French article on upcoming Ecclesia Dei & SSPX Motu Proprio

On the French language websit Golias there is an interesting article about the upcoming Motu Proprio which will concern the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei.

I don’t have time to translate it for you today.  Perhaps some of our French readers here can divvy it up and give us an English text.

Here is an interesting line:

Le nouveau Motu proprio à venir, que préparerait déjà le principal rédacteur du Motu proprio de 2007, Mgr Nicola Bux, professeur de théologie à Bari et conseiller estimé de Joseph Ratzinger, justifiera l’importance accordée à la dimension doctrinale de la controverse intégriste. Le rôle de Don Nicola ne saurait être assez souligné.

 

UPDATE 2122 GMT

A reader sent a translation.  It is a little choppy, but hey!  I didn’t have time to do one and this person stepped up to the plate!

 

According to our informations, and on the eve of the lefebvrist ordinations of next June 27th in Germany, the Pope wishes for the coming months to write a second motu proprio. Document to be spent this time not only to the liturgy in Latin, but to a more comprehensive reintegration of Lefebvre in the Church. By asking, of course conditions, but also by engaging the whole Church in this process. That’s serious!
 
In other words, the bishops will no longer be entitled to express openly their reluctance and even less to slow the return of the traditionalists. In fact one knows that the representatives of these currents regularly are complaining to the Pope about the obstacles to their reinstatement placed by the bishops and their entourage. Until then, Rome and the Ecclesia Dei commission bypassed the local bishops without, however, in general, openly disavowing them.

Thus, in 1988, the commission very quickly and very caringly get the situation of the Benedictine abbey of the Barroux Abbey sorted out, without informing or consulting the Archbishop of Avignon at the time, Archbishop Raymond BOUCHEX. More recently, Rome proceeded in the same way with respect to the Institut du Bon Pasteur, without informing the archbishop of Bordeaux, in which he sat. Recently, another signal was given by the Vatican which restored to her parish a traditionalist parish priest in dissent with his bishop in Calvados, so to remind the French bishops. Following such a new Motu proprio, a bishop considered too reluctant to welcome newly joined traditionalists will certainly be severely rebuked
The bishops no longer will be able to express their reservations

Benedict XVI and his advisers intend to enjoy the quiet summer to advance on the path of reconciliation. After the authorization to celebrate according all the old liturgical books (Motu proprio of 2007), after the lifting of the excommunication of the four schismatic bishops ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre, a new stage is opening up, more delicate however: That is concerning the divisive theological background in particular with regard to Vatican II and the Magisterium of last popes. You should know that the Pope has chosen the new secretary of the International Theological Commission, the Dominican Father Charles Morerod, precisely according to its sensitivity close to the traditionalist partners. In fact one must be aware that Morerod is the author of a doctoral thesis submitted to the faculty of theology at the University of Freiburg, Switzerland, on the master general of the Dominicans, commentator of Thomas Aquinas, Thomas said Vio Cajetan (1469-1534) in his polemic debate with Luther.

Father Morerod for the theological agreement

But Father Morerod was especially noted for his work Tradition and Unity of Christians. The dogma as a condition of possibility of ecumenism (Word and Silence, Paris, 2005), in which he takes a very drastic stance against a more liberal ecumenism (as theologians Fries, Rahner or Tillard) in emphasizing the essential nature of a true Catholic thought, theologicallly and philosophically indivisible.

Hence, it accentuates the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism in a way that does not displease the most common "tradi" streams. The same Father Morerod strived to trounce the thought of a British Liberal Protestant, John Hick, wose relativist spirit he specifically denies. Oh, this reminds us of someone else … The choice of Morerod Father is therefore not a matter of chance! In a very concrete way, the Ecclesia Dei commission will be subjected to the congregation for the doctrine of the faith (cf. Golias Hebdo n ° 85). There was actually a consideration to join it to the congregation for divine worship, but this was to forget that the problem is not solely or mainly liturgical.
The new Motu Proprio to come, that is said prepared already tby he principal drafter of the Motu proprio of 2007, Monsignor Nicola Bux, professor of theology at Bari and advisor of Joseph Ratzinger, would justify the importance accorded to the doctrine of the traditionalist controversy. The role of Don Nicola will not be stressed enough.

