|
Last Sunday we celebrated the
10th anniversary of the passing to eternity of our holy founder, Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre. On the 25th of this month we will celebrate the 10th
anniversary of that of Bishop Antonio De Castro Mayer, the courageous companion
of Archbishop Lefebvre in his defense of Tradition. If we were to ask ourselves
what brought them together, what united them in the combat against modernism,
and what heritage they bequeathed to us, we have only to answer, the love of the Tridentine Mass, the true Mass,
as the legitimate and perfect expression of our entire Catholic Faith.
Already in September 1969, Bishop De Castro Mayer took a
stand against the New Mass, writing to Pope Paul VI that it does not express "the
theology of the Holy Sacrifice as established by the Council of Trent in its
XXII session". He explained what he meant, by pointing out with
incredible perspicacity that it would not only be a pastoral failure, that it "not
only fails to inspire fervor", but that the even more profound problem
was its failure to express the most basic Catholic doctrine concerning the Mass.
He continued to explain that it "diminishes the Faith in central truths
of the Catholic life, such as the Real Presence of Jesus in the most Holy
Sacrament, the reality of the propitiatory sacrifice, the hierarchical
priesthood". The accompanying study established that the idea of a
propitiatory sacrifice for man’s sins offered to the Most Holy Trinity was
removed from the definition, purpose and essence of the Mass, henceforth
considered as the gathering of the people for a commemorative meal. We must
admire how he saw through the still traditional exterior to what really was
happening underneath. It is so much easier for us now that we see all the
consequences of this 30 year old perversion of the notion of what the Mass is.
Archbishop Lefebvre’s same
position became apparent in the crucial role that he played in 1967 in the
composition of the
Ottaviani
Intervention. He repeated his refusal in his
Declaration
of 1974, in which he explained how the New Mass is the tip of the frigid iceberg
of modernism, and the most clear manifestation of its attempt to destroy not
just devotion, but even the Faith itself:
"To the Novus Ordo Missae correspond a new
catechism, a new priesthood, new seminaries, a charismatic Pentecostal church
—all things opposed to orthodoxy and the perennial teaching of the Church…The
only attitude of faithfulness to the Church and Catholic doctrine, in view of
our salvation, is a categorical refusal to accept this reform."
Again, he stated the same thing
in his famous sermon of June 29, 1976, when threatened with suspension, and
after being told that everything he did would be approved by Rome if he were to
celebrate just one New Mass, he made the following statement:
"It is evident that it is on the problem of the
Mass that the whole drama between Ecône and Rome depends…We have the
precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith
which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a
symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith.
For if the most holy Church has wished to guard throughout the centuries this
precious treasure which She has given us of the rite of Holy Mass which was
canonized by Saint Pius V, it has not been without purpose. It is because this
Mass contains our whole faith, the whole Catholic Faith; faith in the Most
Holy Trinity, faith in the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, faith in the
Redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ, faith in the Blood of Our Lord Jesus
Christ which flowed for the redemption of our sins, faith in supernatural
grace, which comes to us from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which comes to
us from the Cross which comes to us through all the Sacraments."
The extraordinary heritage of these two great bishops is
not just that they were attached to the Mass of all time, but the reason why.
This is what those who have placed themselves under the Ecclesia Dei
Commission and who attend the Indult Mass have all failed to see, accepting as
they must the legitimacy and orthodoxy of the New Mass. For these two bishops,
however, the true Mass was as inseparable from the identity of the priest as
from the life of the Church. This is why they were able to leave behind
permanent, lasting works for priestly formation and sanctification, for they
understood and communicated that above everything else a priest is appointed to
offer a sacrifice of propitiation, "for every high priest taken from
among men, is ordained for me in the things that appertain to God, that he may
offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins" (Heb 5:1). This is the
priestly identity that they handed on to us, and which is so antipathetic to the
Novus Ordo.
Some people have blamed the Society’s superiors, in
recent dealings with Rome, from being too inflexible, and not being willing to
take advantage of the opportunity that was offered to become acceptable in the
eyes of the modern church. For did not Cardinal Castrillon come up with
practical privileges, including the approval of all the Society’s bishops and
sacraments and complete independence and immunity from the Novus Ordo
bishops? Who is the Society, to be placing a condition to such a "generous"
offer?
Yet the Society’s superiors and
bishops, together with Bishop Rangel’s representative, did decide on a
condition, one which expresses perfectly the inheritance that we all received
from Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop De Castro Mayer. It was that an official
statement be made informing all the bishops and priests of the world of their
right to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass. For like these two great bishops,
our concern is for the Church as a whole. We cannot accept that the traditional
rite is the privilege of a few. It is the right of every Catholic, in order to
preserve and live his Faith. The very least that our superiors could require, to
see if the Roman authorities really had the intention of turning the tide
against modernism, and of actually promoting Catholic Tradition, rather than
using every kind of maneuvering to stifle it, as they did with the Fraternity of
St. Peter, was the general approval of the traditional Mass for every priest.
As you know, the response was the
refusal to make any public statement on the traditional Mass. The basis of any
kind of agreement is consequently absent. To accept an offer, no matter how
generous, would be to accept a privilege and to deny a right, the right of all
Catholics, priests and laity, to the rite that adequately expresses the Catholic
Faith. We could not expect all priests and faithful to immediately go back to
the traditional Mass. There is a whole work of education to be accomplished
before that would be possible. However, we must and will insist on the
recognition of all Catholics’ right to the traditional Mass, which recognition
will be the basis of a true and exclusive return to Tradition.
In the meantime, let us pray our Mass, the true Mass, as
the lifeline to spiritual survival that it truly is. During the silence of the
Canon we kneel at the foot of the crucifix, praying that the Precious Blood, "shed
for you and for many unto the remission of sins" might be applied to
many souls, that the infinite merits of the intense sufferings of God made man
might be a worthy reparation "for mine own countless sin, transgressions
and failings; for all here present and for all faithful Christians, living and
dead; that it may avail both me and them unto salvation in everlasting
life", gazing with longing at the elevated host promising us "And
I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself" (Jn
12:32), confident that we also shall hear from our Crucified God those
consoling words placing us in Mary’s hands: "Behold they mother"
(Jn 19:27).
Yours faithfully in Christ Our Crucified Savior,
Father Peter R. Scott
|
