Part 1: Bishop Fellay’s Letter to the Cardinals

FRATERNITÉ SACERDOTALE SAINT PIE X Schwandegg CH 6313 MENZINGEN TÉL [41] 41 755 36 36 FAX [41] 41 755 14 44 Menzingen, 6 January 2004 Feast of the Epiphany of Our Lord Your Eminence,       On the occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the pontificate of John Paul II, it seems to us important to address ourselves to you, as well as to other cardinals, to share with you our serious concerns on the situation of the Church. Due to the deterioration of the Holy Father’s health, we have had to forgo writing to him directly, even though the enclosed study was initially intended for him personally.      Beyond the optimism that surrounds the celebration of this 25th anniversary, the extremely serious situation that both the world and the Catholic Church are passing through does not escape anyone. The Pope himself, in his Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Europa, acknowledges noticeably that the time in which we live is that of a “silent apostasy” wherein there reigns a sort of “practical agnosticism and religious indifference whereby many Europeans give the impression of living without spiritual roots and somewhat like heirs who have squandered a patrimony entrusted to them by history1 .”      Amongst the principal causes of this tragic state of affaires, how can we not put in the chief place the ecumenism that was officially initiated by Vatican II and promoted by John Paul II? In the avowed purpose to establish a new unity, and in the name of a will to “see rather that which unites us rather than that which divides us”, there is the pretense to sublimate or to reinterpret or to put aside specifically Catholic elements that appear to be causes of division. One despises thereby the constant and unanimous teaching of Tradition, which states that the Mystical Body of Christ is the Catholic Church and that outside of it there is no salvation. This ecumenism, has seemingly destroyed the most beautiful treasures of the Church, because instead of accepting the Unity which is founded on the plenitude of truth, it wishes to establish a unity adapted to a truth mixed with error.      This ecumenism was the principal reason of a liturgical reform that has been disastrous for the faith and religious practice of the faithful. This ecumenism has revised the Bible, distorting the divinely inspired text in order to present a watered down version incapable to hold up the Catholic faith. This ecumenism now seeks to found a new Church of which Cardinal Kasper in a recent conference2 has given the precise outlines. We can never be in communion with the promoters of such an ecumenism which leads to the dissolution of the Catholic Church, that is, Christ in His Mystical Body, and which destroys the unity of the faith, the true foundation of this communion. We do not want the unity wished by this ecumenism, because it is not the unity wished by God, it is not the unity that characterizes the Catholic Church.      It is thus this ecumenism that we mean to analyze and denounce by the enclosed document, as we are persuaded that the Church cannot correspond to her divine mission if she does not begin to renounce openly and to firmly condemn this utopia which in the words of Pius XI, “completely destroys the foundations of the Catholic faith3.”      Conscious of belonging by right to this same Church, and ever desiring to serve her more, we beg of you to do all that is in your power to give to the present Magisterium, as soon as possible, the centuries old language of the Church, according to which “the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it4 .” The Catholic Church will then become again the lighthouse of truth and the port of salvation in the midst of the world that risks its ruin because the salt has lost its savor.      Please, your Eminence, do not believe that we would want in anyway take the place of the Holy Father, but rather we await from the Vicar of Christ the energetic measures necessary to liberate the Mystical Body from the morass in which a false ecumenism has sunk her. Only he who has received the full, universal, and supreme authority over the entire Church can perform these salutary acts. From the successor of Peter, we prayerfully hope that he would hear our humble appeal for help, and that he would heroically manifest that charity which had been asked of the first Pope when he received his office, the greatest of charity – “Amas Me plus his”, the charity necessary to save the Church. Deign, your Eminence, to receive our devoted and most respectful sentiments in Jesus and Mary. Franz Schmidberger + First Assistant General + Bernard Tissier de Mallerais + Bernard Fellay Superior General + Alfonso de Galarreta Second Assistant General + Richard Williamson   1 John Paul II, Ecclesia in Europa, nº 7 & 9. 2 W. Kasper, The Tablet, Saturday 24 May 2003, May They All Be One? But how? A Vision of Christian Unity for the Next Generation. 3 Pius XI, Mortalium animos, 6 January 1928, AAS 20 (1928), pg. 7. 4 Ibid. pg. 14.

Part 2: Bishop Fellay’s interview with the Staff of SSPX Website «DICI»

DICI: Your Excellency, what is your intention when you address this document on ecumenism to all the cardinals?

	H.E. Bishop Fellay

Bishop Fellay: The fight for Tradition which we have been waging, following the example of Archbishop Lefebvre, for more than 30 years now, necessarily includes the criticism of the errors which lie at the origin of the present crisis. This work of theological criticism was undertaken by our founder himself, and never failed to be present. It is maybe even more necessary today when we see these errors produce more and more poisonous fruits. It is from this point of view that were undertaken the works of the 2^nd Symposium of Theology in Paris, in October 2003, the 6^th theological congress of SI SI NO NO in Rome, last January; as well as the book on The Problem of the Liturgical Reform, and so many articles published in our reviews and bulletins. It is along this same line that was written the denouncement of ecumenism which we sent to all the cardinals. As I wrote in the last Letter to Friends and Benefactors, this ecumenism, under the influence of Cardinal Kasper, is experiencing a development, which is close to sweeping away movement. And we must acknowledge that these ecumenical breakthroughs are backed up by the documents signed by the pope.

