If…, if…, if… by some miracle, Pope Francis rang me up next week and said:
—You Excellency, you and I have had our divergences, but right now I am authorizing you to found a society. You go right ahead for the good of the Church.
—Holy Father, can I have that in writing? Do you mind if I come to Rome and get that with your signature?
—Yes, of course.
—Alright, then I’d be on the next plane to Rome. I’d be on the next plane to Rome!
If anyone sees any difference with +Fellay let me know...
I have read through this thread again trying to understand what Bp Williamson might have meant by this but I still don't understand how this is any way different than Bp. Fellay and the 'neo-SSPX' attitude towards an agreement. I thought the principle of the Resistance was supposed to be, in contrast to the supposed new attitude of the Society, "NO practical agreement without Rome converting back to the Faith" Not we have to wait for a 'no-strings attached deal with the modernists in Rome'.
I would have expected a theoretical phone conversation between Francis and Bp Williamson to look something more like this:
Francis: Your Excellency, you and I have had our divergences, but right now I am authorizing you to found a society. You go right ahead for the good of the Church.
Bp Williamson: So... how about that Syllabus of Errors by Pius IX ? You on board with that now ?
Francis: What's a Syllabus of Errors ? That sounds pretty divisive.
Bp Williamson: Oookay then, lets move along.
Francis: Hey, we are doing a new Assisi meeting next year, you guys want in ? There is going to be fireworks this time !!
Bp Williamson: *Click*
So can someone explain just what it is we are missing? So now 'no strings attached' practical agreements have apparently never been 'anathema' to the Resistance ?
The other point that has me confused is why is it the Resistance would need canonical recognition from the modernists in Rome at all? I had thought that the Resistance was supposed to be the true Society of St Pius X that is carrying on the work of Archbishop Lefebvre in keeping up the traditional priesthood and sacraments ? I had thought it was the 'neo-SSPX' that had changed and departed from the mission of the good Archbishop ? So apparently it is not the actual continuation of the true SSPX, the Resistance is then something entirely new and that needs a fresh canonical recognition to found a new organization ?
I will admit to being really confused as to just what the core principles of the Resistance is supposed to be about.