In Cardinal CastrillÃƒÂ³n‘s recent interview in Die Tagespost there was not a great communicated that was new. However, long time blog participant Henry had another thought. It is woth reexamining.
Henry wrote in his comment: "It seems to me there may be a new thing or two here. Anybody else spot them?"
He is refering to the final answer of the Cardinal (according to one translation):
ANSWER Please, accept that I reject the term “ecumenism ad intra”. The Bishops, Priests, and Faithful of the Society of St Pius X are not schismatics. It is Archbishop Lefebvre who has undertaken an illicit Episcopal consecration and therefore performed a schismatic act. It is for this reason that the Bishops consecrated by him have been suspended and excommunicated. The priests and faithful of the Society have not been excommunicated. They are not heretics. I do, however, share St Jerome’s fear that heresy leads to schism and vice versa. The danger of a schism is big, such as a systematic disobedience vis-à-vis the Holy Father or by a denial of his authority. It is after all a service of charity, so that the Priestly Society gains full communion with the Holy Father by acknowledging the sanctity of the new Mass.
On the surface one might think that the "new thing" is the chat about the SSPXers not being schismatics. This has produced a lot of ridiculous bickering, but it isn’t new. He has said that elsewhere.
If Henry is on to something, this is perhaps what it is:
It is after all a service of charity, so that the Priestly Society gains full communion with the Holy Father by acknowledging the sanctity of the new Mass.
First, this was an answer to a question about the Indult being an act of ecumenism ad intra. So, it was a question about the INDULT. That means that the "it" the Cardinal is talking about has a concrete form and that he assumes "it" is going to happen. He said: "Es geht um einen Dienst der Nächstenliebe, damit .. gewinnt und … anerkennt." The language is concrete.
Second, it indicates a (not the) concrete purpose for the INDULT: that the SSPX can come into full communion. This means that the INDULT must speak about that and provide for it, i.e., there must be some way to receive them.
Third, it would then require something from the SSPXers (e.g., something about the Novus Ordo). We know that not all the SSPXers will sign off on anything which admits anything positive about any aspect of the Novus Ordo. Some will refuse, no matter what is offered. Some will, however, play ball and that will probably require some legislation. Who knows, … it might require a structure within which they can have full communion.
I am just applying a little critical speculation to the text, of course.