3 comments

  1. I find it somewhat odd that you cite Dr. Lamont as proof that the SSPX is taking notice of Pink’s thesis. Although Lamont disagrees with Pink’s reading, he agrees that Dignitatis Humanae can be reconciled with previous teaching; something the SSPX has never admitted.

    We at Rorate have no animus against the SSPX, and we have always hoped for a solution to the disputes between them and the Holy See, but we are realistic about the difficulties involved.

    1. I would say my view is less odd than assuming that the SSPX is, as you stated, “ignoring” Pink’s thesis. Certainly the Society is aware of Dr. Lamont and his writings, as is evidenced from this article which appeared on the U.S. District’s website:

      http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/recognizing-sspx-questioning-vatican-ii-2380

      And then there is this from the Angelus Press web-log

      http://angeluspress.org/blog/cardinal-koch-and-the-sspx/

      So, while it is possible that the SSPX is aware of Dr. Lamont and some of what he has written, but not what he has written on Pink’s thesis, such a view is far less plausible than the one advanced on RC, which suggested that the Society is, again, “ignoring” Pink’s work and, moreover, ignoring it for ideological reasons.

      Of course, we cannot rule out that possibility entirely, but since that possibility carries with it a variety of negative implications, not the least of which being that the Society is obstinately refusing to see continuity where it clearly exists, thus perhaps placing itself in a heterodox position, stronger evidence is required.

Comments are closed.