|
The Sacrifice of the Mass

The Archbishop
Speaks The Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre Courtesy of the SSPX Asia
District
An Address Given by His Grace: Ottawa, Canada November
1975
Ladies and
Gentlemen,
I have come among you to primarily
speak of the most pressing problem of our time, which is the
preservation of our Catholic Faith. I am not referring simply to
certain liturgical modifications, nor to certain aspects of renewal,
which result from the Second Vatican Council. These details, of
course, do have their importance. I am here rather to offer
encouragement in the struggle to preserve the essentials of our
Faith, for our Faith is vital, and before going on, I would like to
bring your attention to what precisely constitutes the essentials of
our Faith.
Our Lord Jesus Christ came down to
earth to redeem mankind, and it was by means of the Cross-that He
achieved this. The central point of Christ's life on earth, the
purpose for which the Son of God became man was to die on the Cross
for the salvation of all men, not only the faithful, not only
Catholics, but all men. Unfortunately, not all men have accepted
Christ's message but be they Buddhists, Moslems or Protestants, all
- at least all who wished to be saved - are bound to achieve their
salvation through the bloodshed for them by Jesus
Christ.
This, of course, is very simple for
us who are Catholics. This is our Faith, the Faith we have always
been taught, and yet, in our own time, how many Catholics still do
accept this truth, that salvation comes to all men through Jesus
Christ, that outside of Christ there is no salvation? I find it
extraordinary that Catholics will questions the age-old adage, "no
salvation outside the Church." This is precisely the most important
question facing mankind today, just as it was in all ages. Indeed,
there is nothing more vital to man than for him to know how he is to
be saved, by whom he is to be saved, and in what manner he is to be
saved. Can there possibly be a question of greater moment for those
who inhabit the earth?
Now, it is quite certain that when
we proclaim today that there is "no salvation outside the Church,"
many Catholics rise up incredulously and affirm that this is
nonsense, that otherwise those not in the Church must be condemned
to hell. The fact is, however, that this remains a crucial tenet of
interest to all mankind. As Catholics we are bound to affirm what
the Church has always affirmed, because the Church is the repository
of all truth: God made man and the Son of God was made man to be
crucified for the salvation of all men. Can there possibly be any
other source of salvation outside of the Son of God, Our Lord Jesus
Christ? Can we as Catholics accept that Luther, Buddha or Mohammed
are also means of eternal salvation? Are they also in heaven seated
at the right hand of God? Yet today, despite the absurdity, many
Catholics no longer accept that there is "no salvation outside the
Church."
Protestants or Buddhists who achieve
their salvation through an act of love for God - in effect,
implicitly a baptism of desire - do so through Christ and His
Church. The Church teaches that no man is saved except through Our
Lord Jesus Christ. This, as Catholics, is what we must believe, for
it is what the Church has always taught. There is no other God, no
other truth, no other salvation but Christ Jesus. This is the
center, the foundation, the goal of our Christian life, and it will
one day be the crowning glory of our Christian life. There is
nothing, in a word, outside of Christ Jesus who is our only joy on
earth and in heaven.
You understand, I am sure, how
important it is to affirm these truths. Jesus Himself, and not
ourselves, chose the means for us to receive His Grace. The means He
chose was the Cross -, and He chose that the Cross - and His
Sacrifice upon it be continued on earth upon our altars. There is no
other place but upon our altars that Christ's Calvary is continued in this world. Catholics
in every age have understood the enormity of the Holy Sacrifice of
the Mass. Our ancestors most certainly
understood it, our ancestors who built the worthy church buildings,
which adorn your country, and the extraordinary cathedrals and
basilicas of Europe. Visitors the
world over come to these shrines to stand in awe before the splendor
of the labor and genius of our ancestors of a thousand years ago.
Why did they erect such monuments, expending decade upon decade of
their fragile lives to bringing forth these magnificent cathedrals?
For the sake of the altar of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and for the sake
of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which is celebrated upon it. And
it was Christ Himself who wished it.
