I have just received two important news items from a friend regarding the removal of the Cross bearer from the Traditional Mass in Post Falls by the Prior Fr. Vassal, SSPX.
For those who remember this whole ordeal, this is the latest developments.
The first important development is one of “apparent” good news: Since Easter, the Cross bearer has been noticed to be put back into the parish bulletin as a “regular” inclusion. Whether this is by a “change of heart”, done under pressure from many people complaining, or from a “conversion”, I do not know. However, the Cross bearer just showed back up within the serving scheduled inside the parish bulletin.
To find out, my friend had called the head M.C. (again) to see what is going on with this. In brief, the head M.C. had said that: “Yes, it has been on the serving schedule lately. But it will now only be on feast days and holidays.” (That is extremely sad.) The question was posed back to him that, “Well, all Sunday’s are first class feast days, and therefore should have the Cross bearer ”. He did reply to say that, “The cross bearer is there like a ‘sacramental’. You bring it out to use it at times”. My friend surprised at this, mentioned, “The Cross bearer is more than a ‘sacramental’, it is the standard of the Faith; and should be there for every procession to proclaim that faith. So it should be on all Sundays and processions”. He replied to say, “Well thanks for the call. Not many people call with good things.” (?).
So what is the bottom line? Fr. Vassal has moved with a lot of liberal persuasion to even alter the “meaning” of our Holy Faith to get what he wants.
Life was good with the Cross bearer for the last several weeks over Eastertide.
What a disaster and a shame…for the SSPX to purposely sow the “anti-cross” mentality. What is next in Fr. Vassal’s agenda?
The second important point of news happens to involve the U.S. District Superior, Fr. Rostand, in all of this.
Below, is a series of 3-Letters addressed to Fr. Rostand, from one of the faithful that attends that Post Falls Chapel. He wrote in his letters the concerns of the Cross bearer being removed from the Post Falls liturgy, along with his conversation he had with Fr. Vassal about this. The 3-letters were mailed to Fr. Rostand since Feb. 27, 2013, April 2, 2013, and May 25, 2013. The importance of these letters, and why they are being revealed, is that Fr. Rostand, as the District Superior has NOT at all responded to any of his valid concerns.
Up to this date, since Feb. 27, 2013, 16-weeks have gone by without a response from Fr. Rostand. Nothing! Nada! Not a peep! Not a single show of responsibility from the U.S District Superior to address this scandal.
Is Fr. Rostand in conspiracy with Fr. Vassal of encouraging this betrayal of the Traditional Mass; to slowly “neuter” it like Vatican II had done? I do not know. However, he is certainly responsible for the actions that have taken place and his silence that contribute to this overall scandal.
Note: My friend had given me these letters to put on Cathinfo; not to show any kind of “disrespect”, to the contrary, he wants others to know what is going on within the chapel of Post Falls and in the SSPX U.S. District at large for others to “pay attention” in their chapels if this is going to be a “trend” of abuses; and to try and prevent any other abuses to happen within the Traditional Mass.
He also has said that if Fr. Rostand, as the District Superior, was responsible in his duties to respond to this scandal of the Cross bearer over these 16-weeks of trying to correspond to him, regardless of the outcome at this time, he would not have revealed these letters in the preference to try and take care of this with Fr. Rostand. It is ONLY because Fr. Rostand, the top Superior of the United States, has not responded, and is continuing to show he is irresponsible in his duties.
If scandals are happening at the highest levels, my friend believes that word needs to get out to stop these abuses to the Traditional Mass, and any other betrayals that may creep in.
Here are the letters:
=================================================
Feb. 27, 2013
Fr. Rostand
SSPX District Superior, USA
Regina Coeli House
11485 N. Farley Road
Platte City, MO 64079
Dear Fr. Rostand,
In result from a recent conversation I had with the Prior of Post Falls Idaho, Fr. Vassal, that with reflection, prayer, and time in passing, I am writing to you with a valid issue taking place here in the priory/parish of Post Falls. Namely, Fr. Vassal had removed on his own initiative, the Cross bearer from the Traditional Liturgy since Advent, December 2012.
I spoke to Fr. Vassal on Feb. 17, 2013, after a Sunday Mass, about his reasons for this; as Fr. Vassal had never announced it from the pulpit, nor informed us faithful in a newsletter, or even posted it in the vestibule. In addition he said, when I asked him if the District Superior knew of this, he said: “No.”
My concerns, outside of the obvious in changing the liturgy the way we have known it all of our lives, is that Fr. Vassal had done this removal privately, under the “radar”; which, as I mentioned to him, is the same thing that the Novus Ordo had done in changing the Liturgy after the Vatican II Council to promote their new religion.
Also, other than many people here that are talking about this, as well as many of the children and altar servers are confused, is that Fr. Vassal in my conversation with him is very nonchalant about this whole issue.
Below, I have written down the exchange of our conversation to bring out the context.
************************
In the exchange between us, Fr. Vassal responses follow:
• I asked Fr. Vassal, Why did you remove the Cross bearer from the Mass, the Liturgy?
It is a Law of the Church; a Canon Law. The cross bearer in the rubrics is “only” for a Bishop. It is in my conscience that I need to remove the “abuse”. The “use” of the cross bearer in procession was actually started in France in revolt to the Bishop in France; from there it went everywhere.
• Well, it is still in France today. It is still in Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet and other places.
Yes, but the priest over there does not want to do it. I do not think it is a problem. Many people may not understand. So we will have it on Holy Name Society Sunday; and some big feast days.
