Paul VI, 1976:
Secret Consistory for the appointment of twenty Cardinals (May 24, 1976) | Paul VI (vatican.va)2) But there are also reasons for bitterness, which we certainly do not want to veil or minimize: and they arise especially from the relief of a polarity, often irreducible in certain of its excesses, which manifests in different fields a superficial immaturity, or a stubborn obstinacy, in essence a bitter deafness to appeals to that healthy balance, conciliatory of tensions, Starting from the great lesson of the Council, it is now more than ten years.a) On the one hand, there are those who, under the pretext of greater fidelity to the Church and to the Magisterium, systematically reject the teachings of the Council itself, its application and the reforms that flow from it, its gradual application by the Apostolic See and the Episcopal Conferences, under our authority, willed by Christ. The authority of the Church is discredited in the name of a Tradition, respect for which is attested only materially and verbally; the faithful are turned away from the bonds of obedience to the See of Peter as well as to their legitimate Bishops; Today's authority is rejected in the name of yesterday's. And the fact is all the more serious because the opposition of which we speak is not only encouraged by a few priests, but led by a Bishop, whom We have always venerated, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
It is so painful to note this: but how can we fail to see in such an attitude - whatever the intentions of these people may be - placing oneself outside obedience and communion with the Successor of Peter and therefore with the Church?
For this, unfortunately, is the logical consequence, that is, when it is maintained that it is preferable to disobey under the pretext of keeping one's faith intact, to work in one's own way for the preservation of the Catholic Church, while at the same time denying her effective obedience. And it's said openly! One dares to affirm that the Second Vatican Council is not binding; that the faith would also be endangered because of the post-conciliar reforms and orientations, that one has the duty to disobey in order to preserve certain traditions. What traditions? It is this group, and not the Pope, not the College of Bishops, not the Ecuмenical Council, that determines which of the innumerable traditions should be considered as a norm of faith. As you see, venerable Brethren, this attitude stands as a judge of that divine will which placed Peter and his legitimate Successors at the head of the Church in order to confirm the brethren in the faith and to shepherd the universal flock (cf. Lk 22:32; I. 21:15 ff.), which established him as guarantor and guardian of the deposit of the Faith.
And this is all the more serious, in particular, when division is introduced, precisely where congvegavit nos in unum Christi amor, into the Liturgy and the Eucharistic Sacrifice, rejecting obedience to the norms defined in the liturgical field. It is in the name of Tradition that we ask all our children, all Catholic communities, to celebrate the renewed Liturgy with dignity and fervour. The adoption of the new "Ordo Missae" is certainly not left to the discretion of priests or the faithful: and the Instruction of 14 June 1971 provided for the celebration of Mass in the ancient form, with the authorization of the Ordinary, only for elderly or infirm priests who offer the Divine Sacrifice sine populo. The new Ordo was promulgated to replace the old, after mature deliberation, following the demands of the Second Vatican Council. In the same way, our holy Predecessor Pius V had made the Reformed Missal obligatory under his authority, following the Council of Trent.
We demand, with the same supreme authority that comes to us from Christ Jesus, the same readiness to apply all the other liturgical, disciplinary and pastoral reforms that have matured in recent years in application of the Council's decrees. Any initiative that aims to hinder them cannot arrogate to itself the prerogative of rendering a service to the Church: in fact, it does grave harm to her.
Several times, directly, through our collaborators and other friends, we have called Archbishop Lefebvre's attention to the gravity of his attitudes, the irregularity of his principal present initiatives, the inconsistency and often falsity of the doctrinal positions on which he bases both, and the damage that comes from them to the whole Church.
It is with deep bitterness but with paternal hope that we turn once more to this confrere of ours, to his collaborators and to those who have allowed themselves to be carried away by them. Oh, of course, we believe that many of these faithful, at least at first, were in good faith: we also understand their sentimental attachment to habitual forms of worship or discipline which had long been their spiritual support and in which they had found spiritual nourishment. But we are confident that they will be able to reflect calmly, without taking sides, and will admit that they will find today the support and nourishment they seek, in the renewed forms which the Second Vatican Ecuмenical Council and We Ourselves have decreed as necessary, for the good of the Church, her progress in the contemporary world, her unity. We therefore exhort, once again, all these brothers and sons of ours, we implore them to become aware of the deep wounds which they otherwise cause to the Church, we again invite them to think . . .
It is with deep sadness but with paternal hope that we turn once more to our confrere Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, to his collaborators; We invite them to think of Christ's grave warnings about the unity of the Church (cf. Jn 17:21ff.) and about the obedience due to the legitimate Shepherd whom he presides over to the universal flock, as a sign of the obedience due to the Father and the Son (cf. 10, 16). We await them with an open heart, with our arms ready to embrace: may they be able to rediscover in humility and edification, to the joy of the People of God, the way of unity and love.
Topic: Was Vatican 2 actually binding? (assuming Paul 6 was Pope) (Read 11295 times)