DICI: Was the publication of this document opportune at a time when word went around about possible agreements between Rome and Ecône?

Bishop Fellay: It is true that since the year 2000, under the impulse of Cardinal Hoyos, a change of attitude has been manifested in Rome regarding Tradition. But, let us be frank: it is only a change of practical attitude, made manifest by interviews and exchange of mail; but we must note that it does not change a thing as to the upsurge of post-conciliar errors. And, in fact, the discussions with Rome have been at a standstill ever since the pure and simple refusal opposed to our request of freedom for the traditional Mass, a freedom which we consider as an indispensable prerequisite for any discussion.

It is not a "canonical sort of put-up job" which can bring order back into the Church. And with this document we want to remind them of the necessity of a debate on the root of the problem. That is why, far from being untimely, our approach of the cardinals aims at reminding them opportunely that this debate is doctrinal.

DICI: Don't you think that it is urgent nevertheless to try to come to an agreement with this pope, because you do not know what his successor has in store for you?

Bishop Fellay: It is true that for the Holy Father the day of judgment is approaching, and that he will have to account for his pontificate. It is a work of charity to try to help him to evaluate these 25 years of pontificate under the eyes of God. For the blatant fact is there: John Paul II, at the end of his pontificate, sees himself the state of silent apostasy in which Europe now is. And leaning upon traditional doctrine, we strive to show that this situation is caused by 25 years of ecumenism.

Of course, we are sure that the return of the Church to her Tradition will happen only under the authority of the Vicar of Christ. But when? We do not know. The only thing we know for sure is that the Church has the promises of eternal life.

DICI: Nevertheless, isn't it a sign of a certain hardening of the SSPX? Maybe even of the will to cease all discussion with Rome?

Bishop Fellay: On the contrary. We desire this discussion, but once again we want it on the doctrinal level. It is impossible to envision a serious debate if we ignore the root of the problem. Be it only to give a clear definition of the words we use, and thus be sure that, beyond the words, we agree on the same realities.

We do not want this "differentiated consensus", within the framework of "unity in pluriformity" in the name of which Cardinal Kasper is discussing with the Protestants. These ambiguous expressions, these veritable contradictions in terms show with evidence that the Conciliar ecumenism does not care for the doctrinal demands, and even more simply still for the demands of sheer logic. What would you say of an agreement based upon the acknowledgement of a "differentiated consensus", or of "consensual differences"?

DICI: The tone of the document may sound stern.

Bishop Fellay: It is certainly austere because the theological problems raised by ecumenism demand a rigorous exposition without approximations. But the letter which accompanies this document clearly indicates the meaning of our endeavor: it is a respectful appeal to the pope and to the cardinals asking them to give back to the Church her Tradition, which has been contested and even attacked since Vatican II.

DICI: Do you really think that the solution to the present crisis is purely on the doctrinal level? Do you, a priori, exclude a more diplomatic and more pragmatic approach?

Bishop Fellay: According to me, it is being pragmatic, and in any case realistic to want to give solid bases for a discussion. And whether we want it or not, these bases are doctrinal. Pragmatism is not synonymous with "burying one's head in the sand", this voluntary blindness on the root of the problem can only lead to "not being on the same wave length", or even to being swindled.

The same dramatic realities are forced upon everyone, the pope as well as us. We are in a state of silent apostasy. We can get out of it only by a recourse to the Tradition of the Church. The answer to the silent apostasy must make itself heard with a strong and clear voice. Before the extent of the evil, we cannot be content with inefficient half measures, measures which, in the end, are accomplices of the evil which they merely soothe without ever being willing to eradicate it.

Part 3: Summary of Bishop Fellay’s Press Conference in Rome

The press conference of the Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X took place on Monday February 2 at 11:30, at the Columbus Hotel. In front of 45 Vatican journalists and around thirty invited guests, Bishop Fellay gave a presentation of the letter which he addressed at the end of January to all the cardinals. After an expose lasting half an hour, he answered questions during one hour, and then granted an interview to the television channels present. - Of note was the presence of three churchmen, of whom at least two are specialists on ecumenical questions, close to Cardinal Ratzinger.

Concerning the discussions with the Holy See, Bishop Fellay said: "We wish to build a bridge. Rome is proposing to us the roadway of this bridge, but we want first of all to construct the pillars. - In other words, the doctrinal base, indispensable for any kind of discussion.

These are some of the headlines on the following day, Tuesday February 3, in the Italian press: "An appeal to the pope against ecumenism" (Il Messaggero); "Lefebvrists to the pope: Rid the Church of false ecumenism" (Il Corriere della sera). And in the French press: "Society of St. Pius X denounces the pope's ecumenism" (Le Figaro); "Integrists launch vicious attack on ecumenism" (La Croix).

Part 4:
Commentary on the SSPX Document on Ecumenism sent to the Cardinals

The document as presented here below is only a partial reproduction of the Society’s long and erudite critique. A selection of texts has been made in order to present a more manageable abridgment, still faithful to the spirit of the full text. (The full text is available on the internet at the Society’s “DICI” website). My commentaries are preceded by :CM:

Document sent to the Cardinals
(hereafter DC, with subsection numbers in bold)

DC: 1. The 25^th anniversary of the election of John Paul II is an occasion to reflect upon the fundamental orientation that the Pope has given to his pontificate.