Jesus Christ instituted the
priesthood at the Last Supper on the occasion of the first sacrifice
- for the Last Supper was indeed a Sacrifice, as the Council of
Trent teaches - when He made priests of His Apostles and enjoined
them, "Do this in memory of Me." He did not say, "Tell this story,
describe this action of Mine to your children and to future
generations." He said rather, "Do this, re-do this, continue to do
this which I have done." It is very important that we realize the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is an action and not a narrative,
not a story. I am sure you must realize why I am emphasizing: it is
precisely because in our time Christ's intentions are being
subverted, contradicted and suppressed.
It is vital, therefore, that we
insist upon what is essential to our Holy Faith and indeed to the
very idea of Christian civilization, in which we have good reason to
glory still, and which we hope with all our hearts to regain and to
see revitalized as it was in medieval times. The world chuckles
today about the Middle Ages. Modem man tells us it was an age of
obscurity - the dark ages - but history itself tells us the medieval
age was the greatest age in history, and the thirteenth the greatest
century that mankind has ever known. Why? Because of the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass, and because of the spirituality generated by
the Mass. Today, more than ever
before, our civilization needs its altars, needs it priests to offer
the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which in fact is a re-enactment of
the Sacrifice of the Cross. The whole of our Christian civilization
rest upon our altars. But if we destroy our altars and replace them
with a table, and upon this table we simply prepare a meal which is
but a memorial of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Last Supper, which
is but a narrative of what He said and did on that occasion, then we
have forfeited the basis upon which Christian civilization rests.
The Catholic Church then ceases to exist, for the Church rests upon
the dogma, upon the reality of the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar,
whence comes Holy Communion, which is Our Lord Jesus Christ in His
Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. For Holy Communion - the Eucharist -
transforms our very souls, civilizes us, disciplines us and imposes
order upon our souls. Without the Eucharist we reek of
disorder.
We frequently wonder why there are
so few priests today. It is because there is no longer any
preoccupation with the Sacrifice of the Mass. There
is no more ideal, no more goal for the priest to pursue, His goal
had always been to go unto the Altar of God to offer the Sacrifice
of Calvary. That is precisely what made the sublimity of the priest,
the ideal of the priestly vocation in a young man. Similarly, for
the religious - nuns and brothers - the foundation of their vocation
was the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, just as it was for you, the
laity.
What, then, precisely is a
Christian? Essentially, a Christian is one who offers himself as a
victim on the altar with Our Lord. That is what the Sacrament of
Marriage is also: a symbol of Christ's union with His Church. Just
as Christ offered His life for His Church, so also do the spouses
offer their lives for their families and for each other. This union
is a vivid symbol of what occurred at Calvary, and thus the spouses
derive the strength and courage required for the sacrifice of their
union from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Without the Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass there can be no Catholic spirituality, no Christian
life, and all that has been the life of the Church through the ages
will simply wither and cease to exist. We, then, do have a vital
requirement for the true Sacrifice of the Mass, and this is of
fundamental importance to us as Catholics.
I do allow that in recent centuries
perhaps our catechetics have placed more emphasis upon the Eucharist
as sacrament, than upon the Eucharist as sacrifice.
There has been great emphasis placed on the Sacrament of the
Eucharist, and for good reason, of course. We stage, for example,
massive international Eucharistic Congresses throughout the Catholic
world to provide the faithful with the opportunity to adore Our Lord
Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. And these Eucharistic Congresses
were of unsurpassed splendor, living testimony of the profound
belief of the faithful in the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus in the
Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Thus, while the Church has in recent
centuries placed much emphasis upon the Real Presence of Our Lord in
the Eucharist - the Eucharist as Sacrament - at the same time,
perhaps unconsciously, the Eucharist as Sacrifice has to some extent
been neglected. Let us come back to this idea of the Eucharist as
Sacrifice, without losing sight of the Eucharist as Sacrament. I do
think that today there ought to be a renewed emphasis on the
Eucharist as Sacrifice because, after all, it is the Eucharist as
Sacrifice, which is the source of the Eucharist as Sacrament. The
Eucharist as Sacrament comes to us from the Sacrifice of the Cross.
