I was taking a break from the forums when this story broke, but I wanted to throw some things out there I haven't seen brought up yet.
First, I wanted to say that while I do agree with TIA's stance that "Our Lady of Good Success" is the correct English translation and by definition "Buen Suceso" is a non-translation, there were a few big problems I had in the way Mr. Guimarães presented his case against the SSPX and Jade Liboro. Many aspects of his arguments were based completely on anonymous sources and speculations. In the first instance, he essentially claimed a miracle occured with the statues of OLGS and the Child Jesus according to "well-informed persons." When has the Church ever relied upon witnesses who refuse to allow their names to be associated with what they saw? This can't be admitted until someone is brave enough to come forward. Next is when he speculated about the SSPX and Archbishop Travez having a pay-to-play relationship, he referred to the "common talk in Quito." That is not journalism. If you're going to expose a financial scandal, you're going to need some tangible documentation. Then comes the focus on Ms. Liboro without performing due diligence on the subject and actually doing some interviews. Even a failed attempt is better than no attempt. He goes on to speak for the Mother Abbess and a handful of other sisters in the convent as if he is personally familiar with them and yet, couldn't figure out a way to secure a Q&A?
I don't buy it!
Even if we conceded each and every point he makes about the SSPX, Fr. Purdy and Jade, so what? We already know that none of the aforementioned entities are destined to turn things around for Quito nor will this particular development amount to a hill of beans. Why? Not once does Our Lady warn Mother Marianna about correctly translating her name into English, nor does she mention any organization outside of the Franciscans or any individuals outside the Pope and the "Prelate" as being destined to effect any significant positive change. She does promise to bless all who spread the message, that's about it.
So what we have here is a needless squabble which has publically injured the reputation of at least one very private individual based on little more than speculation and conveniently anonymous sources no one can scrutinize. "Common talk in Quito," "well-informed persons," "trustworthy sources," just aren't good enough. Imagine my surprise that someone like Atila who has been well known for his meticulous and careful research would have chosen this event to turn the TIA into a trad gossip column.