Letter by Msgr. Camille Perl Regarding Society of St. Pius X Masses

Una Voce ^ | January 18, 2003 | Msgr. Arthur B. Calkins

[ultima ratio]

No one defines Tradition--not even the pope. It is what is handed-down to us without change, without the introduction of unheard-of novelties. It is what has always been believed and practiced. No pope is lord of that.

[patent]

You misread me, no doubt because I was insufficiently clear. The problem is those who APPEAR to be in communnion with Rome but who act in a fashion that is either heretical or schismatic. Hierarchs who engage in criminal behavior, sometimes public scandal, for example. Priests who abuse the Sacraments so badly that they are either invalid or likely so (and if in doubt, you have a moral obligation to seek out valid, even if "illicit" sacraments). They abound in some places and there can be no quarrel with that. Nor can there be any doubt that my friends in the SSPX have always accepted the normative Mass as valid when the form, matter and intent exist. The problem is that even the basic matter is sometimes abused (the honeyed "host" discussed here on this site) not to speak of the intent (when Fr. McBrien calls the Words of Consecration "hocus pocus", can one reasonably NOT question his intent?) or the form ("pro multis")? The ICEL has clearly failed, the hierarchy of the Church in America is substantially made of men who act against church and criminal law (look to the issue of confession or the "generous" application of the Indult or the two of three whose conduct vis-a-vis the pederasty issue is documented as against either canon or secular law) and heterodoxy is the general rule. Divorced and remarried women at the altar distributing the Host, reading the Word and acting as "pastoral ministers" while homosexual activists reign over "The Pink Palace" and "Notre Flame" seminaries are common. There is a crisis my friend and the issues the SSPX raises are real. Do they themselves have problems? Oh my yes. Are they the whole Church? No. Are they part of the Church? According to Msgr. Perl they are, since I can satisfy my Sunday obligation by taking the Sacraments at their Mass. We live in dangerous and interesting times. Rather than attack as schismatic those who attend the Tridentine Mass, perhaps we ought to concentrate on our own sanctification and applaud those priests who help us, regardless of the intramural issues they have with the hierarchs.

Not a single word in the above discusses the issue you raised above, and which I then responded to, about whether I had misread Msgr. Perl. I had thought you could agree to certain of the points, I am surprised that you so blatantly refuse to do so.

More surprised that you rant so hard at changing the subject. The fact remains, A desire to separate yourself from communion [from] those in communion with [the Pope] is a sin, and it is schismatic.

---

To address your points, are there problems today? Yes, but schism is not the answer. Are there heretics trying to hijack the Churck. Yes, but schism is not the answer. Do some in the SSPX accept the normative Mass as valid (while putting all these qualifications you list on it, and then making claims that the qualifications are the rule, rather than the intitial statement?), while others do not even go that far? Yes, but joining their justification for their schism is not the answer. Has ICEL failed? Yes, but schism is not the answer.

Are they part of the Church? According to Msgr. Perl they are, since I can satisfy my Sunday obligation by taking the Sacraments at their Mass.

That is absolutely disingenuous. From Msgr. Perl:

1.) The priests of the Society of St. Pius X are validly ordained, but they are suspended from exercising their priestly functions. To the extent that they adhere to the schism of the late Archbishop Lefebvre, they are also excommunicated.

This doesn't even count the other words from the Church, some of which are quoted above. The Bishops are excommunicated. The actual Society, that is the Bishops who are clearly not a part of the Church and the priests, who are suspended at the very least and in reality adhering to the excommunicated Bishops, are also clearly not a part of the Church. To argue otherwise is plain wrong.

To try to use Perl’s statement to show they are part of the Church is just disingenuous, and desperate.

patent  +AMDG