Without the Cross there would be no Sacrament of the Eucharist
because the Sacrament is the Victim, and without the Sacrifice there
is no Victim. And without the Victim there is no Real Presence, no
participation, no communion by the faithful. In a word, when we
receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist - Holy Communion - we are
partaking of the Victim Who offered Himself on the Cross, and Who
offers Himself in an unbloody manner daily on our altars for the
forgiveness of sins. This, then, is the profound meaning of the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass, and of the Real Presence of Our Lord in the
Eucharist: the Blessed Sacrament is the fruit of this extraordinary
tree which is the Cross because the Sacrament proceeds from the
Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross.
We must therefore come back to this
idea of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which is essential to our
salvation, and see in this Sacrifice precisely that element which
has been the splendor of our civilization, and to understand why,
today, this civilization - Western civilization, Christian
civilization - is shaken to its very foundations, how the decline of
our Christian civilization began when we came to express doubts
about the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, when we began
to attack, abolish and suppress the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This
incredible phenomenon traces its origins to Berenger in the
fourteenth century. Then in the sixteenth century, Luther boldly
declared that the Mass is not a Sacrifice. Luther's attack,
therefore, was directed at the very heart of the Church, to its most
precious dogma. And in thus undermining the Sacrifice of the Mass,
he destroyed the priesthood instituted by Christ, because without
the Sacrifice, what need is there for a priesthood, what ideal does
the priest strive for? The priest becomes merely a functionary
designed from among the members of an assembly to offer worship, to
perform a communion, to break bread.
That is what Luther achieved 450
years ago, and, as those familiar with the history of his
reformation will recognize, that is precisely what is happening with
respect to the transformation of the liturgy in our own time. Many
of the elements of change are identical. During Luther's reformation
the vernacular, German, was adopted and, needless to say, there was
great rejoicing: the youth became enthusiastic, the laity could now
understand, they could return now to what appeared to be a more
evangelical church, they could worship now more meaningfully. The
laity, in a word, had discovered a new relevance in the life of the
Church. But the euphoria of juvenile enthusiasm soon gave way to
disillusion: the priesthood began to disintegrate, priests and nuns
left their monasteries, the convents were emptied and the religious
married. How could this be so soon after the fervor and enthusiasm
of the early years? The whole phenomenon was but a straw fire
because the reformers had attacked the essential elements of
Christ's Church, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
With the Sacrifice attacked, the
traditional respect for the Eucharist did not remain long immune.
The faithful began to receive Communion standing, then Communion was
distributed in the hand, then the reformers began to openly deny the
Real Presence, the Supreme Sacrifice, and to deny the priesthood,
all that the Church had cherished most dearly.
The Protestant Reformation struck
our civilization at its very roots, and it was just a matter of time
before the tenets of Liberalism were added to those of the religious
reformation. Thus, in the seventeenth century, Descartes brought
forward the notion of truth being relative, subjective, within
ourselves. That is, truth comes from our consciences, and not from
outside of ourselves. Descartes refused the notion of truth, which
comes from God and from Christ. And in the eighteenth century,
Rousseau, carrying Descartes a step further, directed his attack at
the moral law: man is good, his conscience is good. Therefore, it is
his conscience, which should guide him, and not the
law.
These three - Luther who attacked
Church dogma and the Faith, Descartes who attacked the concept of
objective truth, and Rousseau who attacked the moral law - were the
precursors of the modern society in which we live today. Today, as
we all recognize, faith, truth and the law are all relative and
subject to the conscience of the individual. That, ladies and
gentlemen, is what Liberalism is all about. Man has become free,
liberated, adult, guided now exclusively by his own conscience and
by his own will.