The Italian prelate Nicola Bux for the new Motu Proprio

Consultor to the congregation for the doctrine of the faith and looking for a strategic promotion, Bishop Bux, an Italian priest of 63 years, friendly and discreet, but frighteningly conservative and accurate in its argument, is the determined and tireless craftsman not only of moving closer to the traditionalists but of a restoration of traditional Catholicism as a whole. He drafted the 2007 Motu Proprio on the Mass in Latin. In his latest book, released last October in Italy, "The Reform of Benedict XVI," prefaced by Vittorio Messori, Msgr Bux reckons that rebuilding the essence of the « sacred and divine liturgy, which cannot be made by the hand of man » is necessary. Otherwise, it "would serve no purpose other than to represent himself and upon all it would not save the man or the world, nor would it sanctify it." He is convinced that the liturgy of Saint Pius V better honors the sense of the sacred than that of Paul VI. He criticizes also quite fiercely the reform named of the pope Montini’s name, a true "decomposition" of the liturgy, according to him, expressing and exacerbating what the theologian Louis Bouyer called the "decomposition of Catholicism."

Indeed, Msgr Bux is not confined solely to the liturgical field. He denounces the opening to the world that defiles the Christian mystery and censures the relaxed life of priests in particular with regard to privacy (célibacy. ..). He also attacks the fundamental deviance of the contemporary theology, that he claims to operate an "anthropological turn" (which he also denounces, following Cornelio Fabro, in Karl Rahner). To thise he opposes a new theocentric and Christocentric turning as it may be symbolized by the celebration to the East, his back turned to the faithful. It is easy to imagine the content and tone of the future and near Motu Proprio with such a writer.

Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, who is currently undergoing health problems, is distressed, frustrated and demoralized, no longer has the power nor the liveliness necessary to oppose such an ultra-conservative reversal .

Far from appearing as a defense of the Council, the Motu Proprio will propose a minimalist reading of it, erasing its novelties and questionning its spirit. In sum, a council "according to the tradition" like Archbishop Lefebvre reckoned he could accept it!

Is this still the Council of which Paul VI proclaimed the importance in 1976 when he was facing the integrist dissent? Nothing is less certain.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to French article on upcoming Ecclesia Dei & SSPX Motu Proprio

  1. Here’s a rough translation: “The new motu proprio to come, already prepared by the principal author of the motu proprio of 2007, Mnsgr. Nicola Bux, professor of theology at Bari and esteemed advisor of Joseph Ratzinger, will justify the importance accorded to the doctrinal dimension of the controversy of integration. The role of Don Nicola is not known to be outlined.”

  2. AlephGamma says:

    Wikipedia says that “Integriste” is not such a nice term for Catholic traditionalist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrism

  3. Tom says:

    An English translation of the complete article is available at http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2009/06/new-motu-proprio-on-sspx-this-summer.html (courtesy of gillibrand via Angelqueen).

  4. Tristan Mordrelle says:

    Father, Golias is a very controversial magazine, very critical of the Hierarchy in general and of the Pope in particular.
    The editor is hostile to the return of the tradition in the Church.

  5. Matthew says:

    I read the article in French, and the folks at Golias make NCReporter sound like Traditionalists. This was essentially a hostile article–they seem to loath the SSPX, but they hate Frs Bux and Morerod far more. In the last paragraphs, which are not in Gillibrand’s translation, they accuse Fr Bux of wanting to the return the Church entirely to its Pre-Vatican II days. They also portray Pope Benedict as ruthless dictator who micromanages Dioceses and hates Bishops. They can see reunion with the SSPX is on the far horizon, and they are very afraid of what the next decade or so may hold.

