1 August 1982

Your Excellency:

In his Apostolic Letter Dominicae Cenae, dated 24 February 1980, His Holiness Pope John Paul II made an apology to the faithful. He wrote:

I would like to ask forgiveness in my own name and in the name of all of you, venerable and dear brothers in the Episcopate for everything which, for whatever reason, through whatever human weakness, impatience or negligence, and also through the at times partial, one-sided and erroneous application of the directives of the Second Vatican Council, may have caused scandal and disturbance concerning the interpretation of the doctrine and veneration due to this great Sacrament. And I pray the Lord Jesus that in the future we may avoid in our manner of dealing with this sacred mystery anything which could weaken or disorient in any way the sense of reverence and love that exists among our faithful people.

The Holy Father ordered the publication of the Instruction Inaestimabile Donum, dated 2 April 1980. This Instruction listed twenty-six of the more serious abuses taking place today and instructed: "If anything has been introduced that is at variance with these indications it is to be corrected."

Your Excellency, it is with sorrow that we feel bound to bring to your attention the fact that the clearly expressed wishes of His Holiness have been widely ignored in the U.S.A. If anything, the liturgical anarchy which prevailed in the U.S.A. before the publication of these documents has intensified—and this anarchy is by no means confined to the liturgy, it extends to catechetical instruction, moral teaching, seminary education, and the religious life. The situation is now so serious that many faithful Catholics consider that there has been a total breakdown of authority within the Church in the U.S.A., so much so that we now consider it legitimate to speak of the schismatic American Church rather than the Catholic Church in the U.S.A. Your Excellency will certainly be aware of the article, "The Plight of the Papist Priest," which appeared in the December 1981 issue of the Homiletic and Pastoral Review. This article certainly confirmed the impression that a number of dioceses in the U.S.A. have passed out of the Pope's control. Subsequent correspondence from priests all over the country has indicated how widespread the problem is. There were a number of such letters in the May 1982 edition of the HPR, including one from a priest who indicated that a state of anarchy does indeed exist, for it appears that there is no one to whom aggrieved priests or laymen can go to obtain justice. "We thought," he wrote, "that our new Apostolic Delegate, Archbishop Pio Laghi, would speak out loud and clear to get the Bark of Peter back on an even keel." Alas, it appears that you have, as yet, been unable or unwilling to take any steps to do this. We pray to God that this is not because Your Excellency actually approves of these abuses. We suspect that it is because you realize that some American bishops will defy any instruction that you or the Pope might give them, in which case they are schismatic. We know that countless faithful Catholics have written to you complaining of the abuses, receiving only polite acknowledgements for their pains. Many among them have asked you to convey the documentation they have sent you to the Pope himself. We hope that you will have done this, in which case we must express our anguish at the fact that His Holiness has failed to intervene forcefully. We cannot help contrasting the effort he put into intervening in the recent armed conflict in the Falkland Islands, without having the least effect, with his failure to take practical measures in defense of "scandal and disturbance concerning the interpretation of the doctrine and veneration due to this great sacrament."

We were impressed by a courageous and perceptive statement made by Father Kenneth Baker, S.J., Editor of the HPR, in his May, 1982 edition:

It seems to me that there is a great reluctance in our society to impose a sanction on anyone, unless it is absolutely necessary. The same mentality is widespread in the Catholic Church. Recent Popes have all used strong language about aberrations and disobedience in the Church, but they have been extremely reluctant to impose any sanctions on offenders. Dr. Hans Kung was treated very gently, in the face of repeated provocations. There are countless cases of priests violating Church law with impunity; some bishops oppose Rome on liturgical matters, the ordination of women, general absolution, first Confession before first Communion and so forth. The sanctions are there, but they are rarely, if ever, applied.

When laws are openly violated and sanctions are not imposed, the law falls into disrepute. This leads to confusion and the breakdown of community.

Your Excellency, we suggest to you most respectfully that Catholic order will not be restored to the Church in America until bishops who defy the law of the Church, bishops who tolerate or promote Modernism, and bishops who actually participate in scandalous liturgical aberrations are removed from their sees. If the Pope is not prepared to do this then it is clear that we have reverted to the situation of the Arian heresy, when an almost solitary and courageous bishop, Saint Athanasius, supported by a small number of priests and laymen, upheld the faith during the pontificate of the weak and compromising Pope Liberius. Your Excellency is probably aware that this pope confirmed the excommunication of St. Athanasius and that the situation became so desperate that the Saint had to ordain priests in the dioceses of other bishops in order to ensure the existence of orthodox clergy when order was eventually restored to the Church. It is frequently alleged against Archbishop Lefebvre and his priests that they lack the jurisdiction to function in America. In normal times this would be a matter of the very gravest consequence, but we suggest to Your Excellency that the argument loses all its force if, indeed, there is a situation of widespread de facto schism and anarchy.

