SSPX British District Superior: Doctrinal Preamble "unacceptable" to those present at October meeting

[Geremia]

My RSS blog feed picked up a Rorate Cœli postdeleted dated Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:22:26 GMT. Here is the snippet of it my feed recorded:

from: New Catholic
subject: SSPX British District Superior: Doctrinal Preamble “unacceptable” to those present at October meeting
website: rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2011/11/sspx-british-district-superior.html

From the November newsletter of the District Superior of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Fr. Paul Morgan. We emphasize that we have not heard any news (or even any comment) of any kind on this matter from credible sources of the Society in Switzerland or from its largest Districts - in France and in America.
The meeting of the Society’s superiors took place at Albano on 7-

UPDATE #2: It has been cached on Google, so the image below was clearly not forged. Here is the text copy-and-pasted from the Google cache:

My dear brethren

The meeting of the Society’s superiors took place at Albano on 7-8th October as announced in last month’s newsletter, and Bishop Fellay did indeed use this opportunity to discuss the ‘Doctrinal Preamble’ text as received from Cardinal Levada on 14th September.

The first day of the meeting covered three issues: an overview of the contacts with Rome since 1987; a summary of the doctrinal discussions; and an oral exposition of the Doctrinal Preamble document itself.

With regard to the doctrinal talks it was disappointing to note that the Roman commission failed to acknowledge the break between traditional and conciliar teachings. Instead it insisted upon the ‘hermeneutic (interpretation) of continuity,’ stating that the new teachings included and improved the old!

It was interesting to learn that the 14th September meeting had not touched upon the doctrinal talks at all, but rather was dedicated to expounding possible practical solutions for the Society.

So it was perhaps not surprising to learn that the proposed doctrinal basis for any canonical agreement in fact contained all those elements which the Society has consistently rejected, including acceptance of the New Mass and of Vatican II as expressed in the New Catechism. Indeed, the document itself conveys the impression that there is no crisis in the Church…

Hence the stated consensus of those in attendance was that the Doctrinal Preamble was clearly unacceptable and that the time has certainly not come to pursue any practical agreement as long as the doctrinal issues remain outstanding. It also agreed that the Society should continue its work of insisting upon the doctrinal questions in any contacts with the Roman authorities.

In many ways we can see the hand of Providence in this meeting, falling as it did on the Feast of the Holy Rosary, given the clarification of Rome’s persistence in the modern errors, and the consequent necessity of continuing with the fight against modernism through fidelity to Catholic Tradition.

The second day of the meeting was dedicated to its original theme, that of communications and the media.

Whilst remembering the Holy souls in our prayers, Masses and visits to the cemetery, let us invoke their powerful intercession also for all our intentions,

Father Paul Morgan

Superior

UPDATE #1: Here is an image of the letter before it was deleted from the SSPX site, courtesy of the Spanish blog Radio Cristiandad:

 

[MarkThompson]

Well, as Bishop Fellay recently charged, “There exists in Anglo-saxon circles a network of infiltrators of the SSPX preparing a break-away.” So it doesn’t seem like much of a surprise to have these rash, hardliner statements coming out of the British faction, and then, presumably, rapidly suppressed by the Krah-Fellay faction.

 

[YoungTradCath]

I’ll wait until Bishop Fellay makes a statement.

 

[Denise1957]

Well, as Bishop Fellay recently charged, “There exists in Anglo-saxon circles a network of infiltrators of the SSPX preparing a break-away.” So it doesn’t seem like much of a surprise to have these rash, hardliner statements coming out of the British faction, and then, presumably, rapidly suppressed by the Krah-Fellay faction.

I agree, and would add that the Anglo-saxon faction, and one bishop in particular, have been known to stir the pot in order to try to force a response from Menzingen. I’m not saying that this is definately the case, but a possibility.

 

[jmj1984]

Following the meeting of the Superiors of the Seminaries and Districts of the Society of Saint Pius X in Albano (Italy), on October 7, 2011, several comments have appeared in the press on the response Bishop Bernard Fellay [Superior General of the Society] would give to the Roman proposals of September 14, 2011. It is recalled that only the General House of the Society of Saint Pius X is entitled to make public public an official communiqué or authorized commentary on this matter. Until further notice, reference should be made to the communiqué of October 7, 2011

This has just appeared on rorate-caeli

 

[giuseppeTO]

This is a duplicate thread. See forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=612275

 

[corsair]

I believe that District Superiors do not speak for the Society as a whole. This is not to say that what the British District Superior says is wrong but rather the Society has not spoken. So until then I’ll reserve any comment.