A Renewed Call for Dialogue with the Fraternity of St.

Peter

There are those who feel that any dialogue with the FSSP (and similar
minded groups or persons) is an attack on the SSPX. Others feel that with
the 1988 consecrations the SSPX necessarily and clearly broke communion
with the Church. I disagree with both of these positions; which is why I
feel no qualms about the proposed dialogue which I---and others--- are
trying to conduct; a dialogue which should not in any way preclude serious
analysis on the basis of the Faith. I believe that traditional Catholics
must attempt to understand and analyse the FSSP's positions----since they
claim to be both traditional and Conciliar---- in the light of the Faith
without any cynicism or a priori judgments, as fellow Catholics and do so
as openly and as honestly as is expected of Christians. The problem is that
the FSSP does not allow its doctrinal positions to be scrutinized. It
simply does not publish them. Fr. Deviller, District superior, on a chat
line recently suggested this is because the questions are too complex,
there is no time, FSSP priests differ on some of the questions, etc. This
is disconcerting to traditional Catholics who contend that to opt for
Tradition in our time of apostasy and travail is to opt for positions which
can be articulated.

FSSP officials need to reconsider answering questions such as those which

follow via position papers, tracts or books---or some such vehicles of
dialogue with Catholic people, since otherwise one only has rumor---and
sometimes fears--- to base opinions on. Such books or position papers would
make such questions as we submit here unnecessary and would preempt the
suspicions that many have---not just the SSPX people--- that the FSSP has
struck a Faustian bargain with neo-modernist bishops that would reduce
traditional Catholics to becoming a mere "side chapel" in a theologically
pluralistic Church. If this is not so there should be reasons which can be
adduced to show it. The absence of a theological literature is clearly a
detriment in an organization which suggests it has a special charism
relating to Tradition. Certainly, the very least that can be said is that
the Society of St. Pius X and other Traditionalists have not in any way
failed to articulate their positions from the very beginning, whatever else
one may think of them (I am not a partisan to any particular organization
as such but am partisan to all who hold the traditional Catholic Faith);
this speaks volumes for their intellectual and spiritual integrity. We must
all confess the Faith when the Faith is threatened (Rom 10:17).

The FSSP----and similar-minded groups or individuals---- should be able to

explain to Catholics whether it accepts or repudiates the new ecumenical
developments----refraining from all ad hominem attacks on groups or
persons--- and to explain the breadth of the theological diversity it
tolerates within its ranks. What is needed is not vague generalities,
evasive answers, or abstruse dissertations----much less ad hominem attacks
and smokescreens which have greeted some who, in good faith, have sought
real answers to simple but crucial questions. There is a new passivity
afoot today which thinks itself superior to apologetics and which equates
the Faith with the Mass only. This has never been the Catholic way.
Apologetics in our day involves confessing and defending the Faith against
the neo-modernism which would subvert it and rob souls of its eternal
consolations.

Following are some of the questions we propose (many more could and should
be added):

"1.) Does the FSSP view the 1986 Assisi prayer meeting of religions as a
legitimate development of tradition or as seriously problematic from the
standpoint of Catholic tradition? Many suggest a mutation has occured here.
What is the FSSP's position on this and similar events?

2.) What is the FSSP's view of the Concilar position on religious liberty?
Legitimate development or is it seriously problematic? This needs to be
explained.

3.) Does the FSSP believe there is an organic development between the
pre-Conciliar and Conciliar Popes regarding ecumenism in general? Can the
ecumenism of today be reconciled with the detailed teachings of Mortalium
Animos (or even Holy Scripture), for example?

4.) Does the FSSP view the Novus Ordo Mass as representing any danger to
the faith of Catholics on account of its theological deletions and general
desacralization? Is the Mass the only issue in the fight against
neo-modernism? Do FSSP priests celebrate the Novus Ordo? Can FSSP priests
refuse to do so on the grounds that it represents a diminution of the
Faith?

5.) If, as the FSSP has suggested, it has always been the Catholic Church's
teaching that what belongs to the magisterium can only be determined by the
magisterium, then does the FSSP necessarily conclude that everything taught
by the Concilar Popes----e.g., Ut Unum Sint; forthcoming ecumenical
martyrology, etc---- is consistent with the Ordinary Magisterium and can be
found in the magisterium of the pre-Vatican II Church, at least implicitly?
This is no radical break?

6). Does the FSSP confess the faith by pointing out errors and those in
error (Rom 10:17; 2 Tim 4:2) in the face of the modernism in the Church
today? How if there are no position papers? Are there no position papers
because there is no consenus regarding issues?

7). Where does the FSSP stand on other issues such as evolutionism
(Teilhardian or otherwise), biblical criticism, the new collegiality, etc?
Does the FSSP view the above issues as mere details over which true
Catholics may differ?

These are some questions Catholics should ask FSSP priests and ANY Catholic
priest in this time of apostasy and confusion.

If you wish to write to the FSSP their e-mail address is:

fssp@trincomm.org

Home