http://www.cfnews.org/fellay-40th.htm

“There is a practice in Rome by which they deal with the Society of St. Pius X as being totally and completely Catholic,” and not schismatic. The practice refers to the Vatican’s recognition of SSPX priests, and recognition of SSPX confessions as valid.

           This was part of the message given by Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, during the recent SSPX Forum.

            The Society of St. Pius X held its 40th Anniversary Conference from October 15 to 17 in Kansas City. It was the first national SSPX conference held in the United States, and up to 700 people attended.

            Nine speakers addressed the conference.[1] The keynote presentation came from Bishop Fellay on Saturday afternoon.  Entitled “Forty Years of Fidelity”, the bishop’s conference discussed the principles of the present crisis, and then the solution proposed by Archbishop Lefebvre.

            Bishop Fellay closed with some little-known revelations of how Rome truly regards the Society of St. Pius X. In important matters, Rome does not act toward the SSPX as if it is a schismatic group, but deals with it as wholly Catholic.

Spiritual Journey

           Bishop Fellay opened quoting from Spiritual Journey, the last book written by Archbishop Lefebvre that he presented as his testimony to his priests in 1990. This book was of such importance to the Archbishop that upon its completion, he said, “Now I have finished my work. God can call me.”
 
           If you want to learn the soul of the Archbishop, said Bishop Fellay, read and meditate on this book.

`           Bishop Fellay constructed his presentation on two key statements of Archbishop Lefebvre, taken from the beginning of Spiritual Journey:

            1) “The evil of the Council resides in the ignorance of Jesus Christ and of His Kingship. It is the evil of the bad angels. It is the way to hell.”

            2) “It is because the Kingship of Christ is no longer at the center of the preoccupations and of the activities of those who are our prelates, that they lost the sense of God, and of the Catholic priesthood. And because of this, we can no longer follow them.”

            These statements are both strong and deep.

            When we look at the Council, says Bishop Fellay, we know there is something wrong. It may be hard to describe, but there is something out of tune. Blatant error is rare in the Council. We find true expressions of Faith, followed by expressions that are almost the opposite.

            In light of this problem with contradictions and ambiguities in the Council texts, Bishop Fellay explains that the texts must be read with the Catholic Faith, that is, with a Catholic “filter”. Thus, “what is good, we accept. What is ambiguous must be interpreted in a Catholic way. What does not enter into [fit through] this filter, we reject.”

            Though Bishop Fellay did not mention it, he was reaffirming the approach to the Council enunciated by Archbishop Lefebvre nearly twenty years ago.

            In his dealings with Cardinal Ratzinger in 1982 and 1985, Archbishop Lefebvre insisted the only way Vatican II could be accepted in light of Tradition would be for the ambiguous texts of Vatican II to be strictly interpreted according to the perennial magisterium, and that the Council texts incompatible with Tradition must be revised.

            Bishop Fellay went on to consider in detail the Archbishop’s statement from Spiritual Journey that “The evil of the Council resides in the ignorance of Jesus Christ and of His Kingship…”

            Here, the Archbishop gets to the root of the crisis. It is a problem that concerns the proper understanding of God and of Jesus Christ. We are dealing with the principle of the Faith itself – God.

            Those infected with the Council’s spirit have a problem with their understanding of God. God is not put in His proper place. He is looked upon as a good grandfather, so good, in fact, that everyone will go to Heaven, no matter what they do.

            And since these Churchmen have the wrong understanding of God, then they have the wrong understanding of sin. Sin is recognized if it is something that hurts our neighbor, but sins against God, which comprise the first three Commandments of the Decalogue, are no longer a concern. “And if there is so much sin in the world today, it is because they have forgotten God. They forget about the punishment for sin,” which ultimately is hell.

            This erroneous understanding of God is manifest in how prelates, priests and Catholic people deal with Him. Using the most elevated language possible, Bishop Fellay cited bishops – and national bishops’ conferences — who approach the problem of AIDS saying that it is better for a man to use an immoral contraceptive device to protect himself, rather than contract this disease that may kill him. Human life is placed as more important than offending God by mortal sin. This perversion comes from the “ignorance of Jesus Christ” spoken of by Archbishop Lefebvre.

