I am only vaugely familiair with the controversy you are referring to re: LaGrange--Breen I am not familiar with. Unless I am mistaken the criticism of Pius XII by LaGrange is appropriate.
Are you talking about Father Reginald Garrigou-LaGrange? I'm talking about the famous Dominican Bible scholar Marc Lagrange, who died in 1938, the year before Cardinal Pacelli became Pope Pius XII.
Lagrange's views on Biblical science were unsound, and, apparently (as one would hope!) viewed as such by the Powers That Be in the Church during the reign of Pope Pius X, of REALLY happy memory.
Father AE Breen was a brilliant but rather eccentric American Bible scholar who understood modern critical methods and saw them as being valid to a point, but who also knew a sneaky semi-Modernist when he saw one and castigated Lagrange bitterly in a book he wrote about his travels in the Holy Land. Breen had spent some time at the Dominican Bible school in Jerusalem and had been appalled by Lagrange's reckless promotion of Rationalist presuppositions where the historicity of Biblical events was concerned. He even mocked Lagrange's sloppy teachng methods and his Gallic tendency to talk through his nose.
Lagrange was the type who checked out okay as to the Gospels, but thought that this gave him license to kill in the OLD Testament. For example, Lagrange claimed that it was "obvious" that what had happened in the case of the tale of Lot's wife's being turned into a pillar of salt was that legends about a rock formation somewhere that resembled a woman had made their way into the Inspired Word, Providence making use of the naive gullibility of the ancients to teach a religious lesson.
Breen was having none of it. Neither was Pope Benedict XV a little later on. Pope Pius XII? In his celebrated encylical on the Bible (but don't ask who is doing all the celebrating) he was (relative to us, all things considered) disastrously vague as to what he meant and what he did not mean regarding modern Bible science solving old problems with new methods etc... Of course, the Modernists who started controlling Catholic Biblical Science in the 1940s and 50s took the "new methods" ball from Pius and ran with it to victory over the God of Israel- and Pope Pius X's ultimately abortive Antimodernist efforts. The subsequent Antimodernist complaining of Pope Pius XII fell on deaf ears. By 1950, things being what they were in high Catholic places and as they would remain, it was too late for the Truth of the Scriptures in mainline Catholic circles. Too late, that is, for the Living God to go on living as He once had in souls.
Nothing about this ultimate assault on God and His Christ is secret or arcane or iffy as to the documents that tell the whole horrible story (though, of course, the constructions that Modernists on the one hand and believers on the other place on the facts is vastly different.) But the story of the whole Apocalyptic mess is depressing and complicated. No fun at all to discuss and kick around with like-minded guys.
Still, it's time for serious-minded Catholics who lay claim to the mantle of Tradition to start learning about and denouncing above all the protocols of the learned masters of the Dominican Bible school in Zion (or at least in that neighborhood) and all related protocols of other learned Roman Catholic masters and their cosmically ruinous effect on Christian faith in the twentieth century.