on June 30 (it’s a secret that I reveal to you, but it will be made public), on June 30, 2012, the Pope wrote with his own hand a letter to our Superior General, Bp. [Bernard] Fellay, signed personally: ‘I confirm to you in fact [that], in order [for you] to be truly reintegrated into the Church [Tissier says:] (let us move beyond this expression), it is necessary to truly accept the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar Magisterium.’
But this is only consistent with what has been known at least since 2009 from the Secretariat of State:
For a future recognition of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, the full acknowledgment of the Second Vatican Council and of the Magisterium of Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and of the same Benedict XVI is an indispensable condition.
So why was there this myth propagated that the SSPX would achieve canonical status without a doctrinal agreement that included acceptance of Vatican II? It has been argued that the Pope is sympathetic to the SSPX and has been eager to have it contribute to resolving problems within the Church by means of its “defense of tradition” (read anticonciliarism). It seems that the Pope himself has definitively rendered this claim baseless.
Mary Victrix 
The teaching of Vatican II is such a varied and nuanced thing, and it assumes (either explicitly or implicitly) so much of the preceding centuries of Magisterial teaching that no serious Catholic could object to it. In my own lifetime the business of “traditionalist” objections to Lumen Gentium 8 (the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church) has undergone a sea change, as the texts of the Council have undergone critical theological examination by those determined to sentire cum ecclesia. I don’t doubt the sincerity of the SSPX but they need to move beyond megaphone diplomacy and soundbite theology.
Of course, the myth was propagated by the SSPX and their eager sympathizers because they believe that they can manipulate the Church with propaganda. They feigned compliance in order to exert political pressure on the Pope so that they could obtain a favorable decision and gain regular status. Given the circumstances, I, for one, am glad that that outcome appears less likely.
Bishop Fellay expected a miracle. He said so–I think it was the Candlemas sermon. And why not? You and I change, grace is a reality, why would not the Holy Father, under the ugly lessons of his pontificate, not realize, finally, that the ingenuine language of the Council has effects, hidden eddies and submerged rocks, he did not, as a young man, completely understand? Also, Bishop Fellay is himself a very personable, very transparent individual, and I think he interpreted Benedict’s warmth on several occasions to mean that he appreciated SSPX’s position and meant to help. Because Fellay, himself, an honest man, is not warm to those he means to destroy, and there is every reason to believe that at some level in the Vatican the manipulation of SSPX by the falsity of the ‘talks,’ which Rome ultimately ignored even though the Society represented itself much better than anyone had realized (google Gleize SSPX to read as much of the blow-by-blows as we’ve been able to have, up to the present) was intended to destabilize and destroy the Society. (But it won’t.)
Perhaps there are those who would minimize SSPX’s doctrinal objections, minimize the ambiguous language of the Council, wave away the ‘nuances ‘ (pretty word for lies) . But I will double damn guarantee you they are not people who are actively engaged in a struggle to save their families’ and their countries’ souls. The Council tied both our hands behind our backs by abandoning the Restoration (because even the threat of it is enough to frighten the devils in the banks–even the threat of it, so anti- Free Market as it is, as the Catholic religious state was).The doctrine of the Social Kingship of Christ the King is the single most important teaching in the defense of worker rights, of women, of the vulnerable, ever, in all the world. Putting a transcendent commitment to the poor, in the person of Christ, at the center of society, is the ONLY way to win the economic and moral struggles that are killing us–oh, not the comfortable us, on our blogs. I say that as a life-long organizer of real struggles. It takes Christ, the Church he founded, and the state He requires. The Council denied that. The Council said Krishna has some good things going on, and that’s all it took to unleash hell.
There isn’t enough proof in the world to win you, if you haven’t already looked at what’s happened to working people in the last fifty years, and it’s all tied to the Council closing down the Church as the Gold Standard. Yeah, ‘subsist.’ That’s all it took.
from Bill Foley
To the whitelillyblog: where is your love for the papal magisterium? John Paul the Great and Benedict XVI both embrace the Second Vatican Council. Please imitate the saints who had a deep, abiding love for the Vicar of Christ. The problems in the Catholic Church have been caused by those who have rejected the letter and the true spirit of Vatican II.
The point has been driven home even further: http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE8940EK20121005?irpc=932
It seems that the SSPX and those who sympathize have been given notice.
Love this Pope! We have compromised for too long. That’s it. No more. The answer isn’t to make Vatican II null and void. The answer is to finally follow it faithfully!
To Steve and Jennifer: thank you for being so loyal to the papal magisterium. If you want to read great defenses of the papacy, you can go to the EWTN website and go into the document library. If you enter Gilroy as an author, you will find a 3-page article re the magisterium. If you enter Costanzo, you will find three essays about the papal magisterium. I have never read anything better than these.
Pingback: A Time for Faith | Mary Victrix