  6. Maureen says:

    Popcorn! Getcher hot, buttery popcorn!

    Coooooooold Veuve! Bottles of the Widow, nicely chilled, I’ll throw ‘em to ya!

  7. TJM says:

    Why not return to the pre-Vatican II days? At least in the US the Church was wildly successful then compared to now. I think His Holiness through
    the hermeneutic of continuity is trying to connect the past with the present, unlike the left-wing loons who want to forgot the prior 1900 years. Tom

  8. #

    “Popcorn! Getcher hot, buttery popcorn!

    Coooooooold Veuve! Bottles of the Widow, nicely chilled, I’ll throw ‘em to ya!”
    Comment by Maureen — 25 June 2009 @ 12:52 pm

    I take an order for two, thank you, heavy on the butter and save the glasses these old glass chalices will do fine. Now about those front row seats ;>)

  9. Jacques says:

    Golias is the worst purported \”catholic\” modernist/ecumenic website I ever saw.
    Their article is very critical about a new Motu Proprio they claim the Pope is preparing to enforce the reintegration of SSPX in the Church.
    I am currently undertaking the translation.
    Will send it to Fr Zuhlsdorf e-mail address within some minutes.

  10. Jacques: The person who sent this too me, actually an esteemed journalist, made the following comment:

    Actually, I think it’s just a hysterical reaction to this.

  11. Chironomo says:

    It’s difficult to tell what in this article is factual and what is anti-traditionalist ranting. It would be excellent if the MP actually were what they claim… we’ll have to see.

  12. Precentrix says:

    This should be enough to give everyone an idea, but I will do the rest if you wish…

    TOWARDS A NEW MOTU PROPRIO for the Lefebvristes

    According to our sources, and on the vigil of the lefebrist ordinations of the coming 27th June in Germany, the pope wishes to produce, in the next few months, a second moto proprio. A document which will be consacrated this time, no more simply to the liturgy in Latin, but in a more general way to the reintegration of the Lefebvrists into the Church. Imposing conditions, of course, but equally involving the whole Church in the process.

    Gravissime ! [doesn’t need translating!]

    In other words, the bishops will no longer hav ethe right to express too overtly their retisence and even less to put a hold on/delay the reintegration of traditionalists. One must know, in effect, that the representatives of these currents complain very regularly to the pope of the obstacles posed by the bishops and entourage to their reintegration. Up until now, Rome and the commision ‘Ecclesia Dei’ have short-circuted the bishops, albeit without, in general, denouncing them overtly.

    Thus, in 1988, the commision regularised very rapidly and in a very benevolent manner the situation of the Benedictine abbey of Le Barroux, without informing or cunsulting the then archbishop of Avignon, Mgr Raymond Bouchex.

    More recently, Rome has proceded in the same manner regarding the l’Institut du Bon Pasteur without informing the archbishop of Bordeaux, within whose territory the Institute is resident. Also recently, another signal has been given by the Vatican which reestablished as parish priest a ‘tradi’ in opposition to his bishop in Calvados, a way of also calling the bishops to order. Following such a moto proprio, a bishop judged to be little inclined to welcome integrists will certainly have his knuckles rapped.

  13. Jacques says:

    Here is the whole translation. Sorry for some mistakes: “Traduttore, tradittore”:

    [I moved the translation to the top entry. – Fr. Z]

  14. Jacques says:

    Dear Father Zuhlsdorf,
    “Hysterical reaction”, yes indeed, but I believe that they have probably first hand infos on the issue.
    Wait and see…

