Rorate Caeli

For the record: La Croix [Updated]

Chapel of the headquarters of the
French Episcopal Conference, Paris
The semi-official daily of the French episcopate, La Croix, reports the following today:

Questioned Thursday, April 12, by La Croix, Fr. Alain Lorans, spokesman of the SSPX [Society of Saint Pius X], said that "Bp. Fellay [Superior General of the Society] will not speak on this matter (note: the letter sent to Rome) before the Holy See's response is known", leaving to Rome the responsibility for the publication of the final decision.

WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE SCENARIOS?

If the Society signs the agreement, the Holy See will propose to it a particular canonical statute, in the form of a personal prelature, as that of the Opus Dei. Before erecting a personal prelature, the Holy See must, according to Code 294 of Canon Law [sic], previously consult with "the concerned episcopal conferences".

Nonetheless, the dossier is made complicated by tensions that exist within the Fraternity, some being violently opposed to an agreement with Rome. Among the possible scenarios, one or several Lefebvrist bishops could refuse to join, in which case they would be excommunicated once again. [sic]

"If they say no, it will be necessary that they explain why not and, in such case, their refusal will involve doctrinal questions. They thus risk not schism anymore, but heresy," explains Fr. Laurent Touze, vice-dean of the University of the Holy Cross in Rome [and member of the Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei].

WHAT IS THE CURRENT MOOD?

According to converging sources, the conclusion of a settlement would be on the right track. In Rome asd in Écône, it is said that, "if the Society does not sign now, it will never sign."

Conscious of the tensions within the Fraternity, Bp. Fellay insisted on the theme of obedience in his homily of [the Chrism Mass in] Holy Thursday. "We grow the habits, precisely, of independence. We do not notice it anymore. We wish to do what we want. These are defects, bad habits, that are the result of the situation in which we find ourselves and to which attention must be paid." [For an audio of the relevant Écône sermon in French, click here.]

On the side of the dioceses, particularly in France, the signing of the agreement will quite probably provoke strong reactions and incomprehensions. "I fear the triumphalism of the Society and the reaction of my parishioners," a young priest who came from the Traditionalist ranks said worriedly on Thursday, April 12. "Most will behave like the older brother of the parable, unhappy with the return of the prodigal son, and this even more because the prodigal son may not arrive with the lowered head, in an attitude of asking for forgiveness."


CÉLINE HOYEAU [Source: La Croix; Tip: Fecit Forum]
___________________________

[Update: Other declarations, granted to Italian news source TMNews:]
"We are sending the response to the Vatican, then we expect a response from the Vatican," declared [Father Lorans,] ... "only after that we will be able to communicate officially with journalists."
...
The spokesman of the Lefebvrians specifies at the moment that the temporal indication [the April 15 date] "was not an ultimatum, but a due date". Regarding the communication that Bp. Fellay is sending these days to Rome, it would not consist in a true and proper second response, but in some "clarifications", that, in any event, "do not modify substantially the first reponse". For Father Lorans, consequently, "things will be clarified in the next few days." [Source and tip: Papa Ratzinger Blog]

47 comments:

Barbara said...

This situation is constantly in my prayers - a little apprehensively, I might add, after reading the possible scenarios. It has to come to an end though. In my humble view,the time is ripe. We absolutely need the FSSPX fully active in the Church. And the people who don't want it or don't like it will jolly well get used to it in the end! I'm pretty sure Our Lord wants it unless someone can explain to me why He wouldn't..

Optimist said...

It looks like a deal is about to be reached between Rome and the FSSPX. Deo Gratias!

Historic Wag said...

Heresy? For what? For questioning the idea that people have the right to be free of legal restriction in publicly propagating their theological errors and evils?

If so, Galileo will be nothing compared to the spectacle of this.

Steve said...

"If they say no, it will be necessary that they explain why not and, in such case, their refusal will involve doctrinal questions. They thus risk not schism anymore, but heresy," explains Fr. Laurent Touze, vice-dean of the University of the Holy Cross in Rome [and member of the Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei]."

This statement alone should be enough for them to say "no deal." Heresy!? Seriously?

If Rome truly believes that novel doctrines inspired out of the ambiguity of a pastoral Council must be adhered to as dogma, what POSSIBLE hope is there of the Society working for Tradition in the Church? This man has just said Tradition = heresy!

