I. “EXCOMMUNICATIONS” LIFTED
There can be no doubt that the most important happening in the Church over the past months was the lifting of the so-called excommunications of the four bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X, last January 21, 2009 made public on January 24. Our Superior General, His Excellency Bishop Fellay, did not hesitate to express his “gratitude” to the Holy Father for this “courageous act”, nor to welcome the doctrinal discussions concerning the unprecedented crisis in the Church.
However, since Bishop Fellay has been accused of going “soft” by requesting and welcoming this canonical act, a little background is in order. It was thanks to the very successful pilgrimage of the Holy Year, 2000, that Rome, being very impressed by the magnitude and spirit of the Society’s pilgrimage, showed an interest in reopening contacts and discussions.
TWO PRELIMINARIES
It was in January 2001 that the Society determined that it could not seek or accept any canonical solution, nor any theological discussions of importance, until two preliminaries had been fulfilled. These two preliminaries were first of all a declaration that all priests have the right to celebrate the traditional Mass, and, secondly, that, by a unilateral act, the so-called excommunications are lifted. There was a very simple reason for both of these. Unless a guaranty could be given to all priests that they had the right to celebrate the traditional rite of Mass, that Mass could not be said to have a right to exist in the Church, and any priest could be forced to celebrate the New Mass, manifestly unacceptable. The reason for the second preliminary was that no doctrinal discussions could exist unless the Society and its bishops are regarded as being Catholic, a first step towards the acknowledgement of the right to contest the errors of Vatican II.
It seemed impossible for Rome to even consider the granting of these preliminaries, and so all negotiations stalled. Meanwhile, the authorities in the Ecclesia Dei Commission and elsewhere determined to do all in their power to divide and conquer the work of Tradition. They did this first of all by offering an Apostolic Administration to the priests of Campos, and allowing them to continue celebrating the traditional Mass (2002). A few years later (2005) came the foundation of the Good Shepherd Institute by several priests who had been convinced to leave the Society by promises, including the exclusive use of the traditional Mass, written into their statutes.
1^st^:TRADITIONAL MASS PERMITTED FOR ALL PRIESTS
Meanwhile, the Society’s General Chapter in 2006 confirmed the demand that the two preliminaries be fulfilled before any further discussions could be made, in particular concerning the canonical status that the authorities in Rome desperately wanted to bestow upon the Society. As a consequence, in October 2006 Bishop Fellay requested a Crusade of Rosaries, to be delivered to the Holy Father, for the intention of freeing up the traditional Mass, so that all priests could celebrate it. A million rosaries were prayed for this intention, and then on July 7, 2007, came the motu proprio “Summorum pontificum” that not only declared that all priests have the right to celebrate the traditional Latin Mass, but also that it had never been abrogated. Although it was issued only for those who do NOT consider “fidelity to the Old Missal” as “as an external mark of identity”, who DO accept “the binding character of the Second Vatican Council”, who DO believe that there is “no contradiction”, “no rupture”, between the Traditional and the New Masses, that the traditional Mass is only the “extraordinary form” of the same rite, and that they ought to be “mutually enriching”, for “the total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness”---to quote Benedict XVI’s own words on July 7, 2007, nevertheless this universal permission for the traditional Mass has been a great blessing for the Church.
2^nd^: LIFTING OF “EXCOMMUNICATIONS”
In June 2008 Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos delivered an ultimatum to our Superior General, Bishop Fellay, along with a barely disguised threat of a declaration of schism if the Society did not cooperate by June 30. We were being asked to accept a canonical status “without delay”, supposedly as an act of gratitude for the previous year’s motu proprio, along with the promise of desisting from any criticism of the Sovereign Pontiff, from considering ourselves as if we were a “magisterium” above him, from opposing the Society to the Church, and from continuing to wound “ecclesial charity”. Thus did Rome attempt to get around the demand of the second preliminary, owed in justice. Bishop Fellay called their bluff, making it clear that he could not accept these conditions, and that he would not be forced into accepting a canonical status that would take away our right and duty of contesting the errors of Vatican II. Silence from Rome was the only response.
Then on the feast of Christ the King, Bishop Fellay issued his call for another Crusade of one million rosaries, this time for the lifting of the so-called excommunications. He followed this up with a letter to Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos of December 15, 2008, in which he formally requested the withdrawal of the decree of excommunication, pointing out that the episcopal consecrations were nothing more than an “Operation Survival” and in no way an act of rebellion. At the same time as he reiterated the Society’s submission to the primacy of Peter, he also insisted on its right to oppose certain texts of Vatican II on account of their opposition to the Church’s unchanging magisterium. The Crusade was more than successful, for Bishop Fellay was able to hand over to the Holy Father a bouquet of 2,703,000 rosaries in January 2009.
The result was astonishing, immediate, and miraculous, having no other explanation than the power of the rosary. For it is manifestly obvious that the pope does not agree with the Society and has not lifted the “excommunications” because he wants to support our doctrinal positions with respect to Tradition and Vatican II. Benedict XVI himself made this very clear in the declaration made at the General Audience of January 28, 2009, when he explained his reasons for lifting the “excommunications”, against those who criticized him for it: “I fulfilled this act of fatherly mercy because those prelates repeatedly manifested to me their deep suffering for the situation in which they found themselves. I hope that this gesture of mine will be followed by the solicitous effort by them to accomplish the ulterior steps necessary to accomplish full communion with the Church, thus testifying true fidelity and true recognition of the Magisterium and of the authority of the Pope and of the Second Vatican Council”.
By this statement, he made it clear that he expects traditional Catholics to accept the errors of Vatican II, and that to do so is to accept the Church’s magisterium, although they are in contradiction with previous teachings. You might wonder how this can be possible. It is only because the magisterium is now considered as “living”, and so accepting the magisterium means accepting the present day expression of the way of collegial thinking of the pope and the bishops, including religious liberty and ecumenism. This the Society will never do, for it sees the “discussions” quite simply as the opportunity to present Catholic truth, in radical opposition to the “modernist” way of thinking concerning the Church.
The great advantage of this decree is not its canonical effect but rather the lifting of the opprobrium that was directed against the Society, namely that of supposedly being punished with a censure that looked like it discredited it as being outside the Church’s communion. Some have expressed the regret that this decree said nothing about Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop De Castro Mayer, whose reputation needs to be cleared likewise. However, the decree does state that the decree of 1988 is withdrawn and that as of January 21, 2009, it is deprived of all canonical effects. This implicitly includes Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop De Castro Mayer, who can no longer be said to be excommunicated. Nevertheless, in continuing our combat for the doctrinal positions that both bishops fought to maintain, we will exonerate them publicly and explicitly, nor will we be happy until we have done so.
Answered by Father Peter Scott, SSPX.