Bishop Fellay Promotes a Hybrid Mass

 

In an interview conducted at the end of June 2015, Bishop Fellay said that blending the Traditional Catholic Mass with the new mass, is an idea which makes him “glad”.  http://sspx.org/en/fellay_interview_tradition_schneider_sarah_Francis

 

In particular, Bishop Fellay declared his support for the idea of “introducing the Traditional Offertory into the new mass”.  Id. 

 

Bishop Fellay is advocating sacrilege, which is an “irreverent treatment of the sacred”.  Summa, IIa IIae, Q.99, a.1.  The Traditional Mass is entirely sacred, including its Offertory.  The new mass is evil, is a danger to the Faith and is a work of the devil and the modernist enemies of the Church.  Combining the Traditional Mass’s sacred Offertory with the evil new mass is as irreverent to the sacred Offertory, as would be mixing consecrated holy oils, with dung.  (In fact, because the new mass is evil while dung is merely repulsive (not evil), what Bishop Fellay is glad about, is worse.)

 

The sacrilege Bishop Fellay is supporting is a mortal sin worse than murder (because sacrilege is a grave sin directly against God, whereas murder is a grave sin directed against man).  Summa, IIa IIae, Q.99, a.2, sed contra; IIa IIae, Q.13, a.3, ad 1. 

 

In the same interview, Bishop Fellay says that this mixing of the sacred and the evil would be “a great step forward” because it would help conciliar Catholics.  But this is like the liberal view that it would be good to combine the Kingship of Christ and the Kingship of Satan on the same banner, in order to “gradually bring around” those who now support the Kingship of Satan. 

 

The truth is, the end does not justify the means!  Uncompromising Catholics do not approve sacrilege even if the goal is to help “bring around” the conciliar Catholics (and even if this means would achieve such an end).

 

Bishop Fellay might think that he can avoid the wrath of God for promoting the hybrid mass, because he plans to prevent the SSPX from using it and he speculates that no traditional priests would ever be so weak so as to rationalize their own use of the hybrid mass (in place of the Traditional Mass).  But whatever Bishop Fellay’s suppositions are, he still is promoting the irreverent treatment of the sacred Offertory, by mixing it with evil (the new mass).

 

Bishop Fellay is not culpable for the Vatican’s creation of the new mass in the 1960s, just as (in the above example), Bishop Fellay is not responsible for the banners of Satan already in use.  But Bishop Fellay is responsible for scandalizing the faithful, by promoting the creation of this hybrid mass; and he is also responsible for lending his influence, as Rome decides whether to blend the sacred and the evil masses.  This is like (in the above example) Bishop Fellay would be responsible for supporting the proposal of a hybrid banner, including both Our Lord and Satan. 

 

Our Lord warned us: “I would thou wert cold, or hot.”  Apoc. 3:15.  By Bishop Fellay promoting the blending of the good and the evil masses, he seeks to achieve the “lukewarm” by blending the hot and cold.  Such persons, our Lord declares, He “will begin to vomit” out of His Mouth.  Apoc. 3:16.

 

 

It is Not New for Bishop Fellay to Seek Convergence between the Traditional Mass and the New Mass

 

This is not the first time Bishop Fellay has proposed a way to bring the sacred Traditional Mass nearer to the new mass.  For example, Peter J. Elliott, the local ordinary of a diocese in Australia, reported that he had lunch with Bishop Fellay, during which Bishop Fellay and his SSPX priests proposed that the Traditional Mass “be said or sung in the vernacular”.  http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/02/reform-of-reform-not-impossible.html#.VZ1o_F9Viko

 

 

Bishop Fellay has been Soft on the New Mass for a Long Time

 

Bishop Fellay’s lack of abhorrence for the new mass is not new: 

 

  Bishop Fellay attended a new mass and praised it afterwards, to a Cardinal.  http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/cardinal-if-lefebrve-had-seen-proper-mass-he-may-not-have-split/  Accord: http://www.sspx.org/superior_generals_news/what_bishop_fellay_really_said_to_cardinal_canizares_about_the_new_mass_1-21-2013.htm

 

  On a visit to Rome with Bishop Fellay, his two Assistants attended the new mass celebrated by Pope Francis.  http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/05/rorate-exclusive-pope-francis-received.html

 

  Bishop Fellay laughed and smiled while recounting his liturgical experimentation as a teenager (creating new “eucharistic prayers” for the new mass used by his conciliar high school), as shown in this video interview, beginning at about minute five: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XhhM8WXjFA

 

  Bishop Fellay stated that the new mass is “legitimately promulgated” (although nothing can be “legitimately promulgated” which is not legitimate).  See, Bishop Fellay’s 4-15-12 Doctrinal Preamble.