DC: 2. […] John Paul II has consecrated the essence of his pontificate to the fulfillment of this unity [of the entire human race], by repeated inter-religious meetings, acts of repentance and ecumenical gestures. This has also been the principal reason for his voyages: “they have allowed me to reach the particular Churches in every continent, prompting a sustained attention to the developing of ecumenical relations with the Christians of different confessions.”¹

CM: At first sight it seems a good thing to bring men of good will together to peacefully resolve their differences, and hopefully convert heretics by the prayers, patient explanations, and good example of saintly Catholic churchmen. If only that were what it is about! Alas, no. The essential difference between an ecumenical gathering and an enquiry class for non-Catholics is the “false opinion that holds any religion whatever to be more or less good and praiseworthy.”²

At these ecumenical prayer meetings, the Pope does not speak like a Catholic bishop instructing those who are in error. It is a requirement at all such meetings that the participants come together as equals, each accepted by the others as a sincere religious person with teachings or practices which will benefit all mankind. Ecumenical meetings are not places for conversion. Instead, these assemblies concentrate on values, which all share in common, and these values are vague enough to suit all manner of heretics and heathens. The infamous meetings at Assisi made the church of St. Francis a veritable Pantheon, dedicated to the worship of many false gods. Pope Pius XI, in his 1928 encyclical on Ecumenism (Mortalium Animos) had condemned these efforts toward ecumenism saying: “they even debase the concept of true religion and little by little lapse into naturalism and atheism .”³In moments of honesty, even Pope John Paul II seems to recognize some of the perverse effects of the ecumenical movement, though without identifying their cause:

Outline of the Document Sent to the Cardinals

DC: 3. …“The time in which we live seems to be an aberrant epoch where many men and women seem disoriented ”.⁴ There reigns over Europe a “sort of practical agnosticism and religious indifferentism” to such a degree that “European culture gives the impression of a ‘silent apostasy’.”⁵ The ecumenism is not a stranger to this situation. This analysis of the thought of John Paul II (Chapter 1) will show us that, not without a profound sadness, the ecumenical practices come from a non-Catholic thought (Chapter 2) and lead to a “silent apostasy” (Chapter 3).

CM: Above, we are given the general plan of the Society’s document criticizing ecumenism. This is the pattern we will follow for the selections and commentary. The purpose of this long exposition is to prove what modern ecumenism is in the personal theory and practice of the present Pope (Chapter 1), how this ecumenism is heretical (Chapter 2), and then to indicate specifically the harm it does to souls (Chapter 3).

Chapter 1: An Analysis of the Erroneous Ecumenical Theory of John Paul II
The Unity of the Human Race and the Unique Church of Christ.

DC: 4. The foundation of the thought of the Pope is found in the affirmation that states that “the Christ ‘has united himself in a certain way to all men’ (Gaudium et Spes nº 22), even if these men are not aware of it.”⁶ John Paul II explains, actually, that the Redemption wrought by Christ is universal not only in the sense that it is superabundant for the entire human race, and that it is proposed to each of its members in particular, but especially that it is de facto applied to all men [...] In actuality, “each man is included in the mystery of the Redemption and with each one Christ has united himself for ever through this mystery. […] That is, man in all the fullness of the mystery in which he has become a sharer in Jesus Christ, the mystery in which each one of the four thousand million human beings living on our planet has become a sharer from the moment he is conceived.”⁷

CM: Does the Pope really believe in universal salvation? Can anyone seriously think that the billion Catholics now alive, of our morally corrupt age, are all going to heaven; and here it is a question not of Catholics only, but of the whole world. Yet, what other interpretation can we give to inter-faith gatherings such as at Assisi (Oct. 27, 1986) during which the Pope, according to his own statement, wanted to detect “in a visible way the fundamental but hidden unity which the divine Word […] has established amongst all men and all women of this world.”⁸

Error: Divisions are not really Divisions

DC: 7. According to John Paul II, divisions in the Church which have happened during the course of history never affected the Church of Christ, that is to say that the fundamental unity of Christians amongst themselves has been left inviolate: “By the grace of God, that which belongs to the structure of the Church of Christ has not yet been destroyed, nor the communion which endures with the other churches and ecclesial communities ”⁹ […] One thus speaks of the imperfect communion between the separated churches and the Catholic Church, the communion of all in the unique Church of Christ remaining intact .¹⁰ The term “sister-churches” is often used.¹¹

DC: 8. According to this conception, that which unites the different Christian Churches is greater than that which separates them.¹²

CM: The theory of ecumenism is simply in denial of the facts. All the anathemas uttered by brave popes of history are forgotten, ignored, or apologized for. Pope John Paul II will not admit that he denies the dogma: “outside the Church there is no salvation,” but he forces a new interpretation on this dogma, contrary to what has always been believed. In this altered reality, heresy and schism do not separate the heretics from the Church, and after excommunication, communion endures.

The origin of this new interpretation is the Second Vatican Council’s constitution on the Church – Lumen Gentium.¹³ (A hint to recognize this new interpretation is the use of the phrase “the Church of Christ”, instead of saying “the Catholic Church.”) In Lumen Gentium, the Council used an ambiguous term, stating that the Church of Christ “subsists in” the Catholic Church, and refused to clearly affirm that it “is” the Catholic Church. This same phrase made another appearance in a later Council text – Dignitatis Humanae.¹⁴ Now, after almost 40 years, the Vatican is openly admitting that the phrase “subsists in” allows non-Catholics to be considered as existing within the Church.¹⁵

Error: Non-Catholics are part of the Church

DC: 8. If this Church only “subsists” in an unique subject in the Catholic Church, she keeps at the least an “active presence” in the separated communities in reason of the “elements of sanctification and truth”¹⁶ which are present in them.

