Quote from: poche

Basically in a nutshell what Sacrosanctum Concilium says is that any priest can say the TLM. He doesn't need permission of his bishop. Any stable group of Catholics (Novus Ordo) can get together and petition the bishop for the TLM and he is required to supply them with a priest to offer the TLM.  

I think you are referring to Summorum Pontificuм.  SC was made in 1962.

Quote from: holysoulsacademy

A good dear friend of mine who happens to be 3rd Order SSPX was ordered by her superior Fr. Purdy to stay away from Resistance Masses.  
When she asked about the AFD, she was told that Fr. Pfeiffer and others interpretation were nonsense and ignorant.  
She was told the AFD was a replica of the Declaration ABL signed.

Wrong.  It is not.  There are substantial differences.  You might want to point these out to her.

...More  on the differences between the AFD & 1988 protocol coming...

A very good comparison from TheRecusant.com

http://www.therecusant.com/apps/blog/

------------------------------------------------------------

In May 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre, under pressure from some of his priests (Fr. Schmidberger?), signed an agreement with Rome. He immediately regretted it and withdrew his signature the following day. He would later write regarding the 1988 Protocol: “Had I signed the agreement we would have been finished in one year.”

The reader may wish to compare the text of the 1988 Protocol, which Rome proposed to the Archbishop, with the text of the 2012 'Preamble' which Bishop Fellay proposed to Rome. The similarities are, to say the least, striking.

The text of the 1988 Protocol, together with an article by Fr. Peter Scott, can be read at this link:

http://www.therecusant.com/abplefebvre-1988-protocol

===============================================

Quote

Protocol of Accord
 
Proposed by Rome to Archbishop Lefebvre
 (1988)

I, Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of Tulle, as well as the members of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X founded by me:

    1. Promise to be always faithful to the Catholic Church and the Roman Pontiff, its Supreme Pastor, Vicar of Christ, Successor of Blessed Peter in his primacy as head of the body of bishops.

    2. We declare our acceptance of the doctrine contained in n.25 of the dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican Council II on the ecclesiastical Magisterium and the adherence which is due to it.

    3. Regarding certain points taught by Vatican Council II or concerning later reforms of the liturgy and law, and which do not appear to us easily reconcilable with Tradition, we pledge that we will have a positive attitude of study and communication with the Apostolic See, avoiding all polemics.

    4. Moreover we declare that we recognise the validity of the Sacrifice fo the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention of doing what the Church does, and according to the rites indicated in the in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Rituals of the Sacraments promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.

    5. Finally, we promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by Pope John Paul II, without prejudice to the special discipline granted to the Society by particular law.

================================================

Now for Bishop Fellay's 2012 Preamble:

Quote

Bishop Fellay's 2012 Preamble

Presented to Rome
15th April, 2012

Translated from the text on La Sapiniere.

I
We promise to be always faithful to the Catholic Church and to the Roman Pontiff, the Supreme Pastor, Vicar of Christ, Successor of Peter, and head of the body of bishops.


II
We declare that we accept the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church in the substance of Faith and Morals, adhering to each doctrinal affirmation in the required degree, according to the doctrine contained in No.25 of the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council.(1)


III

     1. We declare that we accept the doctrine regarding the Roman Pontiff and regarding the college of bishops, with the Pope as its head, which is taught by the dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus of Vatican I and by the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican II, chapter 3 (de constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiae et in specie de episcopatu), explained and interpreted by the nota explicativa praevia in this same chapter.

     2. We recognise the authority of the Magisterium to which alone is given the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, in written form or handed down (2) in fidelity to Tradition, recalling that "the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter in order for them to make known, through revelation, a new doctrine, but so that with His assistance they may keep in a holy and expressly faithful manner the revelation transmitted by the Apostles, that is to say, the Faith."(3)

     3. Tradition is the living transmission of revelation "usque as nos"(4) and the Church in its doctrine, in its life and in its liturgy perpetuates and transmits to all generations what this is and what She believes. Tradition progresses in the Church with the assistance of the Holy Ghost(5), not as a contrary novelty(6), but through a better understanding of the Deposit of the Faith(7).

     4. The entire tradition of Catholic Faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which, in turn, enlightens - in other words deepens and subsequently makes explicit -  certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated(8).

     5. The affirmations of the Second Vatican Council and of the later Pontifical Magisterium relating to the relationship between the Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, as well as the social duty of religion and the right to religious liberty, whose formulation is with difficulty reconcilable with prior doctrinal affirmations from the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the whole, uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner coherent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these affirmations whatsoever that would expose Catholic doctrine to opposition or rupture with Tradition and with this Magisterium.

     6. That is why it is legitimate to promote through legitimate discussion the study and theological explanations of the expressions and formulations of Vatican II and of the Magisterium which followed it, in the case where they don't appear reconcilable with the previous Magisterium of the Church(9).

      7. We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II.

     8. In following the guidelines laid out above (III,5), as well as Canon 21 of the Code of Canon Law, we promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those which are contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by John-Paul II (1983) and in the Code of Canon Law of the Oriental Churches promulgated by the same pontiff (1990), without prejudice to the discipline of the Society of Saint Pius X, by a special law.


Notes--
(1) Cf. the new formula for the Profession of Faith and the Oath of Fidelity for assuming a charge exercised in the name of the Church, 1989; cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 749,750, §2; 752; CCEO canon 597; 598, 1 & 2; 599.

(2) Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis encyclical.

(3) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor Aeternus, Dz. 3070.

(4) Council of Trent, Dz. 1501: “All saving truth and rules of conduct (Matt. 16:15) are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves,[3] the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand.”

(5) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 8 & 9, Denz. 4209-4210.

(6) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3020: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding "Therefore […] let the understanding, the knowledge, and wisdom of individuals as of all, of one man as of the whole Church, grow and progress strongly with the passage of the ages and the centuries; but let it be solely in its own genus, namely in the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.'' [Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, 23, 3].”

(7) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3011; Anti-modernist Oath, no. 4; Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Dz 3886; Vatican Council II, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.

(8) For example, like the teaching on the sacraments and the episcopacy in Lumen Gentium, no. 21.

(9) There is a parallel in history in the Decree for the Armenians of the Council of Florence, where the porrection of the instruments was indicated as the matter of the sacrament of Order. Nevertheless theologians legitimately discussed, even after this decree, the accuracy of such an assertion. Pope Pius XII finally resolved the issue in another way.