A recent editorial by Fr. Michel Simoulin, SSPX, answers several
objections of Traditionalist “hard-liners” to the current negotiations
between the Society of Saint Pius X and the Holy See and describes the
prospect of reunion with Rome in a remarkably positive light.
Writing in the May 2012 issue of Segnadou, a
Traditional Catholic online magazine, Fr. Simoulin, responds point by
point to a “document” sent to him by a concerned Catholic who fears that
the SSPX might renege its principles in order to gain canonical
recognition by the Vatican. He quotes the document: “When are we going
to return to the fundamentals of the Society? When are we going to
have the humility to respect the heritage of its founder?”
Fr. Simoulin, a chaplain for the Traditional Dominican Sisters of Fanjeaux in Southern France, replies,
I think that I know something about the
Society—of which I have been a member for thirty-five years—and that
therefore I have the right to remind everyone that our “fundamentals”
are engraved in golden letters in our statutes: “The purpose of the
Society is the priesthood and everything related to it, and nothing
else, namely what Our Lord Jesus Christ intended when He said: Do this
in memory of Me.” This is the heritage of our founder; these are our “fundamentals”; we have no others and do not want to have any others. The Society is not an army in an uprising against Rome, but rather an army formed for the Church.
The correspondent asks, in effect, why should the SSPX now sign the
Doctrinal Preamble prepared in 2011 by the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith, when Archbishop Lefebvre rejected an agreement proposed
by the CDF in 1988, saying, “With the May 5 protocol we would soon have
been dead. We would not have lasted a year.”
Fr. Simoulin patiently explains that Archbishop Lefebvre actually
signed the CDF protocol on May 5, 1988, and never regretted it. What
disappointed him terribly and what caused the rift between the SSPX and
Rome was the latter’s refusal to grant permission for him to go ahead
with the episcopal consecrations scheduled for June 30, 1988. Lefebvre
was alarmed, not by the terms of the protocol, but by the prospect of
having to continue indefinitely under those ambiguous terms without the
guarantee that he could ordain bishops to perpetuate the work of the
Society of Saint Pius X. Fr. Simoulin writes: “Therefore the
process was stopped not over a doctrinal question, nor over the issue of
the canonical status being offered to the Society, but rather over the
date of the consecration of the bishop” who was to be granted
under the indefinite terms of the protocol. The editorial writer notes
that then-Cardinal Ratzinger is the one who refused to allow Archbishop
Lefebvre to ordain a bishop on June 30. “Without a bishop [of our own],
we would have been at the mercy of the good or bad intentions of Rome
and the [diocesan] bishops.” This is what the founder meant when he said “We would not have lasted a year.”
But much has happened in the years since 1988.
Since our [pilgrimage to Rome during the]
Jubilee Year 2000, Rome has taken the initiative of establishing new
relations [with the SSPX]. Today, the same Cardinal [Ratzinger], who
has now become the Pope, tells us that the Tridentine Mass was never
abrogated (July 7, 2007: “It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate
the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman
Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated”); he
rehabilitated our four bishops (January 21, 2009); he agreed to let us
conduct doctrinal discussions for two years…. These are all things that
Archbishop Lefebvre was not demanding in 1988. It is no exaggeration
to say that Bishop Fellay has gained more than what Archbishop
Lefebvre demanded, yet without having the latter’s prestige or moral
authority. Can we then be more demanding than Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Fellay?
Whatever the present state of Rome may
be, … common sense and honesty should lead us to regard the current
situation in a different light than the situation in 1988! … We are no
longer in 1975 with Paul VI, nor in 1988 with John Paul II, but in 2012
with Benedict XVI…. Don’t tell me that the state of affairs is the same
as in 1988, or even worse. That is contrary to reality and to truth,
and that can only be the result of a more or less secret rejection of
any reconciliation with Rome, perhaps even of a lack of faith in the
holiness of the Church, which is made up of poor sinners but is always
governed by her head, Jesus Christ, and sanctified by the Holy Spirit. The
Society of St. Pius X is not the Church and it can “respect the
heritage of its founder” only by preserving his spirit, his love of the
Church and his desire to serve her as a loving son….
As Fr. Simoulin views it, the crucial question is: “How should the
Society respond to the ‘needs’ of the Church today? … Only Bishop Fellay
and his assistants, who by definition have all the cards in their hand,
can judge most accurately the present situation. The question
that everyone should ask himself instead is the question about our good
will toward authority and especially about our trust in it.”