Archbishop Lefebvre: why the SSPX uses the 1962 missal

The Mass of All Time: 1984 priestly ordinations at Ridgefield, CT

Letter to American Friends & Benefactors from Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

April 28, 1983

Ridgefield, Connecticut

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

What was latent for many years in the relations between most of the priests of the North-East District and the Society of St. Pius X, and was the object of continual difficulties, has just come out into the open by the support given by these priests to the refusal of the Society’s liturgy by one of the three young priests I ordained at Oyster Bay Cove on November 3, 1982.

Thus, their long-standing disagreement with myself and the Society has now become public rebellion. It is the result of an extremist way of thinking and a tendency to schism in the domain of the liturgy, the papacy, and the sacraments of the reform.

They reject the liturgy which has always been used in the Society and consider it evil, the liturgy of Pope Pius XII, signed by Pope John XXIII, and so, the liturgy preceding the Council. They think and behave as if there is no Pope, suppressing all prayers for the Pope. In practice, they tend to hold almost all the sacraments of the new rites to be invalid.

This radicalism is not the attitude of the Society.

The basic principle of the Society’s thinking and action in the painful crisis the Church is going through is the principle taught by St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica (II, II, q. 33, a.4). That one may not oppose the authority of the Church except in the case of imminent danger to the Faith. Now, there is no danger for the Faith in the liturgy of Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII, whereas there is great danger for the Faith in the liturgy of Pope Paul VI, which is unacceptable.

The Society acts on the assumption that Pope John Paul II is Pope and so prays for him and strives to bring him back to Tradition by praying for him, by meeting with those around him, and by writing to him.

The Society does not say that all the sacraments according to the new post-conciliar rites are invalid, but that due to bad translations, the lack of proper intention, and the changes introduced in the matter and form, the number of invalid and doubtful sacraments is increasing. In order, then, to reach a decision in the practical order concerning the doubtfulness or invalidity of sacraments given by priests imbued with the ideas of the Council, a serious study of the various circumstances is necessary.

Many of you know the difficulties to which the attitude of these priests has given rise. Many of you have suffered from it and so will not be surprised by this clarification of the situation.

We regret not being able to come immediately to the assistance of those who wish to stay with the Society, but we will heed the requests of the faithful and, with the grace of God, we will come to your aid and we will keep you united to Rome and to the Church of all time.

So, henceforth, Fr. K---- is no longer District Superior; Fr. C---- is no longer District Bursar; Fr. S---- is no longer Rector of the Seminary. These priests, and the priests who follow them, and any seminarians who might follow them, are no longer members of the Society of St. Pius X, as of 27 April 1983. They no longer have any power, nor hold any office in the Society’s name.

Henceforth, if you have any inquiries concerning the Society in the North-East District, contact, at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Ridgefield, Fr. Richard Williamson, who has been provisionally nominated District Superior, or Fr. Roger Petit, who has been nominated District Bursar.

Most of the seminarians are remaining with us and we shall, God willing, proceed with ordinations in the first days of November.

We count on your prayers so that we can carry on the work of the Society in the North-East District and especially at the Seminary henceforth entrusted to Fr. Richard Williamson. We ask you to continue to help us so that we can continue building up the traditional Catholic Church in America. Please pray for the 24 new priests I am going to ordain on June 29th.

May God bless you through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

+ Marcel Lefebvre,

Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X

Archbishop Lefebvre: only when the Faith is in question
The principle of the Church, it is the principle of St. Thomas Aquinas. It is not my choice; it’s not my favor; it is not my personal desire... I am nothing... I merely follow the doctrine of the Church... 8-24-2012

SOURCE

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by 1jtxfvba4ur2s on January 1, 2013 at 2:47pm

Post removed

Permalink Reply by Dawn Marie on January 2, 2013 at 3:23pm

Dear Claudia,

While I may respect your position regarding the use of the 62 missal and Archbishop Lefebvre's decision to use that missal this site remains a site which supports the SSPX and the use of the 62 missal.

