en.news

FSSPX Dispute May Now End Positively - Polish Senator

Jan Filip Libicki, a Senator in the parliament of Poland, reflects on the tensions between the Vatican and the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX) following the announcement of plans for new episcopal consecrations (Rorate Caeli, February 9).

He notes that the Vatican reacted swiftly to the FSSPX’s announcement.

Comparing the situation with 1988, Libicki writes: “I believe - though of course without certainty - that this time the matter may end positively.”

Roman Rite No Longer a Peripheral Anomaly

Libicki points to the visibility of the Roman rite after Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum.

Despite later restrictions, Libicki maintains that the Roman rite can no longer be dismissed: “This indicates that we are dealing with a real internal ecclesial issue, not with a peripheral anomaly that can simply be ignored.”

Anglican Style: Coexistence Rather than an “Agreement”

For Libicki, the conflict between Rome and the FSSPX is ultimately doctrinal rather than liturgical.

He recalls that Benedict XVI demanded “an unambiguous acceptance of the Second Vatican Council,” a condition that prevented a settlement.

By contrast, Libicki argues that Francis adopted a different governing approach.

He points to the reception of the deviant Fiducia supplicans [!] as an illustration: “For Benedict XVI such a situation was unacceptable; for Francis - regardless of intentions - it became, in effect, a model for how the Church functions.”

In this context, Libicki notes that Francis granted FSSPX priests faculties to hear confessions and assist at marriages without requiring prior doctrinal declarations.

Evil China Agreement as a Precedent

Libicki further argues that the Vatican’s agreement with communist China weakens objections to a canonical solution for the FSSPX. If Rome can recognize bishops selected under an atheist regime, then objections to flexibility toward the Society lose credibility.

“If, in the name of Church unity, such far-reaching compromises are accepted toward a state openly hostile to Christianity,” he argues, “the argument that no canonical solution can be found for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X loses much of its persuasive force.”

Need for a Decision

Libicki concludes that Pope Leo XIV will have to address the issue.

He notes that personal prelatures, ordinariates, or similar structures already exist within canon law. “What is lacking is not instruments, but decision,” he writes.

Picture: Jan Filip Libicki © wikicommons, CC BY-SA, #newsRamcswiasw
71.2K

What does it mean “to accept “? Where are the anathemas ? Where is the new creed? The modernists tried some dogmatic sleight of hand but they pretended there was nothing new just development of doctrine. Make them state their propositions clearly.

foward

A Catholic cannot accept the Second Vatican Council. Nor those documents contrary to Christian morality.

Were not the Second Vatican Council Fathers and the Supreme Pontiff who called for, convened and presided over its opening Catholic?

foward

Yes, it was the bishops, so many bishops who signed it.
But the content is not Catholic.

@la verdad prevalece Seeking approval from a sitting Pope pursuant to Canon Law is not sinful. Sedevacantism is a heresy.

The China argument is persuasive, but comparing 1988 with today is not. The central issue in 1988 was the TLM. Today it is the rejection of the heretical and false teachings of the Second Vatican Council which were under the radar in 1988.

They want the approval of the apostate and gay activist Robert Prevost, who openly defies the laws of God, the laws of the Church, and Catholic morality. Apostate Robert Prevost: "All Religions Are Mothers. All Believers are Brothers"
Here we see the anti-church of the Antichrist that Anne Catherine Emmerich prophesied, where false religions are gathered together with apostate Catholics under a false pope. The fraternity calls the apostate Prevost "pope," the same one who, violating the first commandment, approves of false religions such as Islam, shamanism, Hinduism, etc., and tells heretics and schismatics that he is one with them. One truly has to be blind to want to make a pact with an apostate homosexual sect. Robert Prevost has "de facto" nullified the requirement for salvation that all human beings receive the sacrament of Baptism and believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Prevost taught them that Christ is not necessary for salvation, which is a sin of apostasy.