CUL:The Great Schism  (pronounced "sizzum")  by Bill Jackson

   It finally happened! After years of jockeying for position, trying
to maintain a rigid Catholicism that was true to historic Romanism but
unpopular with popes he termed "modernistic", Marcel Lefebvre went too
far even for the conservative John Paul II.

   Meetings between the two had generated hopes within Lefebvre's Pius
X society that a true reconciliation with the Roman Hierarchy was
possible. Stances by the present pope that indicated his strong
conservatism and even a leaning toward the use of Latin in the liturgy
were found to be meaningless when Lefebvre, contrary to papal commands,
consecrated four bishops at his seminary in Econe, Switzerland.

   Why, you might ask, since both Paul VI and John Paul II had come out
against the Pius X society with their insistence on the Latin Mass, is
it such a landmark when bishops are consecrated? Why was Marcel
Lefebvre not ex-communicated when he insisted that the Mass authorized
by the pope was not valid, and ordained priests at his seminary?

   The significance is this. Although Lefebvre had ordained almost 250
priests contrary to Vatican direction, these priests could only
function until the end of their lives. Since Levfebvre is 82 years old,
his time on earth is definitely limited. If he died without
consecrating bishops, the movement would have no base upon which to
continue. Priests cannot ordain priests, and it would only be a matter
of time before the movement, one of many spurious movements from
Catholic centrality that had occurred over the centuries, would
disappear. Now the bishops can ordain priests, and the movement can
continue for longer, until the hoped-for traditional pope takes the
chair of Peter. As Lefebvre stated, "The Lord may soon call me home. I
must not leave you orphaned."

   This caused the first schism in the Roman Catholic church since just
after Vatican I in 1870 when some bishops, denying the infallibility of
the pope, split to form the Old Catholic Church (Church of Utrech). The
Society that had been begun by Lefebvre shortly after the Novus Ordum
of Paul VI suggested the use of the vernacular in the Mass, was named
after Pius X, the pope who condemned modernism in a 1907 encyclical.
Lefebvre maintains that the discarding of the Latin is a form of
modernism, and his followers have uttered many strong statements about
the post-Vatican II Church. (See THE GREAT SACRILEGE by Priest Wathen).

   Less than two hours after the consecrations, a Vatican statement
condemned them as an act of schism, a formal break with the Holy See.
Even though one is ex-commnunicated and branded schismatic (a formal
term that implies a state of disobedience to the papal office), ex-
communicated people are still under obligation to attend Mass, even
though they are not allowed to partake of the sacraments.

   Two days ago I received a statement from the Pius X society with its
seminary in Connecticut (soon to move to Minnesota). A summary of this
begins on page 3. The head of the seminary, Richard Williamson, was one
of the men consecrated bishop by Lefebvre. An Orlando, Florida priest
of Our Lady of Fatima Church (not recognized by the Archdiocese of
Miami as a Roman Catholic church) stated, "Nobody can be pleased with
what is going on, but it is a necessary step. We do love the pope. He
is our father and we do love him. But this was needed."

   As is to be expected, Catholics who follow official Vatican teaching
have tried to downplay the significance of these events. Rev. Arthur
Bendixen, chancellor of the Archdiocese of Orlando, said, "We feel
saddened about their split from the church. But they are a small group
[about 100, 000]; certainly not a large section of the church."

   Yet the ability of Lefebvre's seminaries to attract young candidates
for the priesthood is in sharp contrast to the authorized Roman
Catholic seminaries, which are empty or sparsely populated. The
youthful vigor of the outlawed group will be missed in Romanism.

   Lefebvre's feeling about the Vatican-controlled Romanism is that the
church has been infiltrated by "wolves and thieves" and is being
consumed by the "cancer of liberalism."

   Central to the Traditionalist position, championed by Lefebvre, is
that the New Mass, celebrated in USA in English, cannot be the same
Mass as was authorized by the Council of Trent (the Tridentine Mass).
Their position is well taken both from history and semantics. In pro-
mulgating this Mass, Pius V did state that this form of the Mass would
be eternal and could not be changed. The center of the Mass is the mys-
tery of transubstantiation, which demands a precise formula for its
doing what Catholics say it does, i.e., transform the wafer into the
actual body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. The logical ar-
gument is that if the formula is said in any living language it cannot
be entirely precise, as living languages change over the centuries. If
there is a perceptible change over 300 years, there will be an
imperceptible change daily, thus destroying the necessary precision.

