(Originally published Sept. 21, 2011):
Famille Chrétienne has published an interview with Fr. Alain Lorans SSPX, the director of the Society's press bureau, on the prospects of a reconciliation between the Vatican and the SSPX.
No time for a translation now, but Mr. Google Translate's version is quite clear.
Nothing here that is new, or unknown to those who follow these matters closely.
Nothing here that is new, or unknown to those who follow these matters closely.
UPDATE: DICI has just published an English translation of the interview:
Fr. Lorans, spokesman of the SSPX, speaks of the Roman press release
Second Sunday of September 2011:Thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost
Are we moving towards the end of a schism, the reconciliation between the heirs of Archbishop Lefebvre and Rome? Today it seems as if the ball in the Society of St. Pius X’s court.
Is this a historical moment or is it a mere rebound?
Fr. Alains Lorans: This is a step. After the preliminaries which Bishop Fellay asked from the Holy Father on the traditional Mass, the canonical sanctions against the bishops of the Society, the doctrinal meetings on the Second Vatican Council, one could foresee future perspectives. This was done on September 14. It is worth noting the great candor of the theologians of the Society during these meetings in which they made very clear the doctrinal difficulties presented by some conciliar texts. This frankness did not prevent the new step. Obviously, Rome knows exactly our positions, and it is with this clear knowledge that Cardinal Levada presented this doctrinal preamble to Bishop Fellay.
Will the Society follow Bishop Fellay if he gives his agreement to this preamble?
An agreement with Rome would solve the canonical situation of the Society of St. Pius X. But this is not as important as to give back to Tradition—often scorned, or persecuted for the last forty years—its right of existence within the Church. This process already began with the motu proprio Summorum pontificum which declared that the traditional Mass had never been abrogated. If, after the thorough reading which Rome wants him to have, Bishop Fellay may give his agreement, the Society will certainly be favorable to it.
What is the legitimate margin of debate around the texts of Vatican II?
This is the question! The doctrinal preamble being confidential, I can add nothing to the official press release: “leaving open to a legitimate discussion the theological study and explanation of expressions or particular formulations present in the texts of the Second Vatican Council and of the magisterium which followed.”
Some explain this to mean that the points of contention in the Council could be open to discussion without putting into question the adherence to the Church: this would be to recognize that these litigious texts do not require the adhesion demanded for dogmas.
Others insist on the fact that this doctrinal preamble—which is not public, mind you—would demand the respect of the entire Council, of its authenticity and of the legitimacy of its teaching. For them… the mere possibility of a discussion of Vatican II would appear a little much…
What we can see is a clear difference between the press release of Sept 14, 2011 and the note dictated by the Secretary of State of February 4, 2009 which was saying: “The indispensible condition for a future recognition of the Society of St. Pius X is the full acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and of the magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI himself.”
Between these declarations, there are two years of theological discussion which allowed to “dig out and clarify the doctrinal problems” in the words of Bishop Fellay. Has there been an evolution of Rome between 2009 and 2011? Has the exposition of the theologians of the Society contributed to it? I leave it to you to reply.