Hans Kung believes Christ did not rise from the dead, there was no virgin birth. He is still in "full communion"! Yet the Society will be charged with heresy if they do not agree with ecumenism?

Absolutely mind-blowing. The Society should run for the hills. These men have lost all Catholic sense.

M. A. said...

"in the end! I'm pretty sure Our Lord wants it."

Yes, and possibly to be crucified.

There has to be a distinct alignment of camps so that we will clearly see who the real enemies of Christ are. Come what may, we must cling to the Apostolic faith,the faith once delivered to the apostles, not that imposter of the "living" faith of aggiornamento.

Cling to our Lady and her rosary! These will be the times in which without our Lady's special assistance many will be deceived.

richard said...

"Most will behave like the older brother of the parable, unhappy with the return of the prodigal son."

Well, *I* would be honored and pleased to welcome the Society back into full regular status (they have always been Catholic), and I would hope that everyone else will feel the same - but I am not naive enough to think it so, alas.

I hope this ends up being something better than a personal prelature. Waiting to hear P.K.T.P. weigh in in three, two, one...

Francis said...

"I fear the triumphalism of the Society and the reaction of my parishioners," a young priest who came from the Traditionalist ranks said worriedly on Thursday, April 12. "Most will behave like the older brother of the parable, unhappy with the return of the prodigal son, and this even more because the prodigal son may not arrive with the lowered head, in an attitude of asking for forgiveness."

This is just more modernist garbage!! Why should the SSPX have "lowered heads"?! The SSPX aren't the ones who abandoned the Catholic faith! If anyone should have their heads low it should be many inside the conciliar church!

M. A. said...

"They thus risk not schism anymore, but heresy," explains Fr. Laurent Touze, vice-dean of the University of the Holy Cross in Rome [and member of the Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei]."
___________________

The above is, I think, just a scare tactic to keep the SSPX away. They are afraid.

Heresy? Hilarious!

Adfero said...

"... the prodigal son may not arrive with the lowered head, in an attitude of asking for forgiveness."

I think the father is the one, in this case, whose head should be lowered begging humble forgiveness.

Steve said...

"Personal Prelature" means, you exist in a diocese with permission of the bishop. If he doesn't want you there, he can boot you out.

And even if he can't, if the Society wants to move in to a new diocese, the bishop has to approve it. Seems like a terrible structure for the Society.

I am not Spartacus said...

ALL Traditionalist Catholics ought fervently pray and work for the restoration of Triumphalism for that is how we are Divinely-Constituted.

Triumphalism IS Tradition.

Who'n'hell was it who had the bright idea that we would be about the the work of Our Lord- SALVATION - effectively if we humbled Holy Mother Church to the point where she is virtually indistinguishable from all of the false religions?

Triumphalism is a much to be desired quality because it is a GIFT from God and not the work of human hands.

Look, I am all for this that or the other Pope practicing personal humility but to humble Holy Mother Church? Please, that , imo, is an act of ungrateful perfidy.

RESTORE TRIUMPHALISM ought be the motto/rallying cry/demand of any Traditionalist worth his salt.

New Catholic said...

This is a news article, let us not enter in another debate on canon law details of something we do not even know if it might happen or not... The report itself does not even say "Code of Canon Law", but simply "Canon Law" (hence the "sic"), therefore read it with caution...

Rusticus Mus said...

I suspect we are approaching the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart. We have just celebrated the triumph of Our Lord, through his crucifixion, death the resurrection, and, as our Blessed Mother is Co-Redemptrix with Our Lord, justice demands triumph of Her Immaculate Heart. We are approaching the end of the SSPX's rosary crusade, and based on the spectacular success of the last one..... anything can happen.

Hugh said...

The SSPX can afford to wait until the liberalism characterisitic of today's church is firmly at an end. Bishop Fellay always wanted to bring the Confraternity into the modern church. This was certainly no secret in the ealier part of his tenure of office. The price he will pay if he does so at present will be more costly on The Society if he yields to threats of accusations of "heresy" and "re-excommunication" than if he holds firm and propagates The Faith succoured by Sacred Tradition rather than its contemporary "living" mutation. This will stifle The Society ultimately far more than if it stands firm. What is on offer resembles a mess of potage and no more than this.
Where are the Indult Societies after all the years of compromises with this modern church? They have made little comparative progress.

