rome was gearing-up to lift the excommunications and to grant the right of the Tridentine Mass to all Latin Rite Catholics.

If this happens (in the Fall, say October, as was previously mentioned by a curial official months ago) Laguérie says Fellay will claim this as a victory. That was precisely my take in the last column. Laguérie points to the appointment of Cardinal Bertone as Secretary of State and Archbishop Ranjith as secretary of the Liturgy department (a known supporter of the Latin Mass) as further favorable signs in Rome. One thing remains, he says, and that is the doctrinal question: how does Vatican II size up with Tradition and the previous magisterium ? Here too he sees signs for hope. He references the Pope's speech to the curial cardinals on December 22nd last year in which he called for a critical reanalysis of the Council's teachings.

The Society is not home and clear by a long-shot, though. Laguérie makes mention of the book circulated by the Society a few years ago to all the cardinals on the problem of the liturgical reform. The book, he argues, is based on weak theology and as such is not taken seriously by Rome. More homework is needed before the question can be seriously examined in Rome.

Then Laguérie springs the sting in the tail: he refers (albeit obliquely) to Tissier's hissies where he has all but called the Pope a heretic and he even suggests that there are those in the Society who are also leaning towards the ridiculous thesis expounded months ago by the American sedevacantist Anthony Cekada (which we have partially dealt with before in this column and are now writing an exhaustive treatise on the subject which will shortly appear at this site) namely that since the rite of episcopal ordination was changed by Paul VI in 1968 the entire episcopate of the Latin Rite is invalid (sic !). Laguérie coins an equally humorous as it is apposite term for those who hold this theory: Ecclesio-vacantists or the Church is Vacant-ists (I almost died laughing at that one - dry, very dry Father !)

Laguérie concludes by asking the mother of all questions: "Will Bishop Fellay be able to impose a clear, coherent line that is wise and doctrinally founded ?". Whilst sincerely assuring Fellay of his works and prayers he nonetheless observes that the "task is crushing".

I was recently chatting with a priest friend of mine and said I was so glad that throughout the years I never really bothered to get into the politics of the Trad movement, which means that with regards to the current pontificate and my support of this Pope, I don't have a lot of "back-tracking" to do like the Society has if they want to sign up with Rome. For more than 30 years they have been calling Rome "modernist" and "heretical" - how now do they undo all of that in order to smooth things out ? Like Lucy they'll have a lot of " 'splainin' " to do.

+TF