            From this ignorance, Churchmen lose their understanding of Our Lord’s Kingship and His Sovereignty over nations. For example, when faced with today’s pluralistic society, they deem it better for the State not to recognize the Catholic Church as the one true religion. But “when you say that the State must recognize all religions, you ask Our Lord to step down.”

            Bishop Fellay cited Pope John Paul II’s second pan-religious meeting at Assisi as evidence of this demoting of Our Lord. The arrangement at the second Assisi meeting was to give the various world religions their own room in the Assisi convent for their prayer rituals. The Catholics asked the members of these religions what they would need.

            The Zoroastrians noted that their ritual requires fire, so they need a window.

            The Muslims said they would need a room oriented toward Mecca

            The Jєωs said “We need a room that has never been blessed.” All blessings are done in the name of Jesus Christ, and the Jєωs do not accept Him. (Where they found such a room in a Catholic convent is hard to envision.)

            Another disturbing point: for the pan-religious prayer meeting at Assisi, “all the crucifixes had disappeared”.  Bishop Fellay notes, “In order to build unity with all the religions, you don’t need much. But you need to remove something – the crucifix.”

            Bishop Fellay also observed the Catholic technical term “False Religion”, employed throughout the centuries, has not been used since Pope Pius XII. “Go through the official texts since the Council and try to find the term ‘false religion’. Are they or are they not false? And if they are false, why not say it?”

            The Year 2000 Vatican docuмent Dominus Iesus may say the Catholic religion is the only one that contains the “whole truth”, but it does not speak of non-Catholic religions as false.

            Thus, the errors of Ecuмenism and Religious Liberty all boil down to the same problem. God is not put in His proper place. Jesus Christ is not put in His proper place. “The evil of the Council resides in the ignorance of Jesus Christ and of His Kingship…” They no longer know who Jesus Christ is.

The Wrong Preoccupations

            This ignorance of Jesus Christ leads directly to Archbishop Lefebvre’s second observation: “It is because the Kingship of Christ is no longer at the center of the preoccupations and of the activities of those who are our prelates, that they lost the sense of God, and of the Catholic priesthood. And because of this, we can no longer follow them.”
 
           Here we move to another level, from the speculative aspect of belief into the active component – the acting out of this ignorance of Jesus Christ. One of the chief ways this is now manifest among modern Churchmen is that the Kingship of Jesus Christ is no longer the center of their preoccupations and activities.

            The preoccupations and activities of these Churchmen become more worldly and man-centered, such as evidenced by the Cardinal of Napoli who said the three great problems of his diocese had to do with traffic, garbage, and a similar dilemma. No mention is made of sin or Christian education.

            Because of this ignorance of Jesus Christ, and because the Kingship of Christ is no longer the center of their preoccupations and activities, “they lose their sense of God”, and this is manifest in the New Mass.

            This is why we feel good and nourished when we attend the true Mass, but we feel bad when we go to the new Mass. The New Mass does not “fit” Catholicism. It does not express our Faith.

            To drive this point home, Bishop Fellay spoke of his meeting with Pope Benedict XVI in August, 2005.[2]

            When the Pope asked Bishop Fellay his thoughts, he responded, “Holy Father, the situation in the Church is such that the normal Catholic life has been made impossible. … Every day, priests, religious, sisters, brothers, faithful, come to us. They prefer to be ‘sanctioned’, punished, rather than to stay in a situation where they are obliged to act against their conscience.”

            In other words, these faithful Catholics would rather endure the stigma of being an alleged outcast, with all the suffering and misunderstanding that comes with it, rather than attend the New Mass, and rather than expose themselves to the spirit of the Council now the norm in diocesan parish life.

            That was 2005, and the situation remains to this day.

Solution

            So what is the answer?

            Bishop Fellay expounded at length on Archbishop Lefebvre’s words from Spiritual Journey. Here the Archbishop says that in the face of “the progressive degradation of the priestly ideal”, it was his goal not only to put forth in all its purity the authentic Catholic priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and not only to teach the pure doctrine approved by the Church, “but also to transmit the profound and unchanging spirit of the Catholic priesthood and of the Christian spirit essentially bound to the great prayer of Our Lord [the Mass] which His Sacrifice on the Cross expresses eternally.”

