The Instruction “UNIVERSAE ECCLESIAE” - BLESSING OR TRAP?

This docuмent is the long awaited application of Pope Benedict XVI’s Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificuм of July 7, 2007, and was published on May 13, 2011, signed by Cardinal Levada, President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, and approved by the Pope. It was hoped that it would take practical measures to positively promote the use of the traditional rite of Mass. Written entirely in the spirit of the Apostolic Letter that it applies, and faithful to it, it has both positive and negative aspects for the Church.

POSITIVE ASPECTS

The positive aspects are as follows. There is a clear reminder that not only was the traditional Mass "never juridically abrogated," and "always permitted" (as Benedict XVI put it in his July 7, 2007 letter to the world's bishops to accompany the Motu proprio) but that it never could be abrogated, quoting from the same letter: “What was sacred for prior generations, remains sacred and great for us as well, and cannot be suddenly prohibited altogether or even judged harmful” (§ 7). The docuмent even gives the profound reason why it is that truly Catholic liturgical worship cannot be suddenly and radically suppressed, namely because they express and profess the unchanging Faith of the Church: “…usages universally handed down by apostolic and unbroken tradition…are to be maintained not only so that errors may be avoided, but also so that the faith may be passed on in its integrity, since the Church’s rule of prayer corresponds to her rule of belief” (§ 3).

Less admirable is the excuse given for Rome’s nearly absolute suppression of this non-abrogated traditional rite from 1969 until 2007: “When the new Missal had been introduced under Pope Paul VI, it had not seemed necessary to issue guidelines regulating the use of the 1962 liturgy.” (§ 7). This is worse than a weak cover-up. It is manifestly dishonest, since Paul VI made no bones about the fact that he was trying to impose the New Mass and to suppress the traditional rites: “The reform about to be implemented, then, corresponds to an authoritative mandate of the Church. It is an act of obedience…It is a law…We shall do well to accept it with joyous enthusiasm and to implement it with prompt and unanimous observance” (Address on the new rite of Mass, November 19, 1969).

Also on the positive side is the recognition that every priest has the right to celebrate in the traditional rite, whenever he celebrates without faithful and that he does not require any special permission from his Ordinary or superior to do so (§ 23). Also is contained the unrestricted use of the traditional forms of the Breviary and Ritual (§32 & 35) as well as "permission" to use the traditional rite of Confirmation, although logically not required if the traditional rite has never been abrogated. The authorization for assistance at the traditional Mass by groups of faithful can hardly be called a positive aspect of this instruction, for even when such a group exists in a stable manner, it only has the right to request of the Novus Ordo bishop, who has authority to decide in liturgical matters, a suitable church and priest, with the possibility of recourse to the Ecclesia Dei commission.

NEGATIVE ASPECTS

Alas, however, the rest of this docuмent is both dangerous and harmful for Tradition, being from beginning to end an attempt to neutralize the very symbolism, meaning and reasons for the existence and celebration of the traditional rites of Mass. It is an effort to nullify any efforts that might be made to use the traditional Mass to bring about a return to Tradition. It seems strange that a docuмent issued to encourage the celebration of the traditional rite of Mass be essentially and profoundly opposed to the return to the practice of the traditional Catholic Faith. However, the following affirmations contained in this docuмent clearly indicate that this is indeed the case:

1) It states that there is neither contradiction nor rupture between the traditional and new rites of Mass, so that both are the expression of the same law of prayer (§ 6 & 7). This affirmation, already made by Paul VI in the above-mentioned address, is manifestly false, for, as Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci declared in their letter of Pope Paul VI of September 25, 1969: "The Novus Ordo Missae…represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent."

2) It maintains that the New Mass and the traditional Mass are but "two usages of the one Roman rite," that the New Mass is to be considered as the Ordinary form and the traditional Mass as the Extraordinary form. This distinction was invented by Pope Benedict XVI, in Article 1 of the above-mentioned Motu proprio, which states that the Mass of Paul VI "is the ordinary expression of the law of prayer of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite" and that the traditional Mass "is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same law of prayer." This is manifestly false, since the New Mass, devoid of the sacred, and of Protestant and Modernist inspiration, is the expression of a banquet meal, a celebration of the community, whereas the traditional Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice, the reactualization of the sacrifice of Calvary. A quite different law of prayer governs each one, nor can that which expresses Catholic doctrine be called "extraordinary," nor that which fails to do so "ordinary."

3) However, most astonishing in this entire docuмent is the condition that is imposed upon the faithful who request the traditional Mass, which is contained in §19: "The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church."

This condition is very strong and uncompromising, directed as it is against traditional Catholics. If they accept that the New Mass is not in itself necessarily invalid, and if they accept the authority of the Sovereign Pontiff, they rightly absolutely refuse to accept the legitimacy of the New Mass. It is precisely for this reason that they refuse to attend it, and why they request the traditional rites. Consequently this condition excludes from the celebration of the traditional Mass under the Motu proprio all those who insist on their right to keep the Faith. For such traditional Catholics to use it, is objectively to do so under false pretences. If this condition were to be strictly applied, it would exclude the very reason why the traditional Mass is celebrated, and it would mean its death, except for a few people with sentimental attachments.

