Vatican discussions with the Society of Saint Pius X

The Vatican has been holding "discussions" with the schismatic SSPX for some time now, Pope Benedict having lifting the excommunications of four of their "Bishops" including the convicted anti-Semite Richard Williamson last year. The news is the head of the society, "Bishop" Fellay has been summoned to Rome for a meeting in September 2011. There should be no doubt of the purpose of this group. On their website, "Bishop" Fellay "explained" to his followers that the polite discussions with Rome were just a tactic to achieve their overall goal of undoing all the reforms of Vatican II. :

For our part, we wanted to try—willfully and deliberately—to create a serene climate around the discussions. Evidently, an indirect consequence of this can be that, concerning certain themes, unrelated or related to these discussions, for the moment one might have the impression that the Society will not have spoken with as much vehemence as on other occasions. This is not impossible!

If we keep the whole picture in mind, then we understand. If we lose this view of the big picture, and see only a particular object, then we say: “What is the Society doing? It is capitulating, it is becoming silent!”

In fact, it is a question of tactics. Bishop Fellay uses a military analogy to explain this way of acting in what remains a true doctrinal combat. Just as a bombardment is done not during an assault but well ahead of time, in order not to fire on one's own troops, in the same way in this war against error, the phase of discussions “momentarily” necessitates a reaction less “vehement than on other occasions”.

Why?

With psychological finesse, Bishop Fellay explains how the passion of an offended interlocutor hinders him from considering the argument presented. Passion blinds the intelligence. “The offended person thinks of the offense, and no longer of the argument.”

The conclusion comes on its own. Since in Rome it is a question of bringing the light of the Catholic truth to the present authorities, it is prudent not to offend them. Hence the fact that “on certain themes, unrelated or related to these discussions, for the moment one might have the impression that the Society will not have spoken with as much vehemence as on other occasions.”

As good strategists, we must distinguish the means: conserving a calm climate for the doctrinal discussions; from the end to be reached: “the triumph of Tradition, nothing else!” “We are still expecting there to be a cross over Vatican II at the end!”