“It is because the Kingship of Christ is no longer at the center of the preoccupations and of the activities of those who are our prelates, that they lost the sense of God, and of the Catholic priesthood..." - Archbishop Lefebvre

 
            Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of St. Pius X have been faithful in preserving the authentic priesthood and the purity of the Faith against modern errors. But Archbishop Lefebvre notes this is not enough. Something more is needed. And that “something” is the “spirit of the Catholic priesthood … the Christian spirit” bound to the Great Prayer of Our Lord.

            The virtues have to be informed by Charity, informed by the true “spirit” of Faith. There is only one way to find this spirit, and that is at the foot of the Cross, through prayer and contemplation.

            In this call to holiness, Bishop Fellay recommends the classic work by Dom Jean-Baptiste Chautard, The Soul of the Apostolate as a guide to help achieve a spirit of prayer and contemplation. We must beware of too much action and not enough prayer. Action that is firmly rooted in prayer, contemplation and holiness “is the only way God uses to bring good to the Church”.

            He notes that every time God brings a crisis in the Church to an end, “He does it by sending saints.” And this time will be no different. “The crisis is deep, and if there is a remedy, it must be mighty.”

            Bishop Fellay spoke at length on the need for this holiness and contemplation. At this point of the presentation, one felt as if one were more on a Retreat than at a conference. These were excellent spiritual considerations that all need to hear.

Rome and SSPX: Latest Revelations

            Due to space restraints, we will move into the final section of the talk that dealt with the Society’s present standing with Rome
         
  Bishop Fellay notes that there is a constant contradiction. We see that the Conciliar Popes recognize there is a crisis of Faith.  Paul VI spoke of “the smoke of satan” in the Church, and John Paul II lamented the spreading of heresy. At the same time, these same Popes worsen the crisis by promoting the Council’s program.

            This contradiction also surfaces in the way Rome deals with the SSPX.  Bishop Fellay said, “We see docuмents and statements such as ‘the Society does not exist’ or ‘their sacraments are invalid.’ At the same time, there is a practice in Rome by which they deal with the SSPX as being totally and completely Catholic.”

            For example, we consider the way Rome dealt with priests who left the SSPX and sought “regularization”.

            There is a principle of action in the Catholic Church that says if a Catholic receives ordination outside of the Church from a schismatic movement, (the Orthodox, etc.), he may come back into the Church, but may never exercise the sacramental power he has stolen from outside the Church. It is a general principle applied up to the present.

            But when SSPX priests, who are supposed to be schismatic, seek “regularization” from Rome, this is not the practice. They are recognized and are permitted to operate as priests.

            ”If we really were schismatics,” says Bishop Fellay, “then Rome would have to prohibit the exercise of the priesthood. The very fact that Rome allows them to act as priests means that we are not schismatic, and that they really do not see us as schismatics. This has continuously been the policy of Rome.”

            This was even the case with a priest ordained by Bishop Rangal [from Campos] who had been consecrated by Bishops Tissier, Williamson and de Galareta. The Congregation of the Faith at the time insisted that the priest be treated the same as those of the SSPX, and allow him to act as a priest. “Once again,” says Bishop Fellay, “no schism”.

            Then there are painful cases that concern sins so severe they are penalized by excommunication reserved only to the Pope.

            SSPX priests who confront these cases in the confessional absolve the penitent from the sin, and from the excommunication. According to Church policy, the priest must then send the case to Rome to be examined, and the excommunication formally lifted. Bishop Fellay says, “Every time – absolutely every time – we have received an answer from Rome that the priest who took care of this confession did well, that it was perfectly in order, and it was both licit and valid.” Rome would then comment on the penance, whether it was sufficient or not enough.

            In other words, Rome does not say the confession was invalid. Rome accepts the validity of the SSPX confession.

            Bishop Fellay asks, “So why is it said that our confessions are invalid if this is the way Rome deals with us in the case of these most serious matters?”

            “You see this contradiction?” he says, “and we meet this kind of contradiction all the time.”

