An interview with Father Daniele di Sorco, given to the Italian District of the Society of Saint Pius X, explores whether the current crisis of the Church generates a true state of spiritual necessity.
Excerpt from FSSPX News
SSPX Italia — What would you respond to Catholics who recognize the problematic nature of these episodes (common interreligious prayer of Assisi, kiss of the Koran by John Paul II, Pachamama ceremony at the Vatican and reception of Sarah Mullally), but consider the reaction of the Society of Saint Pius X as excessive or unjustified?
Abbot Di Sorco — There are indeed Catholics who we call conservatives and who oppose these excesses.
For example, Catholics who do not accept the legitimization of homosexuality, who do not accept the communion of the divorced and remarried, who experience strong perplexities in front of documents like that of Abu Dhabi, where it is said that all religions are the fruit of the will of God, that they constitute a wealth willed by God.
The problem is that these conservatives stop there.
They refuse, let’s say, the second phase of modernism, but they accept the first. They fail to understand that these developments in the moral or dogmatic domain are nothing other than the logical consequences of the errors of the Second Vatican Council.
Very often, then, these conservative Catholics complain. Some may even write articles on the Internet, but their reaction stops there. They do not think that we should also do something practical, as the Fraternity does, in order to resolve the problem and, above all, in order to allow those who remain Catholic to benefit from traditional teaching and traditional sacraments.
In other words, they do not realize that there is little point in criticizing certain excesses of the current magisterium if, then, there are no priests to offer this type of teaching, if there are no priests who teach Catholic doctrine as it has always been taught and who celebrate the sacraments as they have always been celebrated.
This is the main problem.
SSPX Italia — The reference to the state of necessity made by the Society of Saint Pius.
According to some, it would be a vague concept, devoid of precise definition, developed by the Fraternity itself or, in any case, inapplicable to the current situation, in which it would not be absolutely impossible to access the sacraments and traditional preaching, for example at the Ecclesia Dei institutes.
Others further argue that, even assuming that a state of necessity exists, it would not be sufficient to justify the measures taken by the Brotherhood.
Can you first explain what is the difference between a simple crisis in the Church and a true state of necessity, how the latter is defined by moral theology and by Church law, and what are the sources which define its contours?
Abbot Di Sorco — The crisis in the Church is to the state of necessity what the cause is to the effect. There is a crisis in the Church and this crisis produces a state of necessity.
However, as canonists teach us, the state of necessity is not defined in the legislative texts of the Church. We do not find it in the Code of Canon Law, we do not find it in other texts and, therefore, we must resort to doctrine, that is to say what doctors of law teach us canonical.
What do canonists say about this?
The state of necessity is a situation in which a danger exists: a danger to the body, in which case we will speak of physical necessity, or a danger to the soul, in which case we will speak of spiritual necessity. However, this danger means that we may not follow certain laws, precisely because, in this particular case, compliance with certain laws becomes harmful, and we can on the contrary benefit from certain privileges, from certain prerogatives provided for by law.
Read the entire interview here
Leave a Reply