What in reality has all this
liberation meant for society, for our civilization? It has brought
about the destruction of the human person whose very being comes
from God and from Our Lord Jesus Christ, whose entire spiritual life
comes from Christ, from His law of love, from the gift of His grace
which transforms and moves him to adhere to His law. If there is no
absolute truth, but rather our own which we create for ourselves,
there is no more God, no need for God, because we are sufficient
unto ourselves. We become in effect our own gods and accordingly
refuse a God, which transcends ourselves. It is not long before
nature destroys itself in a sense.
In the wake of Rousseau came the
subjectivist philosophers of the nineteenth century: Kant, Hegel and
the others, all contributing and advancing the destruction of the
Christian Faith. Little by little these ideas made their way until
the principles of Liberalism virtually destroyed the notion of
Christian society. Already by the end of the eighteenth century it
had become imperative in France to be liberated
from the restrictions of Christian law, of Catholic kings, of
Catholic society, in a word, of God. That is why in
France, bankrupt of God,
the Goddess Reason was formally consecrated by the
State.
The Church, of course, resisted
these tendencies. For a century and a half - from about 1800 to
about 1960 - the Popes spoke out, issued encyclicals, used every
conceivable means to prevent the destruction of the social and moral
order by these tendencies. But these ideas, which had their origins
in the Protestant Reformation and the advent of Liberalism, made
their way little by little, and society became contaminated, and the
dikes which hitherto had kept men in an ordered state, burst.
Finally, like the Jews before Pontius Pilate, the states declared,
"We have no king but Caesar," and accordingly effected the
separation of Church and State. They drove Jesus Christ from the
courts, from the army, from the universities, from the schools. The
crucifixes were withdrawn from public buildings, the clergy were
relegated to their vestries, society was
laicized.
Society had thus become free, free
of God. There soon followed freedom of thought, freedom of the
press, freedom of conscience. And now, a century and a half later,
we find ourselves enslaved by pornography, enslaved by television
and the other media of social communications, which have so
thoroughly infused into our society the kind of freedom, which
destroys morality, the family, and society
itself.
For her part, until about 1960, the
Church resolutely resisted Liberalism in all these forms. She
continued to teach obedience and submission to Jesus Christ, to His
Law, to His Sacrifice, to His Sacraments and to His grace. For it is
there that we find truth, true freedom, freedom from the slavery of
sin. Once free of sin, we become enslaved rather to
saintliness.
We see to what brutal depths our
society has been reduced. The catechisms, the Canadian catechism, is
a perfect example of the process I have tried at some length to
describe, to destroy, an entire catechism devoted to destruction.
Catechism by its nature suggests a breaking with sin, but modern
catechisms are directed towards breaking down tradition and social
taboos, breaking the family, destroying the restraints, which have
held our civilization together. These are the things your children
are taught in catechism today. Do the Gospels teach us that we must
destroy? On the contrary, the Gospels teach us rather that we are to
forge bonds of charity, of love: love God, love your parents, love
your neighbor. These are strong bonds, mandatory bonds. We are not
free to love or not to love. We must love God, and our parents and
society, to the extent, of course, that society is in accord with
God' s law.
This concept to teach our children
to destroy, to break is a criminal concept because such notions will
accompany them throughout their lives: through their youth and later
when, by a sort of dialectic which will continue to gnaw at them and
will always oppose them to others and consume them with the
imperative to be "free" in order to grow, in order to be
"themselves." This is fraught with extremely serious consequences
and we wonder now how we could even imagine such a system of
catechism. The new catechetics are simply a natural long-term
consequence of Liberalism.
And though our Popes opposed
Liberalism and recognized it for what it is, today nevertheless one
can safely affirm that Liberalism has overwhelmed the Church. It has
permeated our culture, our society, our universities and our
schools. No area remains immune, not even our families have been
spared the poison of Liberalism. Our seminaries have been
contaminated by ideas proposed by such men as Teilhard de Chardin,
whereby truth is relative, evolving, personal. There is no longer an
immutable truth, therefore no fixed dogma. And this, tragically, is
what has come out of Vatican II. Gaudium et spes best
illustrates this: at least two pages are devoted to, the idea of
change, to the evolution of truth. Change is what "updating" is all
about. Anyone who is a party to "updating" faces that as a premise:
as a result of our new found mastery of nature, we must accept
change in philosophy, in modes of expression and action, in the
manner in which we conceive our religion, in the realization that
the way ideas were understood in the past are no longer applicable
today.