 

  Bishop Fellay asserts the strange novelty that our Baptism Character sometimes approves of the new mass.  See, Bishop Fellay’s October 19, 2012 conference, disc 1, about minute 76 (discs sold by Angelus Press); https://www.scribd.com/doc/180007280/Analysis-of-Fr-Themann-conference-pdf (pages 31-32).

 

  Bishop Fellay says that “what needs to be corrected” in the new mass are things like the vernacular translation.  https://fsspx.news/en/content/23740 

Bishop Fellay and Fr. Daniel Cooper

Pope Benedict & the Traditional Mass (Bishop Fellay vs. Archbishop Lefebvre)

 

In his 6-27-15 interview, Bishop Fellay insists on Pope Benedict’s sincere attachment to, and promotion of, the Traditional Liturgy:

 

[I]t is important to insist upon Benedict XVI’s interest for the liturgy in general.  He truly wished to put the entire traditional liturgy, not only the Mass, at the disposition of the priests and the faithful.

 

Quoted from: https://fsspx.news/en/content/23861

 

Archbishop Lefebvre better understood the tactics of this same conciliar revolutionary:

 

They [then-Cardinal Ratzinger and the rest of the hierarchy] do not grant anything out of appreciation for the Traditional Liturgy, but simply to trick those to whom they give it and to diminish our resistance; to insert a wedge in the Traditional block so as to destroy it!

 

September 9, 1988 conference in Écône, (published in Fideliter 66, November-December 1988); English translation from June 2015 Recusant, p.7.

 

 

Fr. Daniel Cooper is Silent on Vatican II

 

Fr. Daniel Cooper, SSPX pastor in Arcadia, California, wrote in a July 2015 letter to parishioners:

 

A concerned parishioner said to me, “What’s wrong with the priests of the SSPX?  They never speak against Vatican II.  Now all we get is the gospel.” This is so typical.  She is complaining because the priests of the SSPX are doing their duty, spreading the message of the gospel.  But she wants them to be attacking Vatican II from the pulpit.  Very rarely is there a good reason to do this.

 

Page 2; emphasis added.

 

By avoiding mention of the principal errors of our time, Fr. Cooper fits in well with the SSPX’s new direction and will fit in well when the SSPX becomes a “recognized” (indult) group.

Bishop Fellay’s Strange Theory about the Role of the Baptismal Character

 

Catholic catechisms and St. Thomas teach that a baptismal character (which is an indelible mark) does two things: 1) it marks us as belonging to Christ; and 2) it enables us to receive other sacraments.  Summa, IIIa, Q.63.

 

Not feeling himself limited to Catholic Doctrine, Bishop Fellay expounds the strange theory that the baptismal character also causes us to recognize the goodness of the traditional Mass.  Bishop Fellay says that, when we attend the traditional Mass, there is a “click” [his word], which is our baptismal character causing us to recognize that this Mass is pleasing to God and is truly Catholic.  Bishop Fellay then says “most of the time there is absolutely no ‘click’ with the new mass.”  Quoted from Bishop Fellay’s October 19, 2012 conference, sold by Angelus Press, disc 1, about minute 76 (emphasis added.)

 

Recently, Bishop Fellay reiterated his novel theory:

 

[Y]oung [conciliar] priests identify with this [Traditional] liturgy, precisely because it is timeless.  The Church lives in eternity.  The liturgy does also too [sic], which is why it is always young.  Close to God, it is outside of time.  So it is no surprise that the baptismal character makes this harmony resound even in souls that have never known the liturgy.

 

June 27 2015 interview found at https://fsspx.news/en/content/23861 (emphasis added).

 

There are two problems with Bishop Fellay’s “click” theory:

 

a)    Bishop Fellay’s statements are not the traditional Catholic teaching about the role of the baptismal character.  Catholics are led to recognize what is good and evil through grace, virtue and especially the gifts of the Holy Ghost, not by the “clicking” of our baptismal character.

 

b)    Bishop Fellay’s comments are soft on the new mass, because his comments indirectly say that at least occasionally our God-given sacramental character (which supposedly helps us to discern what is good) will give a “click” in recognition that the new mass is good!

 

One supposes that Bishop Fellay would say that this (purported) “click” occurs when the new mass is used under the “best”, strictest conditions. But if the new mass is good under strict conditions, then the new mass is good in itself!