            Another example: during the great storm that erupted in January 2009 after the “excommunications” were “lifted”, the Vatican Secretary of State issued a decree stating that the Society of St. Pius X does not exist, that it is not Catholic, and that the SSPX must absolutely recognize Vatican II and all the teachings of the Popes since the Council.

            Later that year, two weeks before Easter, Bishop
Fellay received an intervention from Rome. The German bishops were putting pressure on the Vatican, and were threatening to excommunicate the SSPX if they performed ordinations at their German seminary. In a gesture toward the Pope, Bishop Fellay moved the ordinations from Germany to Econe.

            While the Vatican was trying to stop the ordinations, a Cardinal told Bishop Fellay, “Just ask the Pope for permission and I can almost guarantee you will receive his permission, and untill Easter, the Society of St. Pius X will be recognized.”

            Bishop Fellay responded, “But wait a minute! What about that Decree from the Secretary of State” that claims the SSPX is not part of the Church and that it must accept the Council?

            The Cardinal responded, “That is only a political text. It is not even signed by the Secretary of State, and it is not what the Pope thinks.”

            This is the type of contradiction from Rome the SSPX constantly encounters.

Lex Orandi

            This contradiction also surfaces regarding the Old Latin Mass.
 
           In 2007, Pope Benedict rehabilitated the Tridentine Mass. This was an important move, although the bishops continue to block the Motu Proprio’s implementation. Bishop Fellay quoted a bishop in Italy who said, “The day the Pope says publicly the Tridentine Mass, I leave the Church.” This bishop is certainly not alone in his hostility to old Latin Liturgy.


Bishop Fellay immediately after the Saturday afternoon lecture.

            Bishop Fellay noted that Pope Benedict does not like the New Mass. As Cardinal Ratzinger, he stated in print that it is a “banal on-the-spot fabrication”. He prefers the Old Mass, and there is word he celebrates it from time to time. Yet due to the pressure from bishops, he allows himself to be intimidated into not celebrating it publicly.

            The opposition is so fierce from the progressivists that even mildly conservative Novus Ordo prelates are denounced as “ultra conservative”.

            Along the same line, in 2007 the Vatican noted that “pro multis” in the words of consecration must be translated as “for many”, since “for all” is inaccurate. The German bishops recently stated that in spite of the Vatican’s order, they plan to keep “for all”, because – and this is priceless – “it is tradition, and we have to keep to tradition”.

            When dealing with Rome, there is also a kind of “reading between the lines” that is necessary. In Pope Benedict’s decree “lifting” the “excommunications”, we read “All the effects of the previous decree are taken away.”  Strictly speaking, this means that the excommunications were “lifted” on all six bishops, including Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Meyer, and not only the four SSPX bishops named in the docuмent.

            Referring to the fact that Pope Benedict is a man of both conservative and liberal gestures, Bishop Fellay said, “Ratzinger is a mixture”. Pope Benedict is attacked by liberals because he wants to reverse some of the modern trends in the Church. At the same time, he “is totally in favor of ecuмenism and religious liberty”.

            Bishop Fellay said, “Pray that the good side of the Pope may triumph, in himself, in the Church and in the Vatican.”

            In closing, Bishop Fellay returned to Archbishop Lefebvre’s call to fidelity and to holiness, noting that “our work is not for ourselves, but for the Church.”

            The bishop’s final words were that of encouragement in the face of opposition: “Our Lord promised a special blessing to those who would suffer in His Name. I am sure we are on that side.”

 
Notes;

[1] The roster was comprised of: Bishop Bernard Fellay, Father Arnaud Rostand, Father Juan Iscara, Father Kenneth Novak, Father Scott Gardiner, Father Michael McMahon, Father Cyprian, O.S.B., Dr. Andrew Childs and John Vennari. The Angelus Press will soon release all the lectures on audio CD.

[2] It was during this meeting with the Pope that Bishop Fellay first heard mention of a new structure – along the lines of some sort of Apostolic Administration – as a possible solution for the SSPX. Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos spoke of it during the meeting, but Bishop Fellay has not yet seen it drawn up on paper, nor has he been informed of its details.