This refusal of the legitimacy of the new rite of Mass is an immediate consequence of the observation that the New Mass does not follow the law of the Catholic Faith, that it undermines the interior life and destroys the Faith of those who assist at it, that it propagates modernist ideas, especially the loss of respect for the sacraments, notably the Blessed Sacrament, as well as respect for the ordained priesthood, and promotes the naturalism and humanism that permeate its ceremonies. These are the observations to be made by every thinking Catholic, and the radical explanation as to why so many Catholics have abandoned their practice of the Faith. These considerations make the new rite of Mass in a very real sense illegitimate, because incapable of fulfilling its purpose to sanctify souls, as well as wrong and a grave evil that has brought great harm to the Church. The official approval from the liberal post-conciliar Popes does nothing at all to change this.

It is very interesting to note that this fact was effectively admitted by Cardinal Kurt Koch, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, in an address given to a congress held on Summorum Pontificuм on May 15, 2011. He admitted that "the post-conciliar liturgical reform is considered in large circles of the Catholic Church as a rupture with tradition and as a new creation" and that in the novus ordo "that sacredness that attracts many to the old use must manifest itself more forcefully." (www.zenit.org 5/17/2011) It is an understatement, but at least it is a recognition that in the minds of the faithful there is a real problem with the Novus Ordo. It is the very recognition of this problem which, according to the text of the instruction itself, excludes one from taking part in the Masses celebrated in virtue of the Motu proprio.

4) Underlying this instruction is to be found a hidden agenda that is not clearly expressed. This was already indicated by Benedict XVI in 2007, when he asked that the two rites "be mutually enriching" (July 7, 2007) by the inclusion in the old Missal of new saints and new prefaces. This process was already begun by changing the Good Friday prayer for the Jews in the traditional rite so as to exclude the prayer for their conversion. §25 of the present instruction tells us that such changes are indeed going to continue: "New saints and certain of the new prefaces can and ought to be inserted into the 1962 Missal, according to provisions which will be indicated subsequently."

It was, however, Cardinal Koch himself who, in the above-mentioned address, explained the Roman plan that underlies this granting of permission for a rite that requires no permission. He explained that it is the Pope’s wish for the traditional Mass to be an “ecuмenical bridge," for by it the Pope “wished to contribute to the resolution of this dispute and to reconciliation within the Church: the Motu proprio promotes, so to speak, intra-Catholic ecuмenism...if the intra-Catholic ecuмenism fails, the Catholic controversy over the liturgy will also extend to ecuмenism, and the old liturgy will not be able to carry out its ecuмenical function of bridge-building.” (Op. Cit.) The purpose of this instruction is consequently to force all Catholics, liberal and traditional, to accept one another’s liturgy, so as to end all dispute on doctrinal questions. Surprising as it may seem, it is the same ecuмenical spirit, emanating from Vatican II, that has produced the Assisi world meetings and that is behind Rome’s permission for the traditional Mass that Rome admits needs no permission!

However, Cardinal Koch was even more explicit in his analysis of the ultimate goal of this initiative, namely that the traditional and new Masses will eventually evolve together into a common rite, namely that both are to disappear: “Benedict XVI knows well that in the long term we cannot remain with a coexistence between the ordinary and extraordinary forms in the Roman rite, but that the Church will again need in the future a common rite...However, given that a new liturgical form cannot be decided in an office, as it requires a process of growth and purification, for the time being the Pope stresses above all that the two forms of use of the Roman rite can and must enrich one another mutually.” (Ib.) Rome’s permission of a Mass that needs no permission is that it might ultimately disappear! What a diabolical paradox!

5) Nowhere in this docuмent is contained any missionary zeal or effort to spread the traditional rite of Mass. The traditional Mass is always presented as something that priests and faithful must request of their own initiative, and never something that is positively to be promoted by the Church’s hierarchy. What a strange overturning of the usual government of the Church, or rather a vacuum of authority, that the simple people and priests must be in the driving seat! For this reason also, it cannot be the vehicle for a widespread return to the traditional Mass.

6) The tonsure, minor orders and the major order of the subdiaconate are reduced to the level of simply pious ceremonies, without any canonical value or spiritual importance or power attached to them (§ 30). No longer does the tonsure make a young man a cleric, even in the communities in which only the traditional rite is used. Furthermore the “non-cleric” who receives the minor orders is not recognized as receiving anything. Also, the vow of chastity that is included in the ordination to the subdiaconate is somehow considered as not existing, even when this order is received, nor is the young man who has received this major order even considered to be a cleric. His situation is exactly the same as in the Novus Ordo. He becomes a cleric at the diaconate only. This makes a mockery of all the traditional rites of ordination, that date back to the third century, retained by the Motu proprio purely for sentimental and ecuмenical reasons.

The conclusion from these brief considerations is quite clear. Cooperation with the Ecclesia Dei commission’s administration of this Motu proprio is an unacceptable compromise on principle, the profession that there is no crisis in the Church, and a formal cooperation in the ecuмenical spirit that refuses to resolve the doctrinal problems of modernism. It is to live a contradiction: namely to chose the traditional Mass because the New Mass is wrong, and yet at the same time to profess that the New Mass is not wrong so as to be able to celebrate the traditional Mass. It is the ultimate contradiction of asking permission for that which needs no permission, that that which needs no permission might ultimately be forbidden!