DC: 9. […] A unity so conceived will no longer be realized by the “ecumenism of return ”:¹⁷ “We reject this method of searching for unity. […] The pastoral action of the Catholic Church, both Latin and Eastern, no longer tries to make the faithful pass from one Church to another.”¹⁸

CM: We have just read a quotation from the Balamand Statement of 1993, which has been praised by the Pope.¹⁹ This was an ecumenical agreement between the Pontifical Council for the promotion of Christian Unity (then headed by Cardinal Cassidy, and now headed by Cardinal Kasper) and representatives of the Orthodox churches. Unlike the usual ambiguous and meaningless statements, which proceed from ecumenical meetings, this was a clear statement of refusal to convert heretics. This refusal follows logically from the new idea of unity set forth in Redemptor Hominis (see footnote #7), for if schismatics and heretics are already part of the Church, no conversion can be required of them. The only blight on this universal unity, are external divisions, which, the ecumenists insist, are not essential ruptures, but which they would, nonetheless, like to eliminate. Traditionally, three visible bonds of unity have been acknowledged as essential for union with the Catholic Church: unity of the sacraments, profession of the same faith, and communion with the successor of St. Peter.

Inter-faith gathering at Assisi - 1986

Tampering with the Bond of Unity of the Sacraments

DC: 11. One knows how Paul VI has applied this method in the sacraments: in the successive liturgical reforms which applied the conciliar decrees, “the Church has been guided […] by the desire to do everything to help our separated brethren on the way to union, taking away the stones that could be even the shadow of a risk of stumbling or displeasure.”²⁰

DC: 12. The obstacle of a Catholic liturgy expressing too much dogma …[has been] thus put aside.

CM: We reject this New Mass. Let it be said again! We must refuse the liturgical reform of Pope Paul VI because it is a protestantization of the Catholic liturgy. The New Mass is not fitting for the true worship of God, but for joint-worship with members of false religions it includes almost nothing objectionable.

Tampering with the Bond of Unity of the Faith

DC: 13. In what concerns matters of faith, John Paul II considers that … One must resort to historical relativism, in order to make the dogmatic formulas depend on their epoch: “The truths which the Church really understands to teach by her dogmatic formulas are without a doubt distinct from the changing concepts proper to a determined epoch; but it is not excluded that they might possibly be formulated, even by the Magisterium, in terms which carry some traces of such concepts.”²¹

CM: This is the standard method today for explaining differences between previous Catholic dogmatic teaching and the present ecumenical practice. Few ecumenists are as blatantly heretical as Fr. Jacques Dupuis, who lectured at the October 2003 Ecumenical Congress at Fatima. He openly rejects the dogma defined at Florence that “outside the Church there is no salvation.” Fr. Dupuis said in disgust: “There is no need to invoke here that horrible text from the Council of Florence in 1442.” Most ecumenists are a little more subtle than that. In the DC quotation above, Pope John Paul II effectively devalues dogmatic formulas (e.g. the creed, the profession of faith, and dogmatic constitutions) of any fixed meaning; changing historical concepts may have worked their way into these formulas. Note well that historical criticism is one of the methods of the Modernist heretics, condemned by St. Pius X in the encyclical Pascendi. The first step in this process of historical criticism is to deny the literal meaning of a historical formula. This is called “agnosticism” in so far as Modernists claim that the real meaning cannot be clearly known by reading the words. It is next assumed that sincere believing men have added to or altered the literal meaning of the historical formula, perhaps even at the moment of its composition. These sincere men were blinded from objectivity by their personal faith in the changeable concepts common to their age. It is the role of the Modernist critic to eliminate these accretions and everything, which in their judgement, is not in harmony with what they call the logic of the facts.

An example of this historical criticism of defined dogma is the Common Declaration with the World Lutheran Federation, which will be studied further on.

DC: 14. “This common declaration carries the conviction that the surpassing of condemnations and questions of momentary controversy does not signify that the separations and condemnations be treated lightly or that the past of each our ecclesial traditions be disavowed. Nonetheless, this declaration carries the conviction that a new discernment of the history of our Churches has occurred.”²² Cardinal Kasper summarized it simply with the commentary: “Where we had at first sight a contradiction, we can now see a complementary position.”²³

CM: Clear expressions of Catholic dogma are avoided in this common declaration. The doctrinal definitions of Trent on justification are not denied or contradicted – they are superseded. Somehow, those clear words are judged to be unintelligible by the Modernist historical critic who enters into the ecumenical search to discern anew the real history of the Protestant Reformation.

Tampering with the Bond of Unity of Government

DC: 15. As far as the Petrine ministry is concerned, the desires of the pontiff are known: to find, in harmony with the pastors and theologians of different Churches, “the forms in which this ministry could realize a service of love recognized by each.”²⁴

CM: Yes, the Pope himself is considering a change in the role of the papacy. Read also this other quotation from Pope John Paul II’s encyclical on unity: “I hear the request which has been addressed to me to find a manner of exercising the Primacy which without renouncing anything essential to its mission, opens itself to new possibilities.”²⁵

 

Chapter 2: Doctrinal Problems Posed by Ecumenism
The Church is One by Faith, Government, and the Sacraments

DC: 17. The ecumenical practice of this Pontificate is entirely established upon the distinction between the Church of Christ and the Catholic Church. […] Yet this affirmation does not correspond to the Catholic faith.