Thus, seminaries, for example, are
told they must no longer proselytize, evangelize or convert
non-Christians. They must, rather, engage in dialogue in order to
direct their flocks toward self-discovery and the realization that
their faith is, after all, as valid as our own. This, of course, is
heresy, pure and simple, and has had the predictable effect of
numbing in a very short time the Church's entire missionary spirit.
It goes without saying that, having killed the missionary spirit,
the priestly spirit itself will cease to
exist.
These are the factors, then, which
leave Catholics with no incentive for the religious life today.
People no longer know what the religious state of life is. Recently
the Archbishop of Cincinnati, reporting to the Roman Synod on the
crisis of vocations to the priesthood, solemnly declared that the
lack of vocations apparent in the Church today stems from the fact
that the priest has lost his sense of identity. What do these
incredible words mean? Simply that the priest does not know what he
is. Since when does the priest not know who or what he is? After
2,000 years of having priests in the Catholic Church we suddenly no
longer know what constitutes a priest! Why have we come to this?
Because we have destroyed our altars by changing them into "tables,"
stripped them of their altar stones, which from the fourth century
have harbored the relics of the martyrs. A sacrifice is
traditionally offered upon a stone, a stone altar, but today there
is no sacrifice, no stone, no relics. The Mass has become a meal.
Relics signify that the martyrs had offered themselves as a
sacrifice in union with Our Lord. You can understand just how grave
it is to abolish these magnificent symbolisms, and to what extent
all that is most sacred in the holy Catholic religion, is being
tampered with. And all of this tampering penetrated the Church at
the Second Vatican Council.
I am frequently criticized because I
attack the Council. It is true that I am at variance with the
Council because I realize that the liberal spirit is destroying the
Church, the priesthood, the sacraments, the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass, the catechism, Catholic universities and Catholic schools. And
you yourselves are as firmly convinced as I am because you have the
examples constantly before your eyes. Parents have come to prefer to
send their children to non-Catholic schools, even to Protestant
schools, because they are less subject there to perversion than in
their own Catholic schools.
Is this not an incomprehensible
scandal when we reflect on what Canada was twenty years
ago at the proud invitation of Msgr. Cabana to visit his new
seminary, finished in 1955, full of seminarians. This remained so
until 1965. Today the seminary has been sold and there remains
nothing of this work. What is happening in the Church the world over
when seminaries like the one in Sherbrooke, not twenty years old,
are disposed of in this way?
Recently I spoke with an Italian
bishop who had just returned from a trip during which he had hoped
to come into contact with priests anxious to maintain traditions of
the Church to establish a common bond, to perhaps create an
association of traditional priests in Italy. He had returned
overwhelmed. Having visited nearly every diocese in
Italy, he realized that
seminaries are being sold everywhere, and that young priests are out
and out Marxists. Though Italy has an average three times more
priests than France, the seminaries are empty;
Turin with a capacity for 300 has
80 seminarians from several neighboring dioceses. The Bishop of
Casserta confided to me that his seminarians come back to him
Modernists and refuse to obey him. What kind of diocese is he going
to have in just a few years from now in the light of the state of
the priesthood and the seminaries today?
In France there are
approximately 100 new candidates who enter all the seminaries each
year, for 100 dioceses. The only notable seminary left is at
Issy-les-Moulinaux, near Paris, with 80 seminarians for 25
dioceses and four or five religious communities. And of these, how
many will finish? And how many more are living in the hope that
between now and their ordination Rome will have authorized a married
clergy?