Likewise I ask that you respect that the site defers to the SSPX and the decisions it makes regarding such issues.

We want to keep the site faithful to prayer and not to debates over issues like this.

Permalink Reply by 1jtxfvba4ur2s on January 3, 2013 at 7:46am

Dear D. M.,

It is really not a question of "respect" for "positions." There has been significant changes since 1983 in our knowledge of the Bugnini liturgical reform, the fundamental nature of the liturgy and its relationship to Church dogma and discipline, and in the manner that Rome has treated the 1962 Missal as an Indult and as a grant of legal privilege. In light of these facts it is fair to ask that if Archbishop Lefebvre were here today would he reconsider his decision in 1983 about the 1962 Missal? Archbishop Lefebvre came to reconsider his decisions regarding documents of Vatican II and he reconsidered his decisions with his agreement with Rome in 1988? He was not a person who was unable to reevaluate his position in light of more detailed and accurate information with prayerful reflection.

To pretend that you are doing the SSPX loyal service by confirming them in what is now an evidently erroneous and indefensible position cannot be called true friendship and will be ultimately harmful not just to the SSPX but to all faithful Catholics trying to defend our faith and the purity of divine worship.

It was Archbishop Lefebvre's direction that the bishops he consecrated in 1988 should not be the superior general of the SSPX. The General Chapter apparently had no problem in deciding that this policy should not bind their judgments in light of historical developments. The decision made in 1983, thirty years ago, is not written in stone.

Claudia

Permalink Reply by Dawn Marie on January 3, 2013 at 8:37am

It is not to "pretend" that I am doing "loyal service" to the SSPX that we ask that issues like this are not debated on here.

First I am no theologian, so I am in no position to determine whether the use of the 62 missal is as you say a bad decision or not. I personally defer such things to those more learned than myself such as the priests and bishops of the SSPX.

So to me, and I suspect others it really is a matter of positions. You think it is not good, the Society thinks it is fine and so did ABL. I'm in no position to say one way or the other and this being a site of prayer (and news articles on Church and SSPX news very secondarily) it doesn't seem the place to debate it.

IMH
DM

Permalink Reply by 1jtxfvba4ur2s on January 3, 2013 at 12:35pm

Dear D. M.,

The Crusaders of the Immaculate Heart is for those who want to help the SSPX with prayer and penance to fulfill their duty to defend Catholic dogma and purity of worship. I joined for that reason. My post in reply to yours was submitted for that purpose and with the best intentions.

You have posted Archbishop Lefebvre’s 1983 Letter that explains why chose the 1962 Missal for the SSPX at that time. You now say, “we ask that issues like this are not debated on here.” Then why post it in a discussion forum if it cannot be discussed by those who have the best interest of the SSPX at heart?

Rome regards the 1962 Missal as an Indult and grant of legal privilege, it treats the 1962 Missal merely as a matter of Church discipline. Rome has made it clear that the 1962 Missal and the 1969 Missal are two expressions of the same rite. The final outcome of this new liturgical experimentation is unknown but we should have the first hybrid missal by this summer and another Motu Proprio before long. If the immemorial Roman rite is to be defended against a Modernist Rome then it must be done with proper understanding of the true nature of liturgy and its relationship with dogma.

The position taken by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1983 was justifiable with the information he possessed at the time. But now, it is a position that has been overrun and will make the defense of our immemorial liturgical traditions impossible. I believe ABL would have changed his position on the 1962 Missal if Summorum Pontificum, The Letter of the Pope to the Bishops (also released 07/07/07) and Universae Ecclesiae had been published in his lifetime.

If anything in the previous post was inaccurate then there should be SSPX priests willing to come forward and expose the errors. If what was posted was true then we must pray for the courage for ourselves and others to do, now and always, what is right and leave the outcome to God.

“Faithfully do what God expects of you each moment, and leave the rest up to Him. I assure you that living in this manner will bring you great peace.” St. Jane Francis de Chantal.