The doctrinal discussions between the SSPX and Rome are often discussed. Rome is Modernist. Make no mistake about it. An excellent analysis here by Bishop Williamson of the SSPX. Let us continue to pray that Rome comes back to the truth, and embraces doctrine and tradition once again.
ELEISON COMMENTS CCV (June 18, 2011) : DISCUSSIONS' AFTERMATH
As the doctrinal Discussions which were held from the autumn of 2009 to the spring of this year between the Society of St Pius X and Rome drop back into the past, the question naturally arises of future relations between the two. Among Catholics on both sides there is a wish for contacts to continue, but since such pious wishes for union easily give rise to illusions, it is necessary to keep one's grip on reality if one is not to join the whole modern world in its anti-God fantasy.
Originally the Discussions were wanted not by the Society but by Rome, as it hoped to dissolve the Society's notorious resistance to the Neo-modernism of Vatican II. The great obstacle was doctrine, because the Society is well protected inside the fortress of the Church's age-old and unchanging doctrine. It had to be lured out of that fortress. Now for Neo-modernists, just as for Communists, any contact or dialogue with an adversary in a secure position was - and remains - better than none, because he can only lose by it while they can only gain. So Rome agreed even to doctrinal Discussions.
Alas for Rome, the Society's four representatives believe clearly and held firm. As one of the four Roman theologians taking part in the Discussions was overheard to say afterwards, "We do not understand them and they do not understand us." Of course. Unless the Romans abandoned their Neo-modernism or the Society priests betrayed the Truth, it was bound to be a relatively fruitless dialogue. But Rome cannot stand its own betrayal of the Truth being shown up by the paltry Society, so it is not likely to give up. That is why we already hear of an Ecclesia Dei spokesman telling that Rome will very soon offer an "Apostolic Ordinariat" to the Society. Of course such a quote may be merely a trial balloon to test reactions, but it is also a tempting idea. Unlike a Personal Prelature, an Apostolic Ordinariat is independent of the local bishops, and unlike an Apostolic Administration, such as Campos in Brazil, it is not confined to just one diocese. What more could the Society ask for?
It asks that Rome should come back to the Truth, because it knows, as do Communists and Neo-modernists, that any practical co-operation which would skirt around doctrinal disagreement leads eventually, for all kinds of human reasons, to absorbing the false doctrine of the enemies of the Faith, in other words to betraying the Truth. Here is why the Society's Superior General has in public more than once repudiated any canonical agreement with Rome that would precede a doctrinal agreement. But the Discussions have served at least to demonstrate the depth of the doctrinal disagreement between the Society and Neo-modernist Rome. That is why Catholics should be prepared for the Society to refuse even the offer of an Apostolic Ordinariat, however well-intentioned the Roman authorities may be.
But why is doctrine so important ? Because the Catholic Faith is a doctrine. But why is Faith so important ? Because without it we cannot please God (Heb.XI,6). But why must it be the Catholic Faith? Will no other faith in God do ? No, because God himself underwent the horror of the Cross to reveal to us the one true Faith. All other "faiths" contradict, more or less, that true Faith, with lies.
Four future numbers of "Eleison Comments" will show, with all due respect, how disoriented in this respect is the way of believing of the present Pope, however well-intentioned he may also be.