Matt said...

.....Historic Wag said, "Heresy? For what? For questioning the idea that people have the right to be free of legal restriction in publicly propagating their theological errors and evils? If so, Galileo will be nothing compared to the spectacle of this."

.....Steve said, "If Rome truly believes that novel doctrines inspired out of the ambiguity of a pastoral Council must be adhered to as dogma, what POSSIBLE hope is there of the Society working for Tradition in the Church? This man has just said Tradition = heresy!"

Wag, Steve, I think what is meant by this is, if the Society comes back into the Church and the hold-outs don't, they then become an individual issue. They had the sanction so to speak of moving about within the Society as a part of a whole. Should once the Society move into the Church and those individuals don't, de facto, they are no longer part of the entity and thus remain on the outside.

I'm concerned about the idea of prelature over an ordinariate. A prelature is worthless. A prelature is governance, NOT jurisdiction. An Ordinariate is jurisdiction.

It doesn't matter whether Opus Dei has one. They are hampered from one diocese/parish to the next as any another group is in the Church. This is why an ordinariate was granted to the Roman Catholics of Anglican Use. If they had been granted a prelature, they would not be able to operate within their own context, and be subject to the whim and caprice of the Locals. Opus Dei has to deal with this very same thing.

Now, regarding, "Most will behave like the older brother of the parable, unhappy with the return of the prodigal son." I think this is stupid. how petty and condescending is it even to think the SSPX should even have to act like that? WHEN (thinking positive) they come back in, they should hold their heads high. Is this where it's going now, escalating this to another level where now their attitude needs to be called into question? When these dang liberals do that, we'll talk. Until then, SSPX, HOLD YOURS HEADS UP!!

MATT

Ferraiuolo said...

Lets us not puff ourselves up. Now more than ever, prayers are required.

Bernonensis said...

Christ is risen!

Return of the prodigal son, eh? I remember reading somewhere that when the Ukrainians were reunited with the Church at the Union of Brest, many of the clergy explained it to their flocks by saying that the Pope had joined the Orthodox Church. If there is some kind of accord in the offing, might we witness similar "explanations" of the "return" of the SSPX?

Bartholomew said...

Let me make this clear: the SSPX will NOT accept a Personal Prelature. That is NOT the canonical structure which is being offered by the Holy See.

Sue said...

"We saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire." Third Secret of Fatima

The Angel is there still, sword in hand, with or without an agreement.

P.K.T.P. said...

Here we go again, back to the unworkable personal prelature form, even after Bishop Fellay has said that it will NOT be that, and he has said so recently (and as reported on this blog). If it is to be that, the Society should not sign, no matter what the consequences will be. That structure would be the death warrant of the Society, as it requires that apostolates require the permission of the local bishop to begin, under Canon 297.

I suspect, however, that, yet again, this is misinformation from the usual cads. They just keep recirculating their old notes, and these notes are based on their ignorance. This is just more spin from the usual ignoranti in the unintelligentsia.

P.K.T.P.

P.K.T.P. said...

Let's separate what's reliable here from what comes from the illiterati at La Croix. Assuming that said illiterati are at least not liars, and given also the second source from Fr. Lorans, we can conclude that the S.S.P.X has now submitted (or is today submitting) the latest clarification requested by Benedict XVI. That means that the ball is in Rome's court.

As for the canonical structure, La Croix is likely just re-circulating and speculating. If so, I would not even say that its guesses are educated or informed guesses, and they do carry a bias. La Croix is a semi-official (meaning not an official) organ of the French Episcopal Conference. That body is not exactly a friend to tradition, so I urge everyone to remain calm (including myself). I am sure that the Pope will not offer and the Society will not accept an unworkable canonical form, such as a personal prelature. But we are not at that stage yet. Before we get there, the Pope will likely want to respond to the Society on theological grounds. Either the Society's latest clarifications will be found to be acceptable or not or some will and others will not be. In any case, the Pope's reaction is anyone's guess. Despite what some priest says about this, we do not know that he would 're-excommunicate' anyone. There are a variety of sanctions at his disposal and this priest does not even know the content of the Doctrinal Preamble or its amendments. None of us do.

