These docuмents paint Bishop Fellay in a pretty good light, all things considered.

[Translation from the original French]


FSSPX
Confidential Note from the General House
Distribution: member priests
Date: June 5, 2015

Note about a meeting of FSSPX members with Bishop Vitus Huonder.

On April 17, 2015, the announced meeting between members of the FSSPX and Bishop V.H., Bishop of Chur, took place.  At this meeting, which took place in French at the Priory of Oberriet, were present Bishop V.H., Bishop B. Fellay, Fathers Niklaus Pfluger and A-M Nely, Bishop A. de Galarreta, Fathers M. Gaudron, J-M. Gleize, and Marc Jacot.

The theme of the meeting was the ecuмenism of Vatican II.

Before addressing this theme, Bishop H. wished to begin with a statement whose main points are as follows:

- The canonical integration of the FSSPX is a great concern of Bishop H.
- A canonical status is a necessity.  Without this status, the influence of the FSSPX is minimal, as it is marginalized.  The Conservative bishops want this canonical regularization, without which everyone is against the FSSPX.
- Bishop H. thinks that the FSSPX does not want the schism.  As proof of this, the respect for the authority it always keeps.
- The Magisterium must listen to the criticisms and conclusions of theologians, including those of the FSSPX in a spirit of mutual respect.  The Magisterium must also look to see if the evolution since Vat. II is in conformity with Tradition.  
- The removal of excommunications and Summorum pontificuм are signs of good will on the part of Rome.
- A convention with Rome would be a support for the Superior General and for the apostolic work of the FSSPX; this would give a right to ask the Magisterium for explanations.
- The Church needs the FSSPX for a new evangelization.
- After possible recognition, theological issues should continue to be addressed to find solutions.  

Following this statement by Bishop H., the members of the FSSPX expressed the following points:

- The fundamental question is: Is there a problem of faith and doctrine in Vatican II and its reforms?  
- In fact, there is a problem of faith, and our canonical situation is only a consequence of this fundamental problem and the situation of the Church.
- If there were canonical recognition, there would have to be a freedom to denounce errors.  This is concretely impossible, because we would continue to preach against errors and even against the Pope when he spreads these errors.
- Rome has led the other traditional communities to silence.  The Congregation of Religious is against Tradition; if there is an agreement, it would be the same for us.
- Public criticism of the Council's errors is necessary.  There is no question of keeping quiet about problems of faith.
- Archbishop Lefebvre said: Let us be accepted as we are.  This is a sine qua non condition.  But they want to change our minds, so we say no.

The problem of ecuмenism of Vatican II was then addressed.
- Is there a satisfactory official interpretation of the subsistence in Dominus Iesus? We are talking about a presence of the Church in other churches: the Holy Spirit uses other communities.  However, Pius XII says that it is necessary to distinguish between persons and communities: persons outside the visible Church can receive graces, but not communities as they are, in principle, separate from the Church.
- As proof, the current Pope explains ecuмenism always in a false sense, forgetting the Catholic unity that already exists and talking about "the unity to be found."
- What is the cause of this?  The delicacy of Catholic theology.  In the past, theology used clear terms and concepts, derived from scholastics; today, it is unclear, based on modern philosophies.
-Separate churches are called "means of salvation" as such, which is false.
- Unitatis redintegratio #11 says you have to "preach the truth" but after that, there is a trap: we talk about common elements, and then "hierarchy of truths."  This leads to a false distinction between "essential truths" necessary for salvation, and "incidental truths," not necessary for salvation.
-In Unitatis redintegratio, the Church is called [the] "general means of salvation," and no longer [the] "necessary means of salvation."

Bishop H., during this discussion, declared that he agreed with these few objections: "The Council was too vague, we must clarify all this.  "For me, ecuмenism is about conversion, without which it has no reason to be."  He also admitted: "There are a lot of things to change in the code."

Bishop H. to transmit to Rome the FSSPX dubia on ecuмenism prepared by Abbe Gleize for this meeting.

Confidential note not to be distributed under any pretext; the General House will take care of it if necessary.