May we be permitted to give you a concrete example? We are the Editors of The Angelus, the official journal of the Society of St. Pius X in the United States of America. The Angelus is published here in Dickinson, Texas, where we also have an extremely beautiful church which the local bishop had intended to have demolished. Each day of the week the Tridentine Mass is celebrated here with great dignity and reverence. On Sundays we have a congregation of about seven hundred Catholics at our two Masses. We would indeed be delighted if Your Excellency could be here on Sunday to witness the fervor and reverence of the faithful during the Mass, and to see how many young people there are among them. What a different Church we would have here in America if every parish had such a solemn and dignified Mass, and so devout a congregation—as, indeed, was the case until the Immemorial Mass was prohibited, and after that, the deluge! Your Excellency might well reply that whatever the merits of the Tridentine Mass, and we are sure that you would concede that they are virtually infinite, we are breaching Church discipline in refusing to abandon it. This is a suggestion with which we would respectfully disagree. We enclose for your perusal a pamphlet we have printed arguing that, adhering faithfully to accepted canonical principles, every priest of the Roman Rite is still entitled to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, and the faithful to be present. If Your Excellency disputes the arguments contained in this pamphlet, which are based upon the opinions of competent Canon Lawyers, we would ask you to explain to us where it is in error. You might, alternatively, argue that even if the Novus Ordo Missae has not been imposed with the full force of Canon Law necessary to make it absolutely mandatory, it is clearly the wish of the Pope that the faithful of the Roman Rite should adopt it. But it was clearly the wish of Pope Paul VI, and it is clearly the wish of Pope John Paul II, that the faithful should receive Holy Communion on the tongue, not in the hand. We enclose another of our pamphlets which makes this absolutely clear, and we are confident that Your Excellency would not challenge its documentation. Sadly, we fear that while you might admonish us to conform to the wishes of the Pope, you would offer no such admonishment to the bishops of our country in the matter of Communion in the hand.

As we have just explained to you, we are convinced that every priest of the Roman Rite is canonically entitled to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. But let us concede for the purposes of argument that they are not. In that case, the priests who celebrate the Tridentine Mass daily at Queen of Angels Church here in Dickinson would be in breach of current ecclesiastical discipline. But, Your Excellency, so are thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of priests throughout America, and in these cases gross irreverence and even sacrilege is sometimes involved. Why should traditional Catholics alone be expected to conform to current discipline during a period of widespread schism and anarchy? As Father Kenneth Baker put it: "When laws are openly violated and sanctions are not imposed, the law falls into disrepute." It is also significant that all the officially tolerated disobedience in the U.S.A. tends in one direction only, to the undermining of traditional Catholic doctrinal, moral and liturgical teaching—particularly as regards the sacrificial nature of the Mass and the Real Presence. Our alleged disobedience is for one purpose only, to uphold Catholic Tradition by fidelity to the traditions which have evolved throughout the centuries. Where the liturgy is concerned, the phrase lex orandi, lex credendi is particularly appropriate, the manner in which the Church prays reflects what she believes. Your Excellency, what sort of belief would you say is indicated by the generality of worship in the U.S.A. today?

We would be most surprised if you were to insist that we are exaggerating the schismatic and anarchic tendencies in the American Church. If Your Excellency did so we regret to state that we would not be satisfied with no more than a gratuitous affirmation to this effect. There was a time when an ipse dixit of an Apostolic Delegate would have settled any question for an American Catholic. The fact that this is no longer the case is just one more indication of the extent to which ecclesiastical authority has broken down in this country. After much thought and prayer we have decided to undertake a practical initiative, as a service to you, to the Holy Father, and to the Church. The aim of this initiative will be to establish whether or not Rome does exercise authority over the Church in America. If we establish that it does not, then it is clear that a state of schism and anarchy does exist, and that the priests of our Society have every justification for functioning in schismatic dioceses without jurisdiction. We are sure you will agree that Canon Law exists for the good of the Church, and that the salvation of souls is the supreme law. Wherever they go in the U.S.A., our priests find countless souls thirsting for the Faith they once knew, and unable to recognize that Faith in what is taking place in their parishes today. The form our initiative will take will be to send you each month documentation exposing breaches of ecclesiastical law, irreverence, or even sacrilege—not necessarily confined to the Liturgy. We will happily reprint any reply Your Excellency sends us, giving details of the sanctions imposed upon the bishop, priest or religious responsible. If you do not reply to us, if we do not receive news of the imposition of sanctions, then that in itself will be the most eloquent and heartrending proof of the accuracy of our claim that there is now widespread schism and anarchy in many American dioceses, and that Rome no longer exercises effective control over the Church in this country.

Meanwhile, Your Excellency, we remain your obedient servants in Jesus Christ and ask your blessing for ourselves and our readers.

The Editors of
The Angelus

 

The Most Reverend Pio Laghi
The Apostolic Delegation
3339 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008