It is almost unbelievable that it has been over five years since we wrote this (The ball is in whose court?, Feb. 15, 2006) - yet, while the situation has improved tremendously since then (from the motu proprio to the lifting of excommunications, and to the doctrinal discussions), there are aspects discussed then that need to be considered. In 2006, we said:
So, there are two reasons why the "ball" is at this moment far from the FSSPX's "court". First, because while the conditions for dialogue are (apparently) close to their implementation, we will only know that for sure after the papal-curial meeting of late March and afterwards. Second, because, as far as Vatican II is concerned, the message of Benedict XVI, the message that the Council was no "rupture", that one does not have to "accept" Vatican II as something which changed the Faith, because the Conciliar "Fathers had no such mandate and no one had ever given them one" (Papal words), has to reach those huge portions of the Church completely drowned in the "Hermeneutics of Rupture".
At least the first part has to be implemented: in a few months we will know what, if anything concrete, was offered and then we may finally assert that the "ball is in their court".
Now, it is true that something like a canonical solution could eventually be on the table in 2011 - but that has always been true. Remember the One-Two-Three Strategy? If you do not, we will remind you, from April 2006:
The Superior for the District of France of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX/SSPX), Father Régis de Cacqueray [he is still District Superior in 2011], published a communiqué on the official website of the District ... .The most important passage of his communiqué is ... :
Whatever they [the websites] are interested in portraying [that is, that the Fraternity is dominated by a "cabal of conspirators" willing to "sell out"], the Fraternity of Saint Pius X remains faithful to a line [which has been] clearly expressed and regarding which it has not wavered:- [1] obtaining the two preconditions, which are the withdrawal of the decree of excommunications and the freedom of every priest to celebrate the Mass of Saint Pius V;
- [2] the resolution of doctrinal questions;
- [3] the search for the most adequate canonical solution.
So, then: that all seemed so distant in 2006! Yet, the first most difficult, almost unimaginable, preconditions were fulfilled; and the second one has taken place as a "first phase" and has not truly reached a stalemate (as many would have wished, and have wrongly reported), unless one wishes to argue about what exactly résolution (resolution) meant then.
What we do mean, and this is why we must emphasize these posts from 2006 (we have not been following this publicly just for the past few months), is that there is no need to be overly dramatic about the current situation: the "search for the most adequate canonical solution" may well involve dialogue - such things are not exactly found in the ether -, but there must be no doubt of who, what side, is in the position to actually propose, or confer (unilaterally), a concrete solution.
Now, we know, because the Superior General of the FSSPX himself declared so last week, that there is not a concrete standing offer at this moment. Therefore, it is not correct to say at this moment that the ball is on the Fraternity's side. When it actually is, we will know it.
Now, we know, because the Superior General of the FSSPX himself declared so last week, that there is not a concrete standing offer at this moment. Therefore, it is not correct to say at this moment that the ball is on the Fraternity's side. When it actually is, we will know it.
[UPDATE- 1800 GMT:] As a perfect complement to our post, French Rome-based religious news agency I.Media reported, in the Roman afternoon, that Roman authorities have declared to them that "it is too soon to say that the doctrinal discussions are a failure" and that a joint analysis of the discussions so far (what Bp. Fellay called the "first phase") will be made in September:
[S]ources close to the dossier affirm that it is too soon to say this [that the discussions have ended in failure] and announce an upcoming meeting between those in charge from both parties to evaluate these two years of work, a meeting that could take place in mid-September.
"The discussions are not formally over," an authorized source, close to the dossier, explained to I.MEDIA, adding that if the phase of disputatio is definitely over, it still demands an evaluation by both parties. In this sense, it is revealed in Rome, "it is too soon to say that it is a failure, as it is too soon to say that these discussions have succeeded." (Source)
