Cardinal: If Lefebvre Had Seen Proper Mass, He Might Not Have Split
After witnessing a Mass celebrated at an Italian abbey, SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay reportedly made this comment about the SSPX founder.
by CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY 01/21/2013

ROME — According to a senior Vatican official, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X once said that, if the traditionalist group's leader had seen the Mass celebrated properly, he might not have broken off from the Church.

Cardinal Antonio Canizares, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, made this statement on Jan. 15 in response to questions from reporters after he delivered an address on the Second Vatican Council at the Spanish Embassy to the Holy See.

“On one occasion,” the Spanish cardinal recalled, “Bishop [Bernard] Fellay, who is the leader of the Society of St. Pius X, came to see me and said, ‘We just came from an abbey that is near Florence. If Archbishop [Marcel] Lefebvre had seen how they celebrated there, he would not have taken the step that he did.’”  

“The missal used at that celebration was the Paul VI Missal in its strictest form,” the cardinal added.

The Paul VI Missal contains the ordinary form of the Mass promulgated after the Second Vatican Council and is one of the points of contention that led to the separation with the Society of St. Pius X, founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, who died in 1991, three years after incurring automatic excommunication for illicitly ordaining four SSPX bishops.  

The Lefebvrists have insisted on continuing to celebrate the Mass according to the missal promulgated by Pope John XXIII in 1962.

Cardinal Canizares later spoke with a reduced number of reporters and further amplified his remarks about the Lefebvrists and the Paul VI Missal.  

He elaborated on the idea that if the schismatic archbishop had seen the new Mass celebrated properly and reverently he might not have rejected it.

“Even the followers of the Society of St. Pius X, founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, when they participate in a Mass that is properly celebrated, say, ‘If things were this way everywhere, there would have been no need for what happened and for what really caused this separation,'” he said.

Liturgical Continuity

The cardinal went on to explain that Vatican II offered more than simply changes.  

“It offers a vision of the liturgy in continuity with the entire Tradition of the Church and the theological reflection it makes about the liturgy,” he said. “The changes are a consequence of this theological reflection within ecclesial Tradition.”

To show that the liturgy should not be a cause for division, Pope Benedict XVI published the motu proprio Summorum Pontificuм in 2007 to establish universal use of the 1962 missal.  

The Holy Father has taken several other steps towards reconciliation with the Society of St. Pius X.  

On Jan. 21, 2009, he lifted the excommunications imposed on the four bishops ordained by Lefebvre in 1988, including Bernard Fellay.  

In doing so, however, he stressed that they should give “full recognition to the Second Vatican Council,” as well as to the magisteriums of the popes after Pius XII, as a condition for full communion.

In addition, Pope Benedict XVI gave the society the chance to end the separation in 2011 by accepting a "doctrinal preamble."

In 2012, the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei,” charged with the ongoing dialogue with the Society of St. Pius X, announced that the society had requested “addition time for reflection and study” of the proposed preamble.

What makes these novus ordites clerics think that any SSPX priest couldn't just don his baseball cap, glue on a false mustache and visit some novus ordo church to see how they like to do things there?

In all his years of life after the promulgation of the Novus Ordo and no one could be found to show Archbishop Lefebvre a proper Novus Ordo service?

Bologna is right - especially since it was not the Archbishop who did the splitting.

A bit of history on the founding of the SSPX.
http://www.sspxseminary.org/who-we-are/seminary-history.html

Bishop Fellay has offered a "clarification" on the Society's website:

As very often in such circuмstances, a phrase has been interpreted badly: I was describing to Cardinal Canizares (and this was some five or six years ago) that the abuses in the liturgy have caused a major reaction amongst us. And this is still the case today, in the sense that the abuses and sacrileges in the sacred liturgy have helped the faithful and even priests to quickly and more fully understand the profound defects and danger of the Novus Ordo - because there is a link between the New Mass and the abuses. The abuses have helped to prove that our position is the right one: that is, the New Mass is not good in itself.

But this said, from the beginning and before the abuses took place, Archbishop Lefebvre had already refused to celebrate the Novus Ordo Missae. Because the serious omissions and the whole [conciliar] reform, done in an ecuмenical spirit, gives it a Protestant savor. The New Mass puts at risk the Catholic Faith and the numerous examples of faithful and priests who have lost the Faith directly linked with the celebration of the Novus Ordo are quite blatant. Nevertheless for a while - and until these new damaging effects were clearly recognized - Archbishop Lefebvre did not strictly prohibit attendance at the New Mass. It was only after a few years that he prohibited the seminarians from going to the New Mass while on their holiday’s vacations.

The Neo-SSPX also has posted an article claiming that Archbishop Lefebvre believed that people should attend the NO if necessary.

The Neo-SSPX is getting worse each day.

The Neo-SSPX also has posted an article claiming that Archbishop Lefebvre believed that people should attend the NO if necessary.

Sorry, this is actually false, I was incorrect after checking again. Maybe Matthew will remove that remark I made. I apologise.

It is actually an excerpt from an extensive biography of the Archbishop's life written by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais

The article.

We present here some excerpts from the book Marcel Lefebvre: The Biography which outline the first reactions of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to the Novus Ordo Missae and how he was compelled to eventually oppose assisting at the New Mass.

For the Catholic Priesthood; chapter 16 (pgs 416-417)

A problem: assisting at the New Mass

Since Archbishop Lefebvre was opposed to the New Mass, he would not have it in the seminary. On the eve of the first Sunday of Advent 1969 when the Novus Ordo Missae came into force in the diocese of Fribourg ,the Archbishop simply said: “We’ll keep the old Mass, eh?” Everyone agreed...