• If it is “objective” as you say, and it is the Law, then why do you have it sometimes? Why not get rid of it altogether?
I would like to. But we can do it sometimes in procession.
• Did you ask the District Superior about removing the Cross bearer?
No. (With a shrug of his shoulders, shaking his head, squinting his eyebrows). I don’t think that I need to. I do not see a problem. It is just a small thing. (Fr. Vassal held his fingers up with a very small gap between his fingers.)
• Well isn’t that subjective to do it sometimes?
Well maybe. But it is just a small thing.
• If it is “objective”, why isn’t it done in the rest of the District? It is not removed in the seminary?
I don’t know. (Shrug of shoulders.)
• Isn’t it true in the Church, that if there is a Custom already established, not to remove it?
Well, yes, that is true. But it is a Law; so I need to remove it. It is still only a little problem. I do not think that people will mind once they know.
• I mind! And many people in the parish are talking about this.
Why haven’t they come to me and say something? Then I will need to give a sermon on “rash judgment”. (It was Fr. Vassal that did not communicate this; and it was Fr. Vassal that caused the confusion; which caused in his view, people having a rash judgment!). It is just a little problem.
• No, Fr. Vassal, it is a very big problem!
Well you are the only one that spoke to me. Why did you come to me so late to speak of this?
• Because you have not been here often doing masses; nor, when you were here, you did not come out after mass as you usually do.
That is right. I have not been here, and after mass, much lately.
• Fr. Vassal, you did not even announce it from the pulpit that you were going to remove the Cross bearer. You did not even write it in a newsletter. You did not say anything about it. You just did it. I know you are a foreigner in this country; but in this country when the Novus Ordo came out, the new church also made these changes little by little without telling anyone…and you are doing the same thing. So yes, it is a big problem!
Well maybe it was not prudent to do it without telling anyone. Maybe when I get back, I will think about it. But it is just a little thing. (Shrug of shoulders.) I do not think it is a problem.
• Isn’t it important to teach people, and the children about the Cross, and the importance of it? There is a Boy’s school here. I know that many of the boys who serve are confused; and do not know what is going on. Isn’t the Crucifix the standard of our religion; of the Faith; of the Mass? Isn’t it the standard bearer, like in the earlier days where ever the standard bearer went, it was a message of communication? To get rid of the Cross bearer, the crucifix, is detrimental to the faith.
There is still a cross on the altar. I do not think it is a problem.
************************
The conversation went back and forth with each of us saying the same thing. Fr. Vassal kept looking at his watch; and said at many times that he is trying to find someone. He needs to go. Then he left.
As you can see Fr. Rostand, along with two weeks that had passed and the Cross Bearer is still removed, that Fr. Vassal intention is to continue on. I find this quite an abuse; especially since we are in a crisis of the faith in the Church today; and we are to uphold the tradition of our faith.
I have enclosed one of the Parish bulletins that also shows the Cross Bearer (CB) is removed from the serving schedule. In addition, I was told that Fr. Vassal removed the Cross Bearer from the Liturgy at the Carmelite Sisters in Spokane, as with the Dominican Sisters (the girl’s school) in Post Falls.
Can you please help me understand? Would it also be in your intention that the Cross Bearer be removed from the Traditional Liturgy?
I look forward to your correspondence in what your decision will be on this matter. Thank you.
In Jesu et Maria,
(Name.)
(Address.)
=================================================
April 2, 2013
Fr. Rostand
SSPX District Superior, USA
Regina Coeli House
11485 N. Farley Road
Platte City, MO 64079
Dear Fr. Rostand,
Happy Easter to you.
I have mailed to you a letter dated Feb. 27, 2013 in regards to Fr. Vassal, in Post Falls, changing the traditional liturgy in removing the Cross Bearer from the ceremonies; it is very confusing to all of us, especially in this crisis of the Church.
Since 5-weeks have past, I have not heard from you with a response. Can you please respond back to me of your intentions as the District Superior in this matter?
I will enclose the Feb. 27, 3013 Letter with this mailing.
Thank you.
God bless you,
(Name.)
(Address.)
=================================================
May 25, 2013
Fr. Rostand
SSPX District Superior, USA
Regina Coeli House
11485 N. Farley Road
Platte City, MO 64079
Dear Fr. Rostand,
I have mailed to you a letter dated Feb. 27, 2013 in regards to Fr. Vassal, in Post Falls, changing the traditional liturgy in removing the Cross Bearer from the ceremonies.
Since 5-weeks had passed in not hearing from you with a response, I had written a second letter to you dated April 2, 2013, over 7-weeks ago (totaling 12-weeks), and I still have not heard from you. I am baffled and concerned with your silence.
I am baffled because, as you are a “District Superior”, you have a responsibility before God to address this serious issue. One of your priests in this District has changed the Traditional Catholic Liturgy without your knowledge, nor consent. I am concerned because, as you are a “District Superior”, your silence in not responding to this, is thus acting to encourage it, and to endorse it. Is that what you would like us to believe from your silence on this serious matter?
I may be signing my name “singularly”; but there are many of us who are waiting for your response.
As the District Superior, can you please respond back to me of your intentions in this matter?
This is my third and last letter to you regarding this serious issue before I would have to go to the next level. I am hoping you will be faithful in your duties as a District Superior in that you will respectfully respond. I will enclose again the Feb. 27, 3013 Letter with this mailing.
Thank you.
God bless you,
(Name.)
(Address.)
=================================================
Still NO response! The scandal grows bigger...