Dear bornacatholic,
"(Can I get a witness, sitetest?)"
Certainly. Bornacatholic and I have discussed the possibilities of reconciliation privately on more than one occasion. We agree pretty much on most major aspects of these questions.
In light of all the false starts of recent year, I think that we're both not holding our breath until an SSPX reconciliation actually occurs. If it happens, it will happen when it happens. Neither of us are holding up our Christmas shopping in anticipation. Neither of us expects, if reconciliation occurs, that it will be "clean" (that the overwhelming majority - say, 90% - of SSPX bishops, priests, and regular Mass-goers) will follow. Myself, I think that 20% - 25%, or even a bit more, will break off and schism from the schism as the first schism is healed.
Furthermore, we do not believe that it will occur quite on the terms for which the SSPX leadership currently holds out. It may very well be that after the fact, the SSPX leadership will CLAIM that they got everything they wanted, but we rather have our doubts that this will accurately reflect reality.
However, ultimately, we are both docile, faithful Catholics, and have discussed many "what if" scenarios. Under each one, we have agreed that we are obligated to accept the authoritative actions of the Church in this regard, including the possible nullifications of excommunications and re-establishment of Catholicism within the SSPX by re-established full communion with Peter, without much further ado.
While questions remain unresolved, we are certainly entitled to our private opinions, but once Rome speaks, our own private opinions that run counter to the Church's judgment will be abandoned instantaneously.
sitetest
I was learnt fidelity and obedience were virtues. Who knew they'd be reinterpreted to become a vice. It is very difficult to keep abreast of the changes within the schism opposing the Living Magisterium. In fact, the change is, well, revolutionary, isn't it? For many, no longer does Roma Locuta est, Causa finita est exist.
Mershon: I generally admire your writings on FR and in the Wanderer but I have a hard time imagining that ecclesiastical "Americanism" is applicable as a charge against those who support the justice meted out by Pope John Paul the Great (with the apparently enthusiastic assistance of Cardinals Ratzinger and Gantin) against SSPX, its leaders and its adherents unless and until Pope Benedict XVI acts, as Vicar of Christ on Earth, to reverse, undo or modify that justice. We need more than the living chief schismatic Fellay's public opinion as to what Pope Benedict XVI will do in the future, according to Fellay, and more than the expressed opinions of clerical subordinates among the Vatican hired help before turning our backs on actual papal judgments. Just as Pope Benedict XVI has the authority to modify or end the punishment of the SSPX, so too did Pope Paul VI have the authority to institute the Novus Ordo (Quo Primum or no Quo Primum). I do not like the Novus Ordo nor have I ever liked it. It is a Mass, however, whatever Fellay may imagine. Pope Paul VI said so. For that matter, I did not like Pope Paul VI but he was pope and so, whether I liked him or not, his actions were those of the Vicar of Christ. I attend the authorized Tridentine Mass every Sunday with absolutely no thanks to SSPX, whatever it may please Fellay and company to fantasize.
Sitetest's last paragraph says it all. As a Catholic, I am quite entitled to rely on papal judgments (how is that Americanism???) Bishop John Ireland's problem was not in over-reliance on Rome but on crying for American religious exceptionalism because we were somehow different and better than mankind elsewhere. As Leo XIII rejected Ireland's notions, we know better. Of course, politics and our Faith are clean different things. I gladly favor American political institutions but would never apply their institutional arrangements within Holy Mother the Church. I will take Catholic Church moral guidance to influence my every political vote.