hotpixel

Pope: "It has set on me"

Comments: Pope Benedict XVI.
11. March 2009 After weeks of silence, the Pope answered his critics: In a personal letter to hold the bishops adopted Benedict XVI. Position on its controversial decision, the excommunication of the traditionalist bishops Piusbruderschaft repealed. With reference to the criticism of civil society is also, indirectly, on the intervention of Chancellor Merkel reference. The Pope acknowledges margins that justifies oncoming but his attitude to the bid as Piusbrüdern reconciliation.
We give the letter in its full length again.

Dear brethren in the Episcopal service!

The lifting of the excommunication of the four of Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988 without a mandate from the Holy See has consecrated bishops, both within and outside the Catholic Church from a variety of reasons, to a discussion of a violence led, as we no longer have experienced. Many bishops felt helpless before an event, which came unexpectedly and barely positive in the questions and tasks of the Church of today was to classify. Although many pastors and believers desire the reconciliation of the pope is to be welcomed in principle, were prepared to stand but on the other hand, the question of the appropriateness of such a gesture, given the real urgencies devout life in our time. Several groups, however, accused the pope openly behind the council want to go back to an avalanche of protests began to move, their bitterness was visible injuries, the moment on the boundary. So I feel pressured to you, dear brethren, a clarifying word, to which should help to understand the intentions, which me and the competent organs of the Holy See in this step have been conducting. I hope in this way to peace in the church help.

One for me unpredictable mishap was that the lifting of the excommunication was overlaid by the Williamson case. The silent gesture of mercy to four valid but not legally consecrated bishops appeared suddenly as something quite different: as a rejection of the christlichjüdische reconciliation, the withdrawal of what the council in this matter to the way the church has declared. For an invitation to reconciliation with a church group of donors was in this way, the reverse has become an apparent back behind all the steps of the reconciliation of Christians and Jews, since the council was gone and the un d mitzugehen forward from the start, a goal of my theological work had been. The fact that this superposition of two opposing processes occur and peace between Christians and Jews as well as peace in the church for a moment disturbed, I can only deeply regret. I hear that closely follow the news on the Internet allowing access would, in time for the problem to obtain knowledge. I learn from the fact that we have the Holy See on this news source in the future, careful attention. Saddens me that even Catholics who know better were ready with sharp hostility to drive me to believe. Even more so, I thank the Jewish friends who have helped the misunderstanding quickly from the world to create and atmosphere of friendship and trust, which - like the time of Pope John Paul II - also during the entire period of my Pontificate had passed, and God continues to exist.

A further breakdown, which I sincerely regret, is that boundary and scope of the measure, 21 1. 2009 for the publication of the process is not clearly enough depicted them. The excommunication meets people, not institutions. Episcopal consecration without papal mandate, the danger of a schism, because it is the unity of the Bishops' College with the Pope in question. The Church must, therefore, with the harshest punishment of excommunication, react, and to be punished to repentance and back into the unit. 20 years after the ordinations this goal is unfortunately still not been achieved. The withdrawal of the excommunication serves the same purpose as the punishment itself: once the four bishops invited to return. This gesture was made possible after the affected their fundamental recognition of the pope and his shepherds had violence, albeit with reservations about the obedience to his Lehrautorität and against the concerns of the Vatican. This brings me to the distinction between person and body back. The solution of excommunication was a measure in the field of church discipline: The people were the heaviest burden of conscience punishment exempt church. From this level, the disciplinary doktrinelle field to differentiate. That the brotherhood of Pius X. no canonical status in the church has not really based on disciplinary, but on doctrinal reasons. While the Brotherhood no canonical status in the church, as long as its officials have no legal offices in the church. It is therefore necessary to distinguish between the persons as persons concerned disciplinary level and the level of doctrine, in the office and institution in question. To say it once again to say: As long as the doctrinal issues are not resolved, the Brotherhood has no canonical status in the church and its officials while practicing, even if the church penalty-free, no posts legally in the church.


Given this situation, I intend to the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei", which since 1988 for those communities and individuals is responsible for the Brotherhood of Pius X. or similar groups coming into full communion with the Pope to return in the future with faith congregation to connect. This should be apparent that the problems now being treated much more doctrinal in nature, especially the adoption of the Second Vatican Council and the teaching of the popes nachkonziliaren concern. The collegial organs with which the Congregation of the questions dealt with costs (especially the regular meeting at the Cardinal on Wednesday and the one-to two-year General Assembly), to guarantee the involvement of the Roman prefect of various congregations of the world and in the episcopacy to be precipitated decisions. You can not Lehrautorität the church in 1962 and freeze - that the Brotherhood should be clear. But some of those who see themselves as great defenders of the Vatican excel, it must also be remembered that the Second Vatican Council Lehrgeschichte the whole of the church in itself. Who wants to be obedient to him, must have the faith of the centuries and may not accept the cut roots from which the tree lives.