Buddhists pray inside Assisi's Franciscan convent

If the Church of Christ is something broader or bigger than the Catholic Church, what are its limits? Are Protestants and the Eastern Orthodox part of the Church? Are Jews and Muslims part of this Church? How about Hindus and Buddhists? For the ecumenist it seems there are no boundaries, everyone is united, and if it does not appear to be so visibly, then the bond of union must exist in some secret invisible manner.

Slight external similarities were seized upon by the Second Vatican Council as evidence of this unity. In a general way, Gaudium et Spes states: “…believers of whatever religion have always heard His revealing voice.”²⁶ Perhaps this may be truly said of heretics, or even of Jews who reverently read some of the inspired Scripture, but to attribute this to non-Christian religions is false.

Here are a few particular examples from the Second Vatican Council: Regarding heretics, the Council stated: “all who have been justified by faith in baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.”²⁷ Yet, besides baptism, the true faith is necessary, as Pope Pius XII wrote: “Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed.” ²⁸ Next, regarding Hinduism the Council stated: “in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and …seek release from the anguish of our human condition through ascetical practices or deep meditation or a loving, trusting flight toward God.” Likewise, regarding Buddhism, in the same document the Council stated: “Buddhism …teaches a path by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, can either reach a state of absolute freedom or attain supreme enlightenment by their own efforts or by higher assistance.”²⁹ These are similar texts are the false theological basis for the ecumenical heresy of universal salvation.

DC: 21. On the contrary, one must affirm that these three bonds [of faith, sacraments and hierarchical communion] are constitutive of the unity of the Church, not in the sense that just one [bond] could unite to the Church, but of the fact that if just one of these three bonds is lacking in re vel saltem in voto,³⁰ one would be separated from the Church and would not benefit from her supernatural life. This is what the Catholic faith obliges to believe, as that which follows will show.

CM: What follows is an exposition of the traditional doctrine of the unity of the Church, with reference to each of the three bonds of unity.

Unity of the Faith

DC: 21. [Faith is] described by the First Vatican Council: “a supernatural virtue by which, under the inspiration and the aid of the grace of God, we believe that which He has revealed to us to be true: we believe it, not because of the intrinsic truth of the things seen by the natural light of our reason, but because of the very authority of God who has revealed us these truths, who can neither deceive nor be deceived.”³¹ For this reason whoever refuses but one truth of the faith known to be revealed loses completely the faith which is indispensable for salvation: “Anyone who, even of only one point, refuses to really assent to the truths divinely revealed renounces entirely the faith, because he refuses to submit himself to God as the Sovereign Truth, the very motif of the faith.”³²

Unity of Government

DC: 23. “In order to guard forever intact in His Church this unity of faith and of doctrine, He [the Christ] chose a man amongst all the others, Peter…”:³³ so Pius IX introduces the necessity of unity to the chair of Peter, “a dogma of our divine religion which has always been preached, defended, affirmed with one heart and one unanimous voice by the Fathers and Councils of all time.”

Unity of the Sacraments

DC: 24. “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.”³⁴ By these words of Our Lord, all recognize the necessity, […] of the faith and […] the sacraments.

	Pope Pius XI

CM: The promoters of ecumenism seem to pursue the very noble design of fostering charity among all mankind. They allow nothing to be an obstacle to this “charity” –not dogma, not authority, not the fitting worship of God. They imagine that charity will grow at the expense of faith, as if the two virtues were opposed. “How is it possible …to imagine any kind of a Christian union whose signatories, even in matters of faith, would keep their own manner of viewing and thinking, even when this was repugnant to the opinions of others?”³⁵ It is nonsense. Rather, we must emphasis that all those who are not united by the triple bond of unity are separated from the Church, the ark of salvation. Thus we ought to consider them according to the command of the Lord, “as a pagan and a publican”.³⁶ St. John himself, the Apostle of charity, strongly admonished the faithful to be wary of the dangers which may arise from a familiarity with those who teach false doctrine: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, or say to him, Welcome. For he who says to him, Welcome, is sharer in his evil works.”³⁷

Is that which unites us greater than that which separates us?

DC: 29. If the separated Communities are not formally speaking holders of the elements of sanctification and truth – such as was said above – the proposition which states that that which unites the Catholics to dissidents is greater than that which separates them is true materially speaking, in the sense that all of these elements are references that could serve as a base for discussions that would bring them back to the fold. This assertion nonetheless cannot be formally true, and this is why Saint Augustine says: “In many things they are with me, only in a few they are not with me; but because of these few points they have separated themselves from me, it doesn’t mean anything that they be with me with all the rest.”³⁹

CM: It takes courage and conviction to say what St. Augustine said. A good Catholic must be convinced that his religion is true, completely true. He must have the courage to tell everyone who professes a different belief, though it may be similar, that they are wrong whenever they refuse Catholic dogma. The ecumenist tries to build relationships based on some similarities, pretending that the beliefs, which divide men into different religious groups are of little importance. Ultimately, this leads us to doubt whether those who practice ecumenism possess the virtue of faith, which was defined so well by the First Vatican Council. Pope Pius XI also bravely condemned such dissimulation which concentrated on similarities and minimized dogmatic differences saying: “If it concerns points of faith, it is in not at all licit to distinguish in a manner in which some points are fundamental and others that are not, the first being accepted by all, and the others being left to the free assent of believers; the supernatural virtue of faith has for its formal cause the authority of God revealing, which does not tolerate a distinction of this sort.”³⁹

 

Chapter 3: Pastoral Problems Posed by Ecumenism
(Meaning: In Practice Things are Even Worse!)

