The Bishop's Weekly Column from the Parish Bulletin

OUR LADY OF FATIMA

CATHOLIC CHURCH

More Thoughts on the SSPX Conclave

July 24th, 2006

Well I let the dust settle on this issue in order to consult and ponder. It seems other clergy friends are not as surprised as I was by the re-election of Bishop Fellay for another 12 year term of office. One former SSPX priest shared his similar disbelief in a column he maintains in France (yes, it's in French but I'll summarize it here for your convenience since I think it a text worth considering). Fr Guillaume de Tanouärn was equally surprised as I was by the re-election. What follows is in essence a summary of Fr de Tanouärn's article (NOTE: unless otherwise stated these are not my opinions just de Tanouärn's "take" on the election. I do not concur with everything he says as I will explain below).

He asked two questions which he proceeded to answer:

1/ In re-electing Fellay did those who voted consider the Laguérie business of 2004 / 2005 ? This is a reference to the expulsion of Fr Philippe Laguérie for "disobedience".

(I actually have a profound regard for Fr Laguérie since he was the parish priest at St. Nicholas-du-Chardonnet the Society church in Paris where I saw my first Tridentine Mass - offered by Fr. Putois, as I recall - and I heard many of his rousing sermons during 1989 - 1990. The expression was: "When Fr Laguérie preached France listened!" Unfortunately that was quite literally the case one time. That year the film The Last Temptation of Christ was showing and Fr. Laguérie gave a particularly stirring sermon denouncing the film. After vespers that evening French television cameras were waiting to catch the SSPXer on camera who shared Fr. Laguérie's opinion. Why ? You might wonder. Apparently a bomb had exploded in a Parisian theater wounding or killing some spectators - I forget which. Unfortunately for me I had a microphone thrust at me - my mother proceeded me and proclaimed in halting French that she was English. I opined that those involved should not have attended the film and they would have been spared - as indeed they would. I did not intend to endorse the bombing. Whether I made French TV I know not but for evening Mass next day - Monday - the front doors of the Church were locked - riot police everywhere. I asked an old lady outside if Mass was going to be offered that evening. She told me yes but I needed to go to the side door since the "Communists" were marching against the church because of the film. During Mass the "Communists" duly arrived and a full-scale riot broke out - as only the French can put on. I have never been so scared in my life ! We were finally permitted to leave by the sacristy door which opens onto the Boulevard St Germain and my sister, parents and I went round to the front of the Church and tear gas and riot shields were everywhere. I hope my comments didn't spark the show, but then who knows ?)

You can read for yourself what the matter was all about here (this link is to an SSPX site so bear in mind it is slanted). Fr de Tanouärn's point was that Fellay was pretty heavy-handed in booting out a long-time priest without giving him a fair hearing. Ironically, Fr Laguérie won a civil court case just a week or so before the election mandating the reinstatement of Frs Laguérie and Héry into the SSPX. I don't know that a civil court can order a private religious order to accept back into its ranks people previously dismissed.

[An interjection: Fr de Tanouärn certainly has some reason to complain about Fellay's governmental style since he also was ejected from the SSPX for supporting Aulagnier and Laguérie but lest he think that Fellay's dictatorial style is purely proper to him (i.e. Fellay) he should cast further back into the lore of the SSPX and he would recall that Schmidberger was just as dictatorial in 1986 when he ejected a number of Italian priests from the Society for sedevacantism. We need not stop there, as Bishop Williamson used to say: "Monkey see monkey do". Schmidberger only learnt his trade at the hands of the master: Archbishop Lefebvre. The Archbishop acted in the very same way with the "Naughty Nine" in 1983 when he summarily expelled nine priests of the US district rather than listen to their sede objections. Fellay's style goes a lot further back than him. Indeed one might well wonder how does one govern in the face of recalcitrant priests without having the threat of expulsion ? We clearly see the need for union with Rome since in "normal times" (whatever that expression might mean, but +W used to use the expression all the time - was the Church ever "normal" ? I'm beginning to wonder ! And if she ever is again, how would we know ? What objective criteria would we use ?) such injustices would have been referred to Rome for arbitration.]

2/ In regards to re-electing Fellay does the SSPX intend to reconcile with Rome ?

In answering the first question Fr de Tanouärn references Tissier's outburst in The Remnant where he stated the Superior General ought to be a priest and not a bishop. Fr de Tanouärn writes that obviously nobody was listening to Tissier. Concerning the election itself de Tanouärn notes that complete silence has been maintained. One thing he says is clear, the election was not a done deal by any means. He refers back to the previous chapter 12 years ago where Fellay's election was sealed and delivered by the end of the morning, this time around the election results were only available by the evening. This, he suggests, indicates that the votes were not initially available to Fellay. Unlike the conclave for pope last year, it seems highly unlikely that any of the voters will break their silence like one of the Cardinals did.