Prayer and calm assurance should be our sole response for now. I would add a prayer that, come what may, there will be no personal prelature or any structure in which the Society would be in any way subjected to the control of the local bishops.

P.K.T.P.

JMJ Ora Pro Nobis said...

For the SSPX to be guilty of heresy, someone would have to show what dogmas of the faith they are contradicting, now they will never be able to do this:
1)Because the SSPX are contradicting no dogmas of the faith, the worst they can be accussed of is opposing the ordinary and authentic magisterium of the Church, which would make them disobedient and not heretics. Of course we all know that they are right and it is those in Rome who have departed from the faith and not the other way round
2)Rome doesn't believe in Heresy anymore or at least many in Rome don't

Also judging by the way Rome treats heretics, they would be better off being accused of heresy than disobedience!

As for the return of the prodigal son, the arrogance of these people astounds me! As if it is the Society who have done the wrong thing and not those who have decimated the vineyard of Our Lord!

Brian said...

"We are sending the response to the Vatican, then we expect a response from the Vatican," declared [Father Lorans,] ... "only after that we will be able to communicate officially with journalists."

the temporal indication [the April 15 date] "was not an ultimatum, but a due date". Regarding the communication that Bp. Fellay is sending these days to Rome, it would not consist in a true and proper second response, but in some "clarifications", that, in any event, "do not modify substantially the first reponse". For Father Lorans, consequently, "things will be clarified in the next few days."


This information is the only news here, the rest is just spin.

Jan said...

RESTORE TRIUMPHALISM ought be the motto/rallying cry/demand of any Traditionalist worth his salt.

Oh Spartacus Not, I am with you. But I've had a drink.

Prof X said...

In Church history, two types of "reformers" have emerged: those who work WITHIN the Church, and those who LEAVE the Church and work from the OUTSIDE. The former group consists of a great number of saints -- the latter group protestants and schismatics.

The situation of the SSPX is admittedly a complicated one - and I suggest that most fair-minded people would agree that they exist in a unique limbo between being OUTSIDE versus INSIDE the Church.

Does that make them saintly or schismatic?

I think it's high time to resolve any ambiguity once and for all, and to reconcile with Rome. Too many souls are at stake.

Blast from the past said...

Romanus said...

Mr Perkins, when the personal prelature will be established, which of course would include provisions for those two essential questions, you will still say that it is not a personal prelature. You simply ignore -and mistakenly deny- that a personal prelature is the most flexible of all options.

I wish you would leave the matter to the experts, instead of confusing the readers with your amateur knowledge of canon law. Should I remind you that only a few weeks go you maintained that jurisdiction is required for the validity of a confirmation?

Your comments are usually helpful, but in canonical matters you should be more circumspect.

01 August, 2009 09:39

Knight of Malta said...

@Hugh: The SSPX can afford to wait until the liberalism characterisitic of today's church is firmly at an end.

You might be right, but you might be wrong.

I would submit--to the chagrin of many--that now, under PBXVI, is an opportune time for SSPX to regularize.

From the episode of the Hawaii 6 to the lifting of the excommunications, Pope Benedict (or, then Cardinal) has shown himself one of the greatest friends of the Society in modernist Rome.

I would also submit that +Fellay ardently wants regularization; why else the Rosary Crusades?

But how do we make oil (Tradition) mix with water (Modernism)? Only God knows. But the more oil is added, the more water is dispersed.

St. Athanasius was disunited from Rome, but only for a time, before he was brought back in. Certainly he wasn't brought back in when the Church had it's praxis straightened; so, unity can happen amongst difference.

I hope and pray that Rome and Econe can agree to disagree, in humility, and mesh in humility, ala the St. Benedict Society in MA.

Canisius said...

Heresy because the conceptual grounds to sustain that the SSPX could function as a catholic organization no subjected to the jurisdictional power of the Pope and submitted to him contradicts directly the First Vatican Council.

Bishop Williamson could be perfectly excommunicated under these charges.

"Wherefore we teach and declare that,
by divine ordinance,
the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that
this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both
episcopal and
immediate.
Both clergy and faithful,
of whatever rite and dignity,
both singly and collectively,
are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this
not only in matters concerning faith and morals,
but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world."

NIANTIC said...