This situation, which took root at
the Council, is vitally serious. The enthusiasm for liberation was
evident throughout the Council. It expressed itself in the equivocal
wording of the various schemas, through the idea of change
for the sake of change, through the idea of the primacy of the
individual conscience as opposed to established law, through the
notion of freedom for all religions. This the Church has always
regarded as contrary to her rights because, as she believes, she
alone is Truth. And if a Catholic state places no obstacle to the
spreading of heresy within its jurisdiction, then the state becomes
a Protestant state in effect, with all its attendant errors, on
marriage, for example, which leads to tolerance for divorce,
contraception and abortion, all of which gently undermines Christian
society, Catholic society. We recognize that it is precisely this,
which has set the Church upon a course of full-scale
self-destruction, which has become more and more
obvious.
These, then, are the reasons why we
are so attached to our traditions. This is why, in the face of the
deluge, this universal destruction of the Holy Catholic Church, we
affirm the will to preserve the Catholic Mass, the Catholic
Sacraments, the Catholic catechism, our Catholic universities and
our Catholic schools. We refuse to maintain liberal schools in which
everything and anything goes. We insist upon Catholic schools in
order that our children be raised as Catholics. We insist upon
Catholic universities in order that our children not be perverted.
We no longer dare send a young man or a young lady to a Catholic
university.
We prefer to send them to a state
university. Seminarians no longer know where to go. In seminaries
today, seminarians come and go as they pleased, at any time of the
day and night, go to daily Mass or stay away, as they
please.
We are thus in a state of
decomposition and we cannot accept this situation. This is why our
resistance gives the impression that we are attempting to stand in
the way of all this change. I have been requested to close my
seminary at Econe. Why do I refuse to obey this order? Because I
most emphatically do not wish my seminarians to become Protestants,
because I do not wish my seminarians to become Modernists, because I
do not wish my seminarians to lose their faith and their moral
perspective. I am quite certain that were they to be released and
sent to other seminaries they would lose their faith and their moral
perspective. Accordingly, it appears to me that I have no choice but
to resist this order.
I am asked how it is that I can
refuse orders, which come from Rome. Indeed, these orders to come
from Rome, but from which Rome? I
believe in Eternal Rome, the Rome of
the Sovereign Pontiffs, the Rome
which dispenses the very life of the Church, the Rome which
transmits the true Tradition of the Church. I am considered
disobedient, but I am moved to ask why have those who issue orders
which in themselves are blameworthy been given their authority. The
Pope, the cardinals, the bishops, the priests have been given their
authority for the purpose of transmitting life, the spiritual life,
the supernatural life, eternal life, just as parents and society as
a whole have been given their authority to transmit and protect
life. The word "authority" means "author," author of life. We are
not authorized to transmit death; society is not permitted to pass
laws, which authorize abortion, because abortion is death. In like
manner, the Pope, the cardinals, the bishops and priests exist as
such to transmit and sustain spiritual life. Unfortunately, it is
apparent that many of them today no longer transmit or sustain life,
but rather authorize spiritual abortion.
These, then, are the reasons why, in
the face of an order to close my seminary, I refuse to obey. I
believe that we all have a serious requirement for the type of
priests who transmit the life of the soul. I am certain you do not
wish to have priests who are apt to administer sacraments, which are
invalid. From time to time I am asked to administer Confirmation
which, of course, is irritating to local bishops who remind me that
I have no right to confirm in their dioceses. Naturally, I recognize
this, but I remind them in turn that they have no right to
administer sacraments of doubtful validity to children whose parents
want them to receive the sacramental grace. These parents have the
right to be certain that their children are receiving the grace of
Confirmation. This is, after all, a grave responsibility for
parents. It is grace, which keeps the soul alive, and, to this end,
I much prefer to see parents confident that their children have
received the sacramental grace of Confirmation even when, by
administering the sacrament in someone else's diocese, I am acting
illicitly. I may at least rest easy in the knowledge that the
children confirmed in the manner prescribed by the Church for
centuries truly carry the sacramental grace within them, that the
sacrament is truly valid.