DC: 31. Besides the fact that it depends on heterodox theses, the ecumenism is harmful for souls, in the sense that it relativizes the Catholic faith indispensable for salvation, and it deters from the Catholic Church, the unique ark of salvation.

Problem: Ecumenism begets relativism of the faith

DC: 32. […] It ends up finally denying the sin against the faith that constitutes heresy. So John Paul II affirms, concerning the monophysite heresy: “The divisions which have occurred were due largely to misunderstandings”,⁴⁰ adding: “the doctrinal formulations which separate them from the formulas in use […] concern the same content.”⁴¹ Such affirmations disavow the Magisterium nonetheless infallible in condemning these heresies.

CM: Pope John Paul II is in error on this point, but if we look for the root cause of this error, we find it is ecumenism. We do not accuse the Pope of believing in monophysitism (the heresy holding that there is only one nature in Christ, which was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon). The Pope is just downplaying all doctrinal divisions so that they seem unimportant. Doctrinal beliefs are vitally important, but the Pope does not care to emphasise them. This is the error of indifferentism, the very error which Pope Pius XI predicted would be the result of ecumenism.

DC: 34. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith has certainly reorganized the supposed “hierarchy of the truths in Catholic Doctrine”:⁴² this hierarchy “signifies that certain dogmas are based on others, more fundamental, which illumine them. But all these dogmas being revealed, each must be believed with the same divine faith.”⁴³

CM: So long as all revealed truths are believed, it does not really matter how some theologian organizes the presentation of them. Yet, read on.

Problem: Ecumenists pretend that some doctrines are unimportant

DC: 34. Yet the ecumenical practice of John Paul II is independent of this authentic interpretation. For example, in his address to the Evangelical “Church”, he underlines “that which is important”: “You know that during several decades, my life has been marked by the experience of the challenges which atheism and incredulity launch against Christianity. I have all the more clearly before my eyes that which is important: our common profession in Jesus Christ. […] Jesus Christ is our salvation, for all. […] By the force of the Holy Spirit, we become His brethren, truly and essentially children of God. […] Thanks to the consideration of the Confession of Augsburg and of numerous reunions, we have newly become aware of the fact that we believe and that we profess this together.”⁴⁴

CM: Ponder over those words. The Pope said “that which is important […is] our common profession in Jesus Christ.” Notice how much more orthodox this statement is than the statement about monophysitism (above). Most Protestants would join in our common profession belief in the two natures of Jesus Christ, while a monophysite would not. Pope John Paul II’s message seems to change, depending on the particular group of heretics he is dialoguing with. Yet, this second statement is still unacceptable, for it involves the same real error as the first - indifferentism. The real problem is not the individual doctrine, which is being downplayed or forgotten; the real problem is the indifferentism, which causes the Pope (and so many other Catholics) to minimize the importance of doctrines we must believe in to be saved.

Problem: Ecumenism prevents the unambiguous teaching of the Catholic Faith

DC: 36. The ecumenical axiom that states “The way and method in which the Catholic faith is expressed should never become an obstacle to dialogue with our brethren”⁴⁵ succeeds in solemnly signed common declarations that are equivocal and ambivalent. In the Common Declaration on Justification for example, the infusion of sanctifying grace⁴⁶ in the soul of the just is never clearly taught; the only sentence that makes some allusion is so awkward that it could leave the opposite to be believed: “Justifying grace never becomes a human possession to which one could appeal against God.”⁴⁷ Such practices no longer respect the duty to teach the Catholic faith integrally and without ambiguity, as something “to be believed”….

CM: The Common Declaration on Justification is a practical example of modern ecumenism at work. Liberal Catholics were so intent on reaching a visible agreement with the Lutherans, that they were willing to ignore clear doctrinal teachings of the Church, lest heretics be condemned or offended. This is not an isolated case; it is the logical result of a pattern of action. The habit of non-confrontational dialogue with heretics has led to belief in the illusion that there are no real religious differences.

Problem: Ecumenism does not demand conversion to the Catholic Church

DC: 39. Not only does this ecumenism destroys the Catholic faith, it also pushes heretics, schismatics and infidels away from the Church.

DC: 40. The ecumenical movement no longer searches for their conversion and their return to the “unique fold of Christ, outside of which are certainly those who are not united to the Holy See of Peter.”⁴⁸This is clearly stated: “We reject [uniatism] as a method to find unity. […] The pastoral action of the Catholic Church, both Latin and Eastern no longer tends to make the faithful pass from one church to another.”⁴⁹ […] Cardinal Kasper […] adds as well: “We can describe the ‘ethos’ proper to ecumenism in the following fashion: the renouncement to every form of proselytism whether open or camouflaged.”⁵⁰

CM: Forgotten is the command of our Lord: “Go …make disciples of all nations ”.⁵¹ It is not within our power to call Cardinal Kasper to judgment. Perhaps we should even praise him for his intelligence and honesty. In this age when so few prelates are able or willing to understand the logical effects of ecumenism, it is refreshing to encounter a Cardinal who understands and admits what he is doing. Cardinal Kasper is quoted because he is an authority on ecumenism, as he ought to be since he was placed by the Pope at the head of the Pontifical Council for the promotion of Christian Unity. Note: the “uniatism” named above is the historical submission of some Eastern Orthodox Christians to Rome, such as the Ukrainian Catholics. These “uniates” are an embarrassment to all those involved in the present process of non-proselytising dialogue.

Conclusion

DC: 43. Considered from a pastoral aspect, one must say of the ecumenism of the last decades that it leads Catholics to a “silent apostasy” and that it dissuades non-Catholics from entering into the unique ark of salvation. One must reprobate “the impiety of those who close to men the gates of the Kingdom of heaven”.⁵² Under the guise of searching for unity, this ecumenism disperses the flock; it does not carry the mark of Christ, but that of the divider par excellence, the devil.

CM: This document ends with a clear doctrinal message: ecumenism is a heresy now ravaging the Church and leading souls to hell. Turn away from this impiety! It is the Pope who has identified the results of this heresy and called it apostasy. We have searched for the cause of this apostasy, and found it in the heresy, which the Holy Father himself promotes. The heresy we clearly condemn, but about the promoter of this heresy, the Pope, we only say:

DC: 44. Following a utopian ideal – the unity of the human race – the Pope has not realized how much this ecumenism which he has pursued is truly and sadly revolutionary: it inverts the order willed by God.

CM: This document also ends with a clear pastoral message: it is the duty of faithful Catholics to make reparation for these sins. This is what God asks of us today. As for the others, those who are not Catholic, or those who have abandoned the traditions of the Church, they must be converted.

DC: 46. In these sorrowful circumstances, how can we not hear the cry of the Angel at Fatima: “Penance, Penance, Penance”? In this utopian dream, the coming back to good sense must be radical. One must come back to the wise experience of the Church, synthesized by Pope Pius XI: “The union of Christians cannot be attained other than by favouring the return of dissidents to the only true Church of Christ, which they have had the misfortune of leaving.”⁵³ Such is the true and charitable pastoral action for those who err, such ought to be the prayer of the Church: “We desire that the common prayer of the whole Mystical Body [that is to say, the whole Catholic Church] rise towards God in order that all the wandering sheep rejoin the unique fold of Jesus Christ.”⁵⁴

CM: Keep the faith, wait in hope, practice charity. The merciful love of our Redeemer can soften the hardest hearts; His infinite wisdom can enlighten and inspire the dullest human minds; and always He will be faithful to His promises.

REFERENCES:

1. John Paul II, Tertio millenio adveniente, nº 24. Cf. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 42: "The ecumenical celebrations are amongst the most important events of my apostolic voyages in the different parts of the world."

2. Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, 6 January 1928, Pontifical Teachings, Solemnes, The Church, volume 1, nº 855.

3. Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, 6 January 1928, Pontifical Teachings, Solemnes, The Church, volume 1, nº 855.

4. John Paul II, Ecclesia in Europa, nº 7, DC nº 2296, 20 July 2003, pg. 670-671.

5. John Paul II, Ecclesia in Europa, nº 7 & 9, DC nº 2296, 20 July 2003, pg. 671-72.

6. John Paul II, Discourse to the Cardinals and to the Curia of 22 December 1986, The situation of in the world and the spirit of Assisi. DC nº 1933, 1 February 1987, pg. 134.

7. John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis nº 13.

8. John Paul II, ibid, pg. 133.

9. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 11.

10. Vatican II, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, nº 3: "For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church - whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church - do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles." After speaking of this visible communion partially broken, the decree adds, in order to show the permanence of invisible communion: "But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church. [...] The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation."

11. Cf. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 56, 57 and 60; Allocution in the Basilica Saint Nicolas of Bari, 26 February 1984. DC nº 1872, 15 April 1984, pg. 414; Common Christological Declaration between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Assyrian Church, DC nº 2106, 18 December 1994, pg. 1070; Sermon pronounced in presence of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Dimitrios I, 29 November 1979 at Istanbul. DC nº 1776, 16 December 1979, pg. 1056: "I invite you to pray with fervor for the full communion of our Churches. [...] Beg the Lord that we, pastors of Sister-Churches, might be the best instruments in this historic hour, to govern these Churches, that is to serve them as the Lord wishes, and thus to serve the unique Church which is His Body."

12. Cf. John Paul II, Tertio millennio adveniente, nº16.

13. Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium nº 8.

14. Vatican II, Declaration Dignitatis humanae, nº 1.

15. See the commentary of Cardinal Ratzinger, Ecclesiology of the Conciliar Constitution Lumen Gentium, conference of 27 February 2000. DC nº 2223, 2 April 2000, pgs. 310-311: "By this expression, the Council differentiates from the formula of Pius XII who in his Encyclical Mystici Corporis stated that the Catholic Church "is" (est, in latin) the unique mystical body of Christ. [...] The difference between 'subsists' and 'is' shows the drama of ecclesial division. Even though the Church is one and subsists in a unique subject, ecclesiastical realities exist outside of this subject: true local Churches and various ecclesial Communities."