   How can this effect evangelism? Send for our free tract, WHICH MASS
IS VALID? It might give you some good ideas.

   Following is a letter sent from St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, Route
1, Box 97, Winona, MN 55987. It was entitled THE EPISCOPAL
CONSECRATIONS. A DECISION AND EXPLANATORY DOCUMENTS. It was dated June
15, 1988.

   "Dear Friends and Benefactors, "The die is cast, and, God willing,
Archbishop, Lefebvre will be consecrating four bishops for the Society
and for the Catholic Church, at the Society's Seminary in Econe,
Switzerland, on June 30, with or without Rome's authorization.

   "The sincere hopes of many good people for a reconciliation between
the Society and Rome will be dashed to the ground by such a decision.
The enclosed documentation is being sent to you all by first class mail
in advance of June 30 to help you understand why such a decision was
necessary. Rome and the Society met together from July of last year to
June of this year in their common desire to find an accord, but there
was no meeting of minds. While the Society is intent upon preserving
Tradition, today's Rome is intent upon dissolving it. That is what
these documents are to help you to grasp.

   "Firstly, there is Archbishop Lefebvre's June 2 letter to the Holy
Father requesting of him more than the one bishop granted by the Pope
at the end of May, and requesting above all a majority of members on
the Commission for Tradition which was meant in the Society's mind to
guarantee the protection of Tradition, but in Rome's mind to ensure its
dissolution.

   "Secondly, there is a statemenmt concerning the episcopal
consecrations by Archbishiop Lefebvre, going back to 1983 and just as
appropriate today. The Archbishop has not changed. Rome has not
changed. When Vatican II turned the Church's back on Tradition, and
when in 1970 the Archbishop founded the Society (canonically) to defend
Tradition, logically the clash of today was inevitable. For different
reasons both parties have sought to avoid the clash, but a 'fact is
stronger than the Lord Mayor, ' says the proverb. In fact, Tradition
and anti-Tradition are not reconcilable.

   "Thirdly, there is a text of Archbishop Lefebvre dating from March
of this year, and explaning how the Pope has a right to our
disobedience.

   "Fourthly, there is the Archbishop's letter to the four future
bishops, for whom please pray the words of the Prophet Jeremiah be
realized (Chapter 23), 'And I will set pastors over them, and they
shall feed them: they shall fear no more, and they shall not be
dismayed.'

   "Then there are notes on Canon Law's provisions for a state of
emergency by a German professor, expert in Church Law. These notes most
interestingly indicate that under today's circumstances, the New Code
itself says that its own automatic excommunication for 'unauthorized'
consecrators and consecrated would not be automatic.

   "And lastly - and you might like to start with this one - read the
letter of the seminarian who quit Econe at Pentecost of 1986 to help
found in Rome an alternative Traditional seminary under Rome's
protection. He learned the hard way what we said at the time, namely
that to entrust Tradition to today's Romans is like asking the fox to
look after the chicken-coop.

   "This was in fact the decisive reason why the negotiations failed.
The Archbishop knew that Rome's intentions were not to follow
Tradition. Thus from the French Embassy in Rome a quote of Cardinal
Ratzinger at the time of the negotiations was relayed to the
Archbishop, in which the Cardinal reassured some French politician that
the Commission for Tradition was only to be very provisional, to
arrange for the re- insertion of the Econe priests into the official
dioceses.

   "The Archbishop has not defended Tradition all the way up till now
in order now to hand it over to the wolves. Always pray for this great
shepherd of souls. He does not think he is much longer for this life
after June 30.

   "Sincerely yours in Our Lord's service, "Fr. Richard Williamson"
********** While Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and others in his Society
have made strong statements about the "wolves and false prophets" that
now control Roman Catholicism, the Archbishop has been careful to
maintain a spirit of respect to the person of the Pope, which office he
regards as the continuation of the Petrine episcopacy and the head of
the Roman Catholic Church.

   In his letter of June 2, 1988, he closed it, "Be so good, Most Holy
Father, as to accept the expression of my most respectful and filially
devoted sentiments in Jesus and Mary."

   As we have pointed out, historically and doctrinally the
Traditionalists are correct. They are what Catholics ought to be. I
agree with my pastor who told me, "If I were a Catholic, I would be a
Traditionalist."