I noticed the photo of the Chapel of the French Episcopal Conference in Paris. Looks like a typical Union hall or Protestant meeting room. Cold and barren, devoid of anything lifting the soul to God.
So this is the place the French Episcopate recharges their batteries to attack Tradition, beauty and anything which glorifies God and His Holy Church.
It figures. These Modernists ought to hang their heads in shame, IF they had any shame at all. What a sorry bunch.

P.K.T.P. said...

J.M.J.'s analysis is exactly right. More importantly, it undercuts this entire article from La Croix. The so-called scenarios set forth here are just wild speculation from jackasses and ignoramuses.

Rome cannot find them to be heretics. The charge of schism will be difficult to make too, given the Pope's own admission that there is a state of necessity at least in some parts of the world.

Don't trust a word the liberals say. They have their agenda, and it comes from the fiery pit.

P.K.T.P.

P.K.T.P. said...

Canisius is wrong here, of course. He need to read what the Code says on heresy and schism. The Society does not deny the scope of the Pope's authority, but that authority is plenary, not absolute (see Pastor Æternus). Moreover, the Church has never declared de fide or even doctrinal its 'principles and criteria' that are at issue in the Doctrinal Preamble. This is not a matter of heresy and it is not a matter of schism, as Rome has already said. In order to find that the Society had not case of necessity, Rome would have to offer it real protection from the aberrant bishops. No personal prelature coud manage that. La Croix has not seen the doctrinal preamble, so it is just wheezing nonsense.

P.K.T.P.

Jack O'Malley said...

I agree with non-Spartacus that Triumphalism is appropriate.

Despite Nostra aetate and its indifferentist heterodoxies (I forbear to say heresies), the Catholic Church is the supersession of the Old Covenant as evinced in the words of Our Lord "I come not to destroy the Torah but to fulfill it."

What is unfulfilled is incomplete. Judaism is incomplete without Catholicism. Pace JP2, the Jews are not our "elder brothers in the faith" but rather are deniers of the prophetic realization in Christ Jesus of their own ancient scriptures. The Risen Messiah born of an Immaculate Virgin makes the ancient scriptures obsolete as the means per se of salvation. Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus means absque Christo nulla salus. And Christ is present in His Church and only in His Church. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but through Me." Cardinal Lustiger witnessed to Him that is Truth. Edith Stein witnessed to that Truth. Israel Eugenio Zolli witnessed to that Truth. As did many more. Their Triumph is in the superseding of the obsolete covenant in the New through which their salvation was purchased.

None of this denies the liberty of the Divine Mercy to any and all whom God chooses to favour. May we all be among that elect.

So yes, let Triumphalism and Supersessionism triumph and supersede. Let the Way, the Truth and the Life in this Easter Week and forever be triumphant. Let the Resurrection triumph over the grave.

John L said...

The interesting bit of information in this piece is the quote from the Opus Dei priest. It is of course absurd, but it shows the deep hostility of Opus Dei towards tradition.

Gregorian Mass said...

My most extreme prayers for the Holy Father and the SSPX on these final days. Union must be achieved..

Ora et Labora said...

I enjoyed Bernonensis' comment, it made me chuckle.

"Bernonensis said...
Christ is risen!

Return of the prodigal son, eh? I remember reading somewhere that when the Ukrainians were reunited with the Church at the Union of Brest, many of THE CLERGY EXPLAINED IT TO THEIR FLOCKS BY SAYING THAT THE POPE HAD JOINED THE ORTHODOX CHURCH.=) If there is some kind of accord in the offing, might we witness similar "explanations" of the "return" of the SSPX?"


I keep on praying though.

Zak said...

To a conservative, you're a heretic if you have ever raised your eyebrow even a centimeter at any word that was ever spoken by a pope.

Don't listen to this "assessment." It's just sensational fodder for the media.

--Zak

Ric said...

All this bantering whilst the Lord Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary weep for the Church!
Shame, shame, shame!

Mike said...

Opus Dei has about 90,000 members, about 2,500 priests.

It's absurd to label the whole deal as "anti-Tradition" on a fragmentary quotation from ONE priest.

Many people I know in the Work, in fact, love the TLM; those who are ignorant of it, follow a very Traditional spirituality, which has none of the relativism, indifference, or liturgical goofiness commonly found today.