  15. There is an ASSUMPTION that is widespread that believes the calling of the Council was an inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But that is simplistic. Nicaea itself was called by Constantine to have one version of Christianity for his new Empire. That is hardly an inspiration of the Holy Spirit! It is FAR MORE LIKELY that the inspiration originated from Blessed John XXIII’s personal optimism. There is a coincidence ignored in discerning this question: the Pope had already called the Council, BEFORE he consulted the Third part of the Secret of Fatima,which was supposed to be revealed by 1960. When he DID read it, instead of revealing it he buried it in the archives where it stayed until 2000. He proceeded WITH HIS OWN IDEA OF WHAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE CHURCH,IGNORING HEAVEN’S PROPHETIC INTERVENTIONS THROUGH PRIVATE REVELATION. The very NEXT YEAR AFTER THE ’60 DEADLINE FOR RELEASE, Apparitions began in Garabandal indicating follow-up of Fatima, which lasted significalntly during the span of the Council. Of course, the Council pushed Garabandal into the shadows and it has been downplayed or ignored by the post-Council period.
    BUT, the POINT IS that the AGENDA OF VATII FOR THE CHURCH WAS MARKEDLY DIFFERENT BETWEEN GARABANDAL. The former left in its wake “a diabolical disorientation”–Sr. Lucia’s phrase, which is the SURE INDICATION OF THE ENEMY, ie Satan TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE OPENNING POSSIBLE IN THE AMBIGUITY OF MUCH OF ITS TEXTS AND IN THE NAIVETE OF PAUL VI’S IMPLEMENTATIONS. Now St.Padre Pio was SOLIDLY BEHIND GARABANDAL. If anyone had the gift of discerning the supernatural it was Padre Pio. FRANKLY,IF Garabandal is from heaven, THEN Vat II WAS NOT INSPIRED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT! That doesn’t mean the Council was invalid or lacking in authority of some sort, but it DOES MEAN that people take it FAR TOO SERIOUSLY, including the Holy Father, good, humble and brilliant pope that he is. PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO THE LITURGY,Pope Paul VI was told by the Patriarch of Constantinople NOT TO CHANGE THE LITURGY, ONLY TRANSLATE IT,(echos of Pope Nicholas The Great approving Cyril and Methodius’ Slavonic Litugy from this Greek Patriarch–how ironic) when they met in Jerusalem. The Pope IGNORED THIS APOSTOLIC SUCCESSOR WITH THE GRACE OF STATE OF LIFE, and followed ever so naively the advice of Bugnini voicing the opinions of sons of the Reformation WHO HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO APPOSTOLIC AUTHORITY IN THE LEAST INSTEAD! That ALONE SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT DISCERNMENT!
    The Patriarch proved to be rlight, OF COURSE! One should listen to the “HEALTHIOR PART” But the UNHEALTHIOR PART PREVAILED AND WE BROKE RITUAL CONTINUITY WITH OUR PAST IN FAVOR OF A COMMITTEE ENGENEERED, RATIONALLY STREAMED-LINED, PROTESTANTIZING REPLACEMENT. The Reform of the reform should START ALL OVER AGAIN. Just one example: Suppressing the Solemn Octave of Pentecost ACTUALLY CONTRADICTS LITURGICALLY THE NEEDED, REEMPHASIZED ATTENTION TO THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT CAME TO THE FORE IN VAT II!

  16. JPG says:

    BREAK OUT THE WIDOW INDEED, La Grande Dame @ that! Which year?
    I did not bother reading the site or concerning myself with the tone
    of it since even from the posted translation, one senses on the authors part, pure angst. It is like listening to Pravda in the old days complain about Reagan (of blessed memory). If what they report is true ,on a more serious note, such a tone would sour a fair number of the faithful.Since undoubtedly this will be the take of the secular press and it will not be sufficiently countered by leftist or ill informed centrist(for lack of a better term) clergy. This being a result of horrific catehesis on the part of almost everyone in the past 40 yrs. Likewise I can scarcely contain my glee at the thought of an end run on any liberal bishop’s attempt to block the promotion of Tradition and the squelching of that same bishops permissive and liberal tendencies. The recent directives concerning Liturgical abuses have been largely ignored. One still sees crystal communion cups. Incidentally the thought of using such a vessel for secular purpose after it has held the Blood of Our Saviour is to me repugnant and nauseating. It seems inappropriate to do so (although I laughed out loud at the above post). Is it appropriate to bury such items? Just a thought. If so I’ll get a shovel and start collecting them now.
    JPG

