Too bad. But it’s not clear from the article what the grounds were for this failure of agreement—whether the two sides are irreconcilable, or whether it’s something that can still be fixed.
Also, I don’t entirely trust the National Catholic Reporter to give us the straight facts. I think they’d like to see this fail, and therefore would tend to magnify the problems.
Yeah, the National Catholic Fishwrap had to get a dig in at the SSPX (and at all Catholics too) by (1) implying that Catholics only opposed anti-semitism as a result of Vatican II and (2) that the SSPX is at odds with Vatican II in part because Vatican II, for the first time, rejected anti-semitism.
So, the SSPX favors antisemitism. (The Fishwrap gets away with this by pointing to Williamson’s ravings. The SSPX ought to toss Williamson out on his ear. He does them no good whatsoever. Except that, I suppose if they did that, it would split the group even more.)
“Also, I don’t entirely trust the National Catholic Reporter to give us the straight facts. I think they’d like to see this fail, and therefore would tend to magnify the problems.”
Why on earth would they misrepresent the facts here? Fellay hasn’t shown anything to suggest that he’s been negotiating in good faith.
What concession has Fellay made in any of this?
This is based on a leaked document, which may be true, but it was probably a mortal sin to leak it. I’d prefer to wait to hear from Pope Benedict. The same document also implied that the Pope approved the revision by Fellay, then Cardinal Levada added back some of things that had been changed. All rumors, but I guess that’s what counts these days.