On the threshold of possible good news for the Church and SSPX and Tradition, I urge good will, restraint, and above all, Charity to all who weigh in on these issues.

Trads should know who their friends are.

Canisius said...

Dear PKTP:

I do not agree with you.

In the same way, it would be impossible to find a formal assessment, for example, in the Neocathecumenal Way from Kiko Arguello) denying any dogma "de fide" defined by the Church. But only a blind catholic could affirm that they are not schismatics and heretics regarding some "de fide" definitions.

In the same way, if the Catholic Church considers that bishop Williamson is inside the Church, it would be appropiate to start a canonical process against him and the compatibility of his behaviour with the Pastor Aeternus Constitutions and its dogmatic decrees.

The doctrinal position that sustains tha it is possible to be within the Church without complete submission to the plenary (as you like) jurisdiction of the office of Peter is a blatant heresy, EVEN in the case of necessity.

So, the statement of the Opus Dei cleric does not reveal hate to the traditionalism. It is a juridical position regarding the canonical situation of a bishop who, after the agreement between Rome and the SSPX, deliberately prefers to be free from the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff as this jurisdiction is dogmatical defined.

That doctrinal position can be qualified as heresy, and the behaviour derived from that position can be considered schismatic, and his author excommunicated by the supreme authority of the Holy Father. Absolutely nothing new in that.

Regards,

Chris said...

Good take on the impending Society answer at the Remnant, with lots of Rorate citations.

http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2012-0415-dupuy-ides-of-april-sspx-rome.htm

The Pope needs the Society "in" to march forward with the "authentic reform." If the Society stays on the "outside", they preserve the TLM and Tradition as it stands now. The Pope wants to slowly transform the fossilized Tradition and Mass of the Society into "living Tradition" and a hybrid Mass (per Cardinal Koch).

Not sure how the Society proposes to work under a Pope to return to fixed Tradition, when said Pope is looking to transform Tradition itself into something entirely different.

Francis said...

This is a very interesting article. What he says is mostly true. Yet the five percent of Vatican II that the SSPX, and other traditional Catholics don't agree with are obviously a big problem.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350219?eng=y

jasoncpetty said...

"We grow the habits, precisely, of independence. We do not notice it anymore. We wish to do what we want. These are defects, bad habits, that are the result of the situation in which we find ourselves and to which attention must be paid."

These are excellent observations; did he develop this much further in the homily? I tried listening, but my comprehension of spoken French just isn't good enough. Does anyone know if there's a transcript?

Bartholomew said...

Re: Magister's Article as cited by Francis.

From the Lamont piece: "...what is the authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church on the points that are in dispute between the FSSPX and the Holy See?"

These have long been settled before the Council. BUT, this IS the conundrum faced by the Holy See -- NOT the FSSPX.

Enoch said...

The La Croix here mentions that "the dossier is made complicated by tensions that exist within the Fraternity, some being violently opposed to an agreement with Rome."

Oh, so true. Looking at the comments here helps to verify this. I've often thought that if the SSPX reconciles, that Bp. Fellay might have to go into hiding, as he would no doubt be harassed by those members and laity in the Society who will not support reconciliation. Remember what happened to the Redemptorists when they reconciled? They said that the stones came from behind, and they are a relatively small group as compared to the SSPX.

The worst persecution that Bp. Fellay (and those other SSPX who go over to Rome) will face will be from others in the SSPX, it's hardline laity supporters, and blogs and websites that support the hardline position.

Bp. Fellay and others, if they reconcile, will need many prayers that they will not flee for fear of the wolves who will definately nip at their heels as they head to Rome. And prayers most especially will be needed for their trad persecutors, since Our Lord requires that we love our enemies and pray for them.

Francis said...

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=14002

Gene O said...

I believe the real infighting is taking place in the Vatican between those who want the SSPX to be excommunicated and those who are sympathetic to their work. The SSPX is rightfully leery of what reconciliation means in a practical sense. They don’t want to enter into a trap and have a pillow stuffed over their face and have their work stifled.

Ora et Labora said...

Enoch I agree with your comment on
13 April, 2012 17:30, I think the rocks and stones are going to come mainly from the hardliners in the Society, and as you said the stones will also come from websites, blogs etc that are opposing a reconcilliation with the Holy See.

We will have to pray for the Society because they will need our prayers.