(...)

It is true that prudence might suggest to this or that priest “not to refuse the new Ordo for fear of scandalizing the faithful” by their witnessing his apparent disobedience to the bishop.[40] Such a priest should, however, “keep the Roman Canon which is still permitted, and say the words of consecration in a low voice according to the old form, which is still allowed.”[41] When Archbishop Lefebvre was absent on a Sunday, the seminarians would go and assist at Mass together at the Bernadine convent of La Maigrauge where an old monk celebrated the New Mass in Latin. The Archbishop was not a man to rush souls. He allowed himself time to seethe fruits more clearly in order to pass better judgment on the tree. He also wanted to hear the opinions of his colleagues in the episcopate, and find a consensus among his friends.

His friend Bishop de Castro Mayer found himself with a very painful problem of conscience with respect to his priests:

Can we, the bishops, be silent? Can we, pastors of souls, follow a via media, saying nothing and leaving each priest to follow his conscience as he wishes at such risk to so many souls? And if we say openly what we think, what will be the consequences? We will be removed... leaving many of the faithful in confusion and scandalizing the weakest souls.[42]

In January 1978 the Bishop of Campos had already solved his doubts. He translated the Short Critical Study and distributed it among his priests.

It seems to me preferable that scandal be given rather than a situation be maintained in which one slides into heresy. After considerable thought on the matter, I am convinced that one cannot take part in the New Mass, and even just to be present one must have a serious reason. We cannot collaborate in spreading a rite which, even if it is not heretical, leads to heresy. This is the rule I am giving my friends.[43]

At the time, Archbishop Lefebvre’s position was not quite as categorical. He considered that the New Mass was not heretical, but as Cardinal Ottaviani had said, it represents serious dangers; thus in the course of time, “Protestant ideas concerning the Supper would be unconsciously accepted by the Catholics.” This was why children had to be taught the fundamental notions about the Mass. However, “it is an exaggeration to say that most of these Masses are invalid.” One should not hesitate to go a little further to have Mass according to the Roman Ordo; but “if one does not have the choice and if the priest celebrating Mass according to the Novus Ordo is faithful and worthy, one should not abstain from going to Mass.”[44]

Footnotes

40 Spiritual Conference, Fribourg, Nov. 9, 1969.

41 Letter to a young priest, Sierre, Feb. 16, 1970.

42 Bishop de Castro Mayer, Letter to Archbishop Lefebvre, Oct. 5, 1969.

43 Letter of Jan. 29, 1970, to Archbishop Lefebvre. Unfortunately, Bishop de Castro Mayer states that Archbishop Sigaud “has drawn up a decree for the implementation of the New Mass in his diocese.”

44 Letter of Feb. 17, 1970, to Gerald Wailliez.

“I adhere to Eternal Rome”; chapter 17 (pgs 461-465)

Faithfulness to the Mass of All Time: rejecting the Novus Ordo

Archbishop Lefebvre did not found his Society against the New Mass, but for the priesthood. However, the concerns of the priesthood now brought him to reject the new Ordo Missae.

(...)

The orthodoxy and validity of the New Mass

Archbishop Lefebvre did not hesitate to speak publicly on the question of the orthodoxy and validity of Paul VI’s Mass. He considered that “one cannot say generally that the New Mass is invalid or heretical”; however, “it leads slowly to heresy.”

(...)

In 1975, the Archbishop added that the New Mass:

is ambivalent and ambiguous because one priest can say it with a totally Catholic faith in the sacrifice, etc., and another can say it with a different intention, because the words he pronounces and the gestures he makes no longer contradict [other intentions].[9]

The problem of assisting at the New Mass

Some priests were torn between the need to keep the Faith as expressed by the traditional Mass and a desire to be obedient as they saw it. In the early days of the reforms, Archbishop Lefebvre advised them to keep at least the traditional Offertory and Canon and to say them in Latin. His advice to the seminarians as to the faithful was remarkably moderate intone for one who was first to step up to the breach to repel the New Mass. He exhorted them:

Make every effort to have the Mass of St. Pius V, but if it is impossible to find one within forty kilometers and if there is a pious priest who says the New Mass in as traditional a way as possible, it is good for you to assist at it to fulfill your Sunday obligation.

One can counter the dangers for the Faith through solid catechism:

Should all the world’s churches be emptied? I do not feel brave enough to say such a thing. I don’t want to encourage atheism.[10]

(...)

Little by little the Archbishop’s position hardened: this Mass with its ecuмenical rite was seriously ambiguous and harmful to the Catholic Faith. “This is why one cannot be made to assist at it to fulfill one’s Sunday obligation.”[15] In 1975 he still admitted that one could “assist occasionally” at the New Mass when one feared going without Communion for a longtime. However in 1977, he was more or less absolute:

To avoid conforming to the evolution slowly taking place in the minds of priests, we must avoid - I could almost say completely - assisting at the New Mass.[16]

A poisoned liturgy

Soon, Archbishop Lefebvre would no longer tolerate participation at Masses celebrated in the new rite except passively, for example at funerals [this is also true for marriages - Ed]...[17]

Footnotes

9 “La messe de Luther,” Talk in Florence, Feb. 15, 1975. [In A Bishop Speaks, 192 ff.]

10 Spiritual Conferences at Econe, Dec. 10, 1972.

15 Letter to M. Lenoir, Nov. 23, 1975.

16 Spiritual Conferences at Econe, 42 B, March 21, 1977.

17 Circuмstances he considered decisive in 1974: Spiritual Conferences at Econe, March 7, 1974, and April 1, 1974.

Pablo, the video was fantastic, thanks!