  17. let the wailing and gnashing of teeth begin, more popcorn please;>)

  18. Mary says:

    JPG I couldn’t really make out what post you were trying to respond to, but an entry a few weeks ago mentioned that the appropriate disposal of things like crystal vessels used as chalices is burial. For scapulars you can burn them, by the way. In some cases you’re supposed to destroy the item first to make sure no one uses it again. I’m not sure which cases.

  19. Cornelius says:

    Less blogging, more praying for the Holy Father.

  20. JPG says:

    Mary,
    The comment to which I was referring was by Mr Osterloh when he suggested to another commenter that the glasses ought to be spared since he had a couple of glass chalices. The implication being to toast the rumoured future motu proprio with the widow(Veuve Cliqout,
    La Grande Dame is their best and is a vintage) using the glass chalices. To which my reply was that using any vessel for vulgar purpose when it has been used for the Precious Blood is something I find repugnant. I am no lover of inferior vessels being used for the Sacred Species, but once so used and so dedicated it would be my opinion that they ought not to be used again for anything else.
    That line made me laugh however outloud. I would happily aid in the retirement of any vessels not made of durable precious metals as instructed in ,I think, Redemptionis Sacramentum. As to the Angst felt by the liberals or modernists at thse developments all I can say is” good”. It may be a perverse and unchristian thought on my part but it may pay back some angst and anger I feel at liturgical abuse of the day at almost any Masses I attend. Cornelius is right less bloggigg more praying. Still I live in a liberal leaning world where this is one of the few places where I can read , learn and appreciate the thoughts of others . Many on this blog have given voice to what I have known and thought for years. The prevailing orthodoxy of reformist mentality even occupies the minds of for lack of a better term “conservative” Catholics. Reading this blog has provided food for thought and ammunition if you will in discussions with those of that mindset. Keep in mind three conditions one finds in those with this mindset 1. ignorance of Church history 2. Theology
    3. a fuzzy, muddled, 1970-80’s I’m ok you are ok mentality which irnores revelation , sin and sin’s consequences both in this life and in the life to come. All in All a recipe for indifference and Apostasy.
    JPG
    Fairfield, CT

  21. pop corn with La veuve, quelle horreur! huhu…caviar is the required ingredient….

  22. JM says:

    Praise the Lord! I hope for once that these Liberals are correct with their news story. Here in my Florida diocese the only thing I can think of which might bring reform (barring a Heaven sent chastisement) would be the immediate infusion of SSPX. I’m so tired of seeing women in halter tops, backless, and sleeveless, blouses, miniskirts, etc and how about guys wearing shorts, t shirts, and flip flops into Church and yet NOBODY will say anything. Where is the Priest or Bishop to tell these people? I went to a 7:30 am Mass last Friday to celebrate the feast of the Sacred Heart and it’s mostly older, faithful Catholics and one teenage girl with her clueless mother, sporting a halter top. It’s simply astounding to me the lack of respect and the lack of action by priests and Bishops to inform the community not to show up at Mass like this. But, when most of these same people are shuffling up to Holy Communion every week not having been to Confession in years, what can we expect? I’m praying The Holy Father launches this ASAP.

  23. Piers-the-Ploughman says:

    JM,
    the dress you describe is not appropriate but remember a teenage girl and her mother were there on a Friday not a holy day of obligation.
    the Lord works with all of us where we are
    and yes the Church could really use the 500 priests of the SSPX

  24. Barb says:

    I am curious, concerning those glass chalices, would it be required to shatter them and then bury them so as to ensure that they are not dug up and used for profane purposes?

