Replies

From Bishop Fellay's interview 3 months after the election of B16

Bp Fellay: If we may make a comparison, before his elevation to the sovereign pontificate the Church was in free fall, Benedict XVI will open a parachute, and there will be a certain slowing down. A slowing down more or less significant depending on the size of the parachute. But the orientation remains the same. May we hope for more than this deceleration? The promises of Our Lord always hold true. And the good Lord uses everything to make His Church go where He wants it to.

Here I will give you my personal opinion: if Benedict XVI were pushed against the wall, in a crisis situation, faced with a very violent reaction from the progressivists or a political crisis, or persecutions, I think – from observing how he has acted and reacted up to now – that he would make the right choice.

Here are some facts:

- With his appointment as bishop of Munich, in 1977, whereas he had previously only been a professor of theology, he entered the sphere of reality and was obliged to forbid one of his friends to accept a chair of theology at the university. This earned him the hostility of his former friends.

- In France, in 1983, he reaffirmed that the catechism in force was the Roman catechism, i.e. that of the Council of Trent. And he had to brave the anger of the bishops of France.

- We know that Cardinal Ratzinger was against the interreligious meeting of Assisi in 1986 and did not attend it. The second time, in 2002, though still opposed to it, he was forced to attend. Several times he tendered his resignation as head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith because of disagreements with the pope, notably over Assisi.

- The Charter of Cologne, in 1989, signed by 500 theologians against the Roman magisterium, gathered together the great majority of the Catholic intellectual elite of the time. They openly manifested their hostility to Rome and to the magisterium. Subsequently the cardinal wrote some documents on the new theology. In a very perceptive and realistic description he showed the extent of the gravity of the situation. Unfortunately the remedies he proposed did not match up to the diagnosis, and in fact, were virtually non-existent.

Now that Cardinal Ratzinger is pope, we may expect that, considering the gravity of the situation, Rome may turn its eyes towards all those attached to the old Mass. Two currents are emerging: one in support the Society of Saint Pius X, the other which sets itself to reinforce Ecclesia Dei and cause the Society to crumble away. It seems that this latter has prevailed. There will certainly be two levels of action. We will see a reinforcement giving more weight to the support of those who want the old Mass. There will also be a reinforcement at the level of the Ecclesia Dei groups. But here, we see that everything works unto our good and that of Tradition; in the end, the good God uses the Fraternity of Saint Peter as a trampoline for the Society of Saint Pius X. In this way, we can but rejoice over any opening in favor of the old Mass.

DICI: If you were received by the pope, what would you ask him?

Bp Fellay: I would ask him for the freedom of the Mass for everybody and everywhere. As for our personal situation, there will also be the issue of recanting the decree of excommunication related to the consecrations. These are two pre-conditions which we can not dissociate from any further doctrinal discussion. We know very well that the issue of the Mass is not all, but we must begin with something concrete; we must begin with a beginning. It would be a deep and efficacious breach in the progressivist system; this would gradually lead to a change of atmosphere and spirit in the Church.

A head of a dicastery in Rome, seeing our processions during the Holy Year 2000, exclaimed: "But they are Catholic, we are obliged to do something for them". There are still bishops and cardinals who are Catholic, but the evil is so widespread that Rome no longer dares to take up the surgeon’s knife.

We see clearly that the Church is going through the same agony as Our Lord on the cross. I wonder whether the third part of the message of Fatima does not deal with an apparent death of the Church. We are living through an unprecedented situation, but the grace of God is still powerful. We can live in a Christian manner. We can still show that the Catholic religion exists, and that we can still live it. And this living example of Tradition carries much weight in our relations with Rome.

For Ecône is not against Rome, as the journalists would have it. We share with Pope Benedict XVI the same realization of the dramatic situation of the Church. And how could we not be in agreement on this point when we see the drop in vocations: in Dublin, Ireland, last year it seems there were not a single young man who entered the seminary! A year or two ago, there were only seven Jesuits who took their final vows in the whole congregation! But Rome does not go back to the cause of those effects which everybody sees, because that would be tantamount to questioning the Council. Rome must find again its own Tradition. Of course, it is not we who convert, only God can do that; but we may bring our little stone to the restoration, we must do what we can. We must make people understand that Tradition is not some archeological state of things; it is the normal state of the Church, even today.

We can also present the ecclesiastical authorities with theological studies on the Council. This takes time. Then, there is major work to be done among the bishops and priests. There are many faithful who are ready to take up Tradition again, many more than we think. For the priests, it is more difficult. Those who are as old as the Council, those who gave up everything and set out upon this adventure are no longer capable of going back. The younger priests are more open.

This is what SSPX means by "lifting" the excommunications? An admission from the Vatican that they were never valid?

Exactly.

In other words, the Pope goofed?

OK, make sure that you're sitting down,I know this may shake your whole moral foundation, but yes it happens. Popes can goof. Popes can also make canonical decisions based on politics or other motives instead of truth and justice. Unfortunately it has happened before. Did you know that one pope excommunicated a whole city, the city of Florence? Although the Church restricted them from the sacraments (and in that way they suffered "excommunication") do you think that each and every citizen was guilty in reality and in the eyes of God, so that they also suffered "excommunication" in the spiritual sense?

The penitent confesses his sin, expresses sorrow and is absolved.

Now there is no way for the Archbishop Lefebvre to do this, and the nullification his "excommunication" is included in the request And why would someone express sorrow and ask forgiveness for a crime they are not guilty of? Wouldn't that be like lying?

Think of an innocent man wrongly convicted, even by the highest court. He suffers legally by going to jail, his reputation is irreparably damaged, and the public accepts him as "guilty". However, in reality and in the eyes of God he is never guilty, he remains innocent.

You guys want it the other way around?

I am not the SSPX, nor one of the bishops of the SSPX. Pope Benedict XVI can formally acknowledge it or not, the reality of the invalidity of the "excommunications" will not change.

This is the real question though, if this pope or a future pope does acknowledge that the "excommunications" were invalid are you going to accept it? Are you going to feel sorry for how you spoke about the SSPX bishops?