With respect to sacraments of
doubtful validity, today bishops rarely confirm: they delegate their
vicars-general or other priests, and many of these change even the
new authorized formulas. Because the particular sacramental grace of
each sacrament has to be signified explicitly, and as many of these
changes of working do not signify the sacrament in question, it
follows that the sacrament is invalid. In other words, it is not
permissible to toy with the formula of the sacraments, just as in
the Sacrifice of the Mass we many not tamper with the wording of the
consecration. It is necessary to perform as the Church has always
intended.
All of this, therefore, is of utmost
importance and it is also the reason why we must maintain our
traditions, and fear neither difficulties nor obstructions. We are
living in a time of veritable agony. We must be careful, of course,
not to offer violent opposition to our bishops and to our priests
who refuse to understand the grave dangers under which the Church
labors today. But in following the Church of all time, we must also
pray for our pastors. We are not inventing anything new. I have not
innovated at my seminary at Econe.
Those who condemn me are condemning
their own formation, which is absurd. In the face of these
absurdities, I can only close my ears and my eyes, and continue to
receive seminarians. In September [1975], I welcomed twenty-five new
candidates at Econe, five at my new German-language seminary near
Lake Constance in German Switzerland, and twelve at my new house at
Armada, Michigan. Vocations are surely not wanting and I am quite
certain that were we encouraged instead of harassed and struck down,
I would have not three seminaries, but seminaries in every part of
the world. Make no mistake: there are sufficient good, young, wiling
men - good and holy vocations in every
country.
We are bound, therefore, to pray
that we recover one day an understanding of the way of the
priesthood because Christian society cannot live without its
priests. The Church without the priesthood is no longer the Church.
It is for this reason essentially that I ask your fervent prayers
for young priests. Pray also to the Blessed Virgin Mary, for she is
the Mother of priests and the Mother of the priesthood. Pray for the
graces of holy vocations, and for assistance with respect to
Rome, that one-day Rome itself
may be enlightened.
Rome, for me, has become a great
mystery. What is happening in Rome? It is surely Rome that
constitutes the most serious problem. To say such a thing is neither
calumny nor detraction, for if the crisis in the Church has spread
to every country in the world, it is only sensible to seek a common
cause at its Seat. There is something distinctly abnormal and
sinister about Rome today, the
workings of grace are being obstructed in Rome, there are men in Rome who are
under the ascendancy of Satan. How else could the Church be
strangled, as it were, and troubled to such an extent? Though we may
not readily understand the problem, one can feel it, sense the
atmosphere of today's Rome. I am still frequently in
Rome, and I have occasion to chat
from time to time to priests of the different sacred congregations,
the men who carry out the day-to-day affairs of the Curia. These men
confide to me in private that Rome
has become stifling, that a veritable terror reigns in the bureaus
and the corridors of the Vatican, with always
somebody listening, spying, ready to report, to criticize. Even the
cardinals are not immune to the terror, to the veritable diabolical
influence, which permeates every facet of Vatican life.
What has caused such a
deterioration? Who are these sinister people? Are they hidden
personalities, or are they clerics in important positions? Nobody
seems to know, but what is absolutely certain is that this spirit
permeates not only the Seat of the Catholic Church, but every one of
us no matter how far we are from Rome.
The present state of Rome is just
one more reason why we must not hesitate or fear to
regroup.
In closing, I would wish to
emphasize especially how important it is to remain united, and to
avoid dissension at all costs. We are already so few who wish to
hold onto our traditions, who understand, who have received the
graces. There can be no question but that it is God's grace, which
has allowed us to keep our holy traditions, the very traditions,
which have produced the saints. It is vital, therefore, that we
proceed as of one mind, that we labor together in order to better
insure a strong defense.
You most assuredly have it within
your power, through grace, to build up something solid, which will
last, which will attract the others, something which will allow you
to form your children. You will find it easier to provide catechists
to help you in your tasks. You will find it easier to organize your
own schools, administered by laymen and fully Catholic, teaching the
true catechism, celebrating the traditional liturgy, forming your
children as strong and perfect Christians. It is this sort of
arrangement to which we must come in order to protect our holy
religion and our souls, for, ultimately, to save our souls is all
that matters.
|