I hope, dear brethren, so that the positive meaning as well as the limit of the measure, 21 1. 2009 is clarified. But now the question remains: Was it necessary? Was that really a priority? Is there not much more important? Of course, there are more important and urgent. I think that I am the priorities of the pontificate in my speeches to the top have made clear. It then said my guideline remains unchanged. The first priority for the successor to Peter, the Lord in the Supper Room unequivocally fixed: "You, however, strengthen your brethren" (Lk 22, 32). Peter himself did in his first letter this priority rephrased: "Be always ready to answer every question and to stand by the hope of asking who is in you" (1 Peter 3, 15). In our time, in the belief in large parts of the world threatens to go out like a flame, which no longer find food, is the first priority, to make God present in this world and give people access to God to open. Not to be any God, but to the God who has spoken at Sinai, to the God whose face we are in love until the very end (Jn 13, 1) - in the crucified and risen Jesus Christ. The real problem of our history lesson is that God made the horizon of the people and that disappears with the cessation of light coming from God disorientation in mankind falls, its destructive effects, we always get to see more.

The people of God in the Bible speaking of God, is the supreme and fundamental priority of the church and successor of Peter at this time. From then it is obvious that we want the unity of believers must go. Their dispute, her inner conflict, the speech of God in question. Therefore, the effort to the common witness of the Christian faith - the Church - in the highest priority included. Then there is the necessity that all who believe in God, seek peace with each other, trying to become closer to each other, so differences in their image of God but to share the source of light to go - the inter-religious dialogue. Those who love God as proclaimed to the end, the witness must give the love, the suffering in love turned to hatred and enmity fend off the social dimension of Christian faith, which I in the encyclical "Deus caritas est" have spoken.

If so, the struggle for the faith to hope and to love in the world the true priority for the Church in this hour (and always in different forms), then it also includes the small and medium-sized reconciliation with them. That the quiet hingehaltenen a hand gesture to a great noise, and just as the opposite of reconciliation has become, we must take note. But now I have to wonder: Was it really is wrong, even here the brother entgegenzugehen, "which has something against you" to try and reconciliation (cf. Mt 5, 23f)? Do not also the civil society are trying to prevent radicalization, their possible carrier - if possible - zurückzubinden in the major creative forces of social life to cutting oneself off with all its consequences be avoided? Can it be entirely wrong to seek the solution of cramps and to seek and narrowing the space for what is positive to find and insert it into the whole thing? I myself, in the years after 1988 seen by the return of previously separated from Rome in communities where the interior climate has changed, how the return to the big wide unilateral and joint church activities overcame cramps and dissolved, so that now resulting positive forces for the whole thing was. Can a community totally indifferent to it in the 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 Seminars, 88 schools, 2 university institutes, 117 brothers and 164 sisters are? Should we really calmed down from the church wegtreiben approved? I am thinking, for example, of the 491 priests. The fabric of their motivations, we can not know. But I think that they are not for the priesthood had decided, if not next to some sick Schiefen or the love of Christ would have been there and the will to him and with him the living God proclaim. Should we simply represent a radical fringe group from the search for reconciliation and unity off? What will be?

Certainly, we have long and again when many Mißtöne reason given by representatives of this community - pride and superior, fixation in one-sidedness into it, etc. It must be the truth because I add that I also a number of moving testimonies of gratitude have received in where an opening of hearts became evident. But the big church should not even be magnanimous in the knowledge of the long breath, she has the knowledge of the promise which it is? Should we not, as some educators right unsatisfactory over and quietly listen to the narrowness of the mainstream we strive? And we must not admit that even in church circles Mißtönendes come? Sometimes one has the impression that our society needs at least one group, the opposite of tolerance is no need to give, to the quiet man with hatred must go And who dared touch it - in this case the pope - was himself the right to tolerance and was deprived without shyness and reticence also hate to be considered.

Dear brethren, in the days in which my mind was to write this letter, it was found by chance that I am in seminary at the center of Rome Gal 5, 13-15 to interpret and comment on before him. I was surprised how it directly from the presence of this hour talking about: "Do not use your freedom as a pretext for the meat, but rather, serve one another in love! The whole Law is summarized in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself! If it bites, ripping each other, then give care that you do not kill each other. "I was always inclined to this sentence as one of the rhetorical excesses to which it occasionally at the St. Paul there. In some respects it may be also. But unfortunately, there is the "biting and tearing to pieces" even today in the church as an expression of a poorly understood freedom. Is it surprising that we are not better than the Galatians? That we at least have the same temptations threaten? The fact that we have the right use of freedom is always new to learn? And we always new that the first priority must learn: the love? On the day I know seminary to speak, was in Rome, the feast of the Madonna della Fiducia our Lady of Confidence - perpetrated. In fact - Maria teaches us the confidence. It leads us to the Son, which we all expect. He will guide us - even in turbulent times. So I would like at the end of all the many bishops of heart thanks to me at this time moving sign of trust and affection, but above all their prayers have a gift. We also thank all the faithful to me during this time their unchanged fidelity to the successor of St. Peter have testified. The Lord preserve us all and lead us to the path of peace. This is a wish that spontaneously from my heart rises, especially now at the beginning of Lent, a liturgical period of time that the inner purification is particularly beneficial, and invites us all with new hope for the glowing goal of Easter to watch.

With a special Apostolic Blessing, I

Yours in the Lord


From the Vatican, on 10 March 2009

I ran out of steam trying to read this, but he seems to be saying that he wouldn't have rehabiitated Williamson if he had known about his track-record of holocaust denial, but he didn't know about it because they don't use the internet to find out these things.

Oh sure - they don't investigate with any of the traditional means like asking people a little background information, and they don't get reports or complaints from those who are against his holocaust-denying stance, and the only way they could have found out was on the internet...

Sure.