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”.
particular, Bishop Fellay declared his support for the idea of “introducing the
Traditional Offertory into the new mass”. Id.
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.)
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.
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.
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).
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).
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.
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.
is Not New for Bishop Fellay to Seek Convergence between the Traditional Mass
and the New Mass
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.
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”.
Fellay has been Soft on the New Mass for a Long Time
Fellay’s lack of abhorrence for the new mass is not new:
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/
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
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
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.
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
➢ 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