    Fiat Voluntas Tua

  25. Jack says:

    JM I know exactly where you’re coming from!!! although its not quite as bad in my Parish you still see allot of teenagers/pre teens wearing t-shirts, jeans and shorts, apart from the older parishinors my friend and I are pretty much the only ones who wear their Sunday best to Mass (as I’ve said before what really impressed me when I visited the local SSPX chapel over the Corpus Christi Tridium was the reverence on the part of the laity)

  26. John says:

    I don’t know anything about the background of those who produced this article, but it has to be a distortion if it virtually portrays the SSPX as the victors in the negotiations.

    Also, this paragraph near the end is intriguing:

    “Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, who is currently undergoing health problems, is distressed, frustrated and demoralized, no longer has the power nor the liveliness necessary to oppose such an ultra-conservative reversal.”

    I’ve always thought Levada’s appointment was extremely strange.

    Finally, TJM, I agree with your post of 1:07. Vatican II snatched defeat from the jaws of victory…a disaster which was then described as a “new springtime.”

  27. Jeremy UK says:

    This blog http://fidesetforma.blogspot.com/2009/06/bufale-alla-diossina.html vehemently denies there is and truth in it having spoken to Dom Bux perportedly. But who knows? The Pope is wise enough to find a way where all else has failed in the past. God give him the grace to bring it about.

  28. Matt Q says:

    Yeah, we’ll see. When Summorum Pontificum was released, we saw how it flopped big time. [I deny your premise, as others should as well. I don’t think Summorum Pontificum was a flop. It was of enormous significance.] Is this to be construed perhaps as the “Clarifications” we had been expecting all this time and never came? Who knows, and after the hype and then let-down with Summorum Pontificum, let’s not get all worked up over this. From the tone of the article, we’ll see how long this will take to get released. If the Holy Father is going to be “reflecting” while on vacation, then perhaps we won’t even see this until Christmas ( ugh, just five months from now? ) or later.

    It’s also evident how irrational all these naysayers are about the Holy Father wanting a “pre-Vatican II” Church. Well, other than the few weirdos in the Council, it was not the Council’s intention to turn the Church into what it is today. The weirdos won though, and the Holy Father is trying to correct the mess we have today.

    = = = = =

    I read the article in French, and the folks at Golias make NCReporter sound like Traditionalists. This was essentially a hostile article—they seem to loath the SSPX, but they hate Frs Bux and Morerod far more. In the last paragraphs, which are not in Gillibrand’s translation, they accuse Fr Bux of wanting to the return the Church entirely to its Pre-Vatican II days. They also portray Pope Benedict as ruthless dictator who micromanages Dioceses and hates Bishops. They can see reunion with the SSPX is on the far horizon, and they are very afraid of what the next decade or so may hold.

    )(

    Again, more loser-creeps spewing [Tone it down, please.] more vicious rhetoric all the while maligning the Holy Father. Matthew’s last sentence is very warming to me. “They are very afraid.” Good. Let them be afraid, oh, let them be so very afraid. Let them learn soon enough how very wrong they are. At the same time, as paraphrased from the Bible, because of their stubbornness, God will let them persist in their stubbornness and all which is due them will befall them.

    = = = = =

    TJM wrote:

    “Why not return to the pre-Vatican II days? At least in the US the Church was wildly successful then compared to now. I think His Holiness through the hermeneutic of continuity is trying to connect the past with the present, unlike the left-wing loons who want to forgot the prior 1900 years.

    )(

    Bravo. Good observation. These are the very same people who are in control of all facets of secular life and wish to bring about a very warped and distorted society. They are the very ones who are actually dangerous. It is these people who invented political correctness, who foment the anti-religious bigotry, the erosion of free speech. They are the ones who are building those lovely detention camps in major metro areas.