Fr de Tanouärn continues to analyze the election: he says that those voting came from the four corners of the globe and barely knew each other. Logically they voted for someone they knew best. As an aside, it had occurred to me that one powerful reason to vote for the continuance of the man-in-charge's term of office was to assure your own continuance as Seminary Rector, District Superior etc. De Tanouärn suggests that Fellay was a known quantity in 1995, and now after 12 years in office even more so. He also outlines the potential danger of facilitating a potential "reign" of 24 years by observing that the next chapter will definitely be shaped in Fellay's image since the electors then will (for the most part) all have been chosen by him. This de Tanouärn says is tantamount to Fellay re-founding the SSPX.

Fr Schmidberger he notes has lost his position as first assistant; a man who, now officially without a portfolio, was the superior general from 1982 - 1994, and number two in the Society until 2006. What is to become of him ? Doubtless he will be retained by Fellay in some capacity. Pfluger's election to Schmidberger's job does of course free up the District Superior of Germany and Schmiddy is German after all, and we do like to keep the jobs "in the family" in the SSPX. Schmidberger's demise (as de Tanouärn characterizes it) was a quid pro quo namely his hobnobbing with Ratzinger made him fall foul of the "no dealers" and it was time to axe him. Personally I don't buy that theory, if that were true then surely the same thing would have applied to Fellay. He's also been hobnobbing with Ratzinger and with Castrillon-Hoyos and he got re-elected. No, Schmidberger was replaced by the Swiss Fr Pfluger and as de Tanouärn rightly observes he is a man very much in the same mould as Fellay.

First Assistant : Father Niklaus Pfluger
Former District Superior of Germany

One blog-site (one of the better known ones) which to my mind seems to be acquiring all the credentials of a Traddie National Enquirer in tone and editorial - you know the off the wall headlines guaranteed to grab your attention in the check-out line. I had been in the USA three years before I noticed this rag and just as I said a headline grabbed me: I have never forgotten it "My Mom had Big Foot's Baby". After supper that evening in the seminary at table when the bell rang indicating the reading was to cease and we seminarians could talk, I asked the naive question: "What kind of newspaper is The National Enquirer ?" To the groans of all the Americans at the table they explained the matter to me. Well this Traddie National Enquirer web-site is circulating the rumor that Pfluger was elected to counter-balance Fellay. De Tanouärn flatly contradicts this analysis and maintains the reverse. Indeed another French website (run by an extremely nutty sede priest - you know he's a nut when he calls Pope John Paul II the "anti-Christ", I mean if John Paul II was the anti-Christ what does that make Ratzinger ? The "runner-up to anti-Christ" ? See how bizarre these people have become !) has this tidbit of information:

Le choix de l'abbé Pfluger comme assistant n'est pas dû au hasard : sa soeur est Mère Abbesse du monastère cistercien de Magdenau, près de St Gall en Suisse allemande (Révérende Mère Raphaëla Pfluger), ce que les français ignorent, en général.

The choice of Fr Pfluger as assistant was not due to chance: his sister is Mother Abbess of the Cistercian Monastery of Magdenau, close to St Gall in German Switzerland (Reverend Mother Raphaëla Pfluger), which the French generally do not know.

Pfluger's own sister is the Mother Superior of a Novus Ordo Cistercian monastery in Switzerland - the deal is settled with connections like these !

Second Assistant : Father Alain-Marc Nely
Former District Superior of Italy

Fr de Tanouärn turns his attention to the election of the second assistant. Having been the district superior of Italy, his residence hitherto was the Society's house at Albano 18 miles outside of Rome (you can bet he knows his way around that city !) The Archbishop acquired this former seminary as a house for the SSPX. He intended that the 4th year of the 6 year course should be conducted at Albano so that his seminarians would acquire Romanitas (the Roman spirit i.e. a love for Rome, her customs, her teachings, her buildings). For a few years this was carried out but it was too taxing to maintain a seminary staff both in Econe and at Albano. The "Albano year" as it was called was quickly discontinued. The buildings continue to serve as the residence for the SSPX district HQ. It also acts as an SSPX hotel for whenever Fellay needs to visit the Curia. De Tanouärn concludes that the stage is set for the continuance of re-union talks now that the apparent Tissier-Williamson stone-walling has definitely been kicked into touch. Time, as they say, will tell...

+TF