In the interview below, Bishop Fellay makes some interesting statements.
When referring to Pope Francis, he states “So we have no choice but to think that he does consider us Catholic.” The implication is that this is a good thing – our Holy Father, who really does not grasp what it means to be Catholic, accepts the SSPX as Catholic. This does not set off alarm bells?
When referring to Pope Benedict, he states “He truly wished to put the entire traditional liturgy, not only the Mass, at the disposition of the priests and the faithful; …”. The Pope who has not changed his Liberal views since before Vatican II, truly wanted to do this? Therefore, Bishop Fellay accepts that Pope Benedict also was a supporter of the SSPX and this view is not dangerous to the SSPX.
Bishop Fellay comments on his appointment by the Vatican as a judge of first instance “That is nothing new; it has been the case for over ten years. ” So the cooperation with the Vatican has been going on for at least ten years. This cooperation fits well with the analogy of the “boiling frog”, but he either does not see it or (purposely?) refuses to apply it.
The reaction of the bishops appointed by the Vatican to visit the SSPX seminaries: “They were very satisfied.” Why, what is wrong with the seminaries if these bishops are satisfied?
The question is asked “Is the Society’s role as a counterweight within the Church important?” and he answers “This role is nothing new. Archbishop Lefebvre started it, and we are continuing it… ” He misrepresents the position of the Archbishop who insisted that Rome converts before discussions/recognition/agreement could take place.
The main problem of the SSPX is identified as “The risk of separation is serious. Look at the caricature of Tradition that calls itself the “Resistance”, for example: it is a non-Catholic spirit that is almost sectarian. ” He does not discuss the origin of the risk of separation – his variation from the Roadmap of the Archbishop. He calls the Resistance a caricature of Tradition, the Tradition that he is deviating from. Sectarian – who is really the one leading a sect, a sect that is deviating from his Order’s founder?
When asked about the idea of inserting the proper Offertory into the NOM, he says “I think it would be a great step forward” . Most of us would prefer to forbid the NOM outright, not change it piece by piece.
Why are the supporters of the nSSPX still supporting the nSSPX? Has this bishop not made his position clear enough?
The Archbishop made his position clear: