This is a beautifully and charitably stated reply by Fr. Pagliarani. He shows much more respect for the Roman leadership than they do for the Society, sadly.
An excellent (and very clever) letter, putting the ball firmly in the Holy See's court. When I say it's clever, I don't wish to imply that it's in any way insincere. I am sure that the Society fervently wishes to retain unity within the Church, but they correctly state that this unity is up to the Pope - to extend his blessing on the consecrations, and/or to refrain from excommunicating those involved.
Fr. Pagliarani uses unanswerable logic regarding the "schismatic" status of the SSPX: if Pope Leo is pleading with them to avoid schism, then they can't already be in schism. If they're not in schism then why is the Pope refusing permission for these much-needed consecrations? And why has he refused to grant them an audience after so many requests?
Of course we know the answer, and so does Fr. Pagliarani, but he has the diplomatic good sense not to allude to the obvious desire of the modernists to eliminate traditional Catholicism completely (while pretending "tolerance"). The French have always been great diplomats.
Another observation: how utterly alien is the language in this letter to the language used by the Synodal church! And it's marvellously Catholic.
It will be interesting to see what response the Vatican will come up with.
This is a beautifully and charitably stated reply by Fr. Pagliarani. He shows much more respect for the Roman leadership than they do for the Society, sadly.
An excellent (and very clever) letter, putting the ball firmly in the Holy See's court. When I say it's clever, I don't wish to imply that it's in any way insincere. I am sure that the Society fervently wishes to retain unity within the Church, but they correctly state that this unity is up to the Pope - to extend his blessing on the consecrations, and/or to refrain from excommunicating those involved.
Fr. Pagliarani uses unanswerable logic regarding the "schismatic" status of the SSPX: if Pope Leo is pleading with them to avoid schism, then they can't already be in schism. If they're not in schism then why is the Pope refusing permission for these much-needed consecrations? And why has he refused to grant them an audience after so many requests?
Of course we know the answer, and so does Fr. Pagliarani, but he has the diplomatic good sense not to allude to the obvious desire of the modernists to eliminate traditional Catholicism completely (while pretending "tolerance"). The French have always been great diplomats.
Another observation: how utterly alien is the language in this letter to the language used by the Synodal church! And it's marvellously Catholic.
It will be interesting to see what response the Vatican will come up with.
In other words, "Tell Tucho to stand down."