16. Vatican II, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, nº 3; John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 11.

17. One understands the term "ecumenism of return" as Pius XI in his encyclical Mortalium Animos: "To encourage the to return the dissidents to the only true Church of Christ, as they had in the past the misfortune to separate themselves from her. The return the unique true Church, as we say, clearly visible to our eyes."

18. Declaration of the International Mixed Commission for the theological Dialogue between the Catholic and Orthodox Church, 23 June 1993, also called the "Balamand Declaration", nº 2 and 22. DC nº 2077, 1 August 1993, pg. 713. This citation only concerns "uniatism", but Cardinal Kasper gives more systematic formulation "The old concept of ecumenism of return today has been replaced by that of a common journey, which directs Christians towards an ecclesial communion comprised as a unity in reconciled diversity". (W. Kasper, The Common Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification: a reason for hope. DC nº 2220, 20 February 2000, pg. 167)

19. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 59, 60.

20. A. Bugnini, Modification to the Solemn Prayers of Good Friday. DC nº 1445, 4 march 1965, col. 603. Cf. G. Celier, La dimension œcuménique de la réforme liturgique, Editions Fideliter, 1987, pg. 34.

21. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 38, quoting the Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. DC nº 1636, 15 July 1973, pg. 267.

22. Common Declaration of the World Lutheran Federation and the Catholic Church, nº 7 (cf. Nº 5, 13, 40-42). DC nº 2168, 19 October 1997, pgs. 875.

23. W. Kasper, The Common Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification: a reason for hope. DC nº 2220, 20 February 2000, pg. 172.

24. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 95.

25. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 95, as quoted in the Angelus SiSiNoNo Reprint #20.

26. Vatican II, Constitution, Gaudium et Spes, nº36.

27. Vatican II, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, nº 3.

28. Pius XII, Encyclical, Mystici Corporis, nº 22.

29. Vatican II, Declaration, Nostra Aetate, nº 2. Read the Angelus SiSiNoNo Reprint #55 for more commentary on these points.

30. "in reality or at least in desire"

31. Vatican I, Session 3, c. 3, DzH nº 3008.

32. Leo XIII, Encyclical Satis cognitum, 29 June 1896, ASS 28 (1895-1896), pg. 722. Pontifical Teachings, Solemnes, The Church, volume 1, nº 573.

33. Pius IX, Encyclical Amantissimus, 8 April 1862, Pontifical Teachings, Solemnes, The Church, volume 1, nº 233, 234-237.

34. Mk. 16, 16.

35. Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, 6 January 1928, Pontifical Teachings, Solemnes, The Church, volume 1, nº 868.

36. Mt. 18, 17.

37. II Jn. 10 - 11.

38. Saint Augustine, in Psalmo 54, §19, quoted by Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum ASS 28 (1896), pg. 724, Pontifical Teachings, Solesmes, The Church, volume 1, n° 578.

39. Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, AAS 28 (1920), pg. 12. DzH nº 3683.

40. Common Christological Declaration between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of East, DC n° 2106, 18 December 1994, pg. 1609.

41. John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 38.

42. Vatican II, Decree Unitatis Redintegratio, nº 11.

43. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae, 24 June 1973. DC nº 1636, 15 July 1973, pgs. 667.

44. John Paul II, Meeting with the Evangelic Church Counsel, 17 November 1980, DC n° 1798, 21 December 1980, pg. 1147.

45. Vatican II, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, nº 11; John Paul II, Ut unum sint, nº 36.

46. Council of Trent, Decree on Justification, c. 7, DzH 1528: "Justification itself is not only the remission of sins, but at the same time the sanctification and renovation of the interior man by the voluntary reception of grace and its gifts."

47. Common Declaration on Justification by the World Lutheran Federation and the Catholic Church, nº 27. DC nº 2168, 19 October 1997, pgs. 875 ff.

48. Pius IX, Encyclical Neminem vestrum, 2 February 1854. Pontifical Teachings, Solesmes, The Church, volume 1, nº 219.

49. Declaration of the Mixed Commission for the Dialogue between the Catholic and Orthodox Church, 23 June 1993, also called the "Balamand Declaration", nº 2 and 22. DC nº 2077, 1 August 1993, pg. 711.

50. W. Kasper, The Ecumenical engagement of the Catholic Church, conference given 23 March 2002 during the General Assembly of the Protestant Federation of France. Œcuménisme informations, nº 325 (May 2002) et nº 326 (June 2002).

51. Mt. 28: 19.

52.Preparatory schema of Vatican I on the Church, published in the Pontifical Teachings of Solesmes, The Church, volume 2, pg. 8*: "We reprove the impiety of those who close the entry into the Kingdom of Heaven to men, on assuring them under false pretexts that it is dishonourable or in no way necessary to salvation to abandon the religion - even false - in which one is born, raised and taught; those also who complain that the Church projects herself as the only true religion, to proscribe and condemn all the religions and sects separated from her communion, as if there could be a possible community between light and darkness, an arrangement between Christ and Belial."

53. Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, 6 January 1928, AAS 20 (1928), pg. 14, Pontifical Teachings, Solesmes, The Church, volume 1, nº 872.

54. Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, AAS 35 (1943), pg. 243, Pontifical Teachings, Solesmes, The Church, volume 1, nº 1105.