I will paste the final paragraph below:
Il faudra faire admettre aux autorités romaines que nous ne pouvons suivre sans de sérieuses restrictions l’interprétation que l’on donne du concile et l’œcuménisme tel qu’il est pratiqué. Au fond, ce que nous espérons, c’est de faire comprendre un jour la raison d’être de la Tradition.
Here is how I would translate it:
It is necessary to get the Roman authorities to admit that we cannot follow without serious restrictions the interpretation given the council or ecumenism as practiced. Beneath it all what we hope is someday to make understood Tradition's raison d'etre.
If I were to regard this as merely a restatement of a general opposition to notions such as those expressed in Dei Verbum 8 and Sacrosanctum Concilium 21, would I be far off?
Freepnet Neo-Catholics notwithstanding, the liberal Bishops (98% of American Bishops will go into Schism if the the SSPX is allowed back or if any sort of universal Indult is granted.
The chances of Pope Benedict XVI getting murdered are getting very high at this point. Better double up on the Swiss Guard ... I think his days are numbered.
It does not mean "to get the Roman authorities to admit" but "An admission must be made to the Roman authorities"--a somewhat indirect way of saying, "we have to make it clear to the Roman authorities".
Dear aposiopetic,
Your translation seems roughly the same as what my own admittedly rudimentary efforts would bring about.
However, I wouldn't translate it as, "...to get the Roman authorities..." I'd still go with, "...to make the Roman authorities...," as that's actually the more straightforward translation. But there are nuances that I may well be missing. I haven't communicated regularly in French for over 20 years.
As to what Bernard Fellay is referring, I'd only be guessing.
However, I find this statement of his to be somewhat alarming:
"Then Benedict XVI pointed out that there can only be one way of belong to the Catholic Church: it is that of having the spirit of Vatican II interpreted in the light of Tradition, that is in the intention of the Fathers of the Council and according to the letter of the text. It is a perspective that frightens us greatly…"
To me, this suggests that even interpreted in the light of Tradition, the Council is generally to be rejected. Else, why would it frighten him? I sense a little more than a quibble with this or that specific problem with some of what came from the Council, and more of a rejection of the Council, per se.
That saddens me, in that I don't believe that the Catholic Church will reject an Ecumenical Council, and if that is a requirement for the return of the SSPX to the Catholic Church, then sadly, I believe that the schism will be permanent.
sitetest