Talk with Bishop Bernard Fellay

Here are the main parts of an interview published in the French magazine Fideliter No. 140 – March-April 2001.
Note that this interview was made before the Vatican decided to deny the Sociey her two basic requests

We have spoken about the priests and the bishops. What about Rome? In your opinion, did the Fraternity's Jubilee Pilgrimage, last summer, make any impression on Rome?

I think so. I think that Rome was "challenged", as they say today, by the Pilgrimage, which was a splendid demonstration of what we really are: authentic Roman Catholics. I think that many of them realized that they had perhaps been mistaken in their view of us. They came to understand that our actions, our state of mind, our persons and our desires are exclusively Catholic and Roman. I think that some of them have said to themselves: "There are a certain number of people in the Church who are very much opposed to the true Catholic Faith, and who are very much further from the spirit of Rome than these pilgrims. Isn't it time to change the verdict on the Fraternity?"

During the Pilgrimage, three bishops dined with Cardinal Hoyos...

Yes, there were three of us. The fourth had to catch a plane. In fact, we did not want to go all together, so as not to give this meeting too official a character. As for the bishop who was not present, it was not that he had refused to go, but his absence fitted in with our analysis of the situation.  Cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos was very kind and friendly, and I think I can say that he expressed a lot of sympathy for Tradition. In reality, he is discovering Tradition. Since he is responsible for Ecclesia Dei, he has to concern himself with the traditional Mass; but I am not sure that, at this stage, he has really grasped what the problem is.

Were you able to raise doctrinal questions with him?

This was only an initial contact, almost just a matter of simple courtesy. But there was no misunderstanding and no blockages at the doctrinal level. After all, the Cardinal is himself a Thomist. As I said, at the present time, he does not understand the whole question of the Mass, but I regard him as a valuable contact.

Will there be any follow-up, any further contact? Is there anything happening in Rome, as we hear here and there?

There is something in the air, something surprising actually, particularly if you compare what is happening to the Fraternity of St. Peter. In effect, there is an approach, a new opening, on the part of Rome, which we must examine in detail.

Is this a new attitude or simply an evolution of the previous attitude? Are people beginning to think logically about the past?

No, I don't think there is any logic in this. What is happening now is not logical or at least not logical at a human level. But there is the divine logic, God's logic, the logic of thirty years of prayers and sacrifices. That is why it is more necessary than ever to redouble our prayers.

All the same, we can see a kind of human explanation. It's all a question of getting a proper understanding of the situation. There are several possible reasons. The first is this: before he dies, the Pope would like to settle this problem, which constitutes a blot on his pontificate. Another is this: the Roman Curia would like to settle the problem before the next pontificate. Then there is another reason: confronted with the disorder, the anarchy, which reigns in the Church today, and the demands made, for instance, by the progressive left, some people could point to us and say, "Why not ask them to join forces with us to make a kind of counterweight?" But as to which of these solutions is the true one, and whether there is any link between them, and whether there are any other explanations—we cannot say for sure.

The past year presented us with great contrasts. On the one hand, we witnessed the Pope "asking forgiveness", the new martyrs, the renewal of Assisi, etc. On the other hand there were some astonishing things, notably the declaration Dominus Jesus, which poured cold water on the progressives by adopting a classical tone: "The Catholic Faith forbids us to say," and "the Catholic Faith obliges us to say," etc. Does this augur well for an opening-up on Rome's part, or are you still very suspicious?

It is normal to be suspicious when we see what is going on, e.g., people persisting in the errors of the Council, and when we look back at the whole past - the thirty years of struggle and, now, what is happening to the Fraternity of St. Peter. We may legitimately wonder whether it is not, perhaps, a trap for us, for example, to create dissension between those who would wish to accept this or that proposal from Rome and those who would not. Clearly there is suspicion; it could not be otherwise.

So you would be inclined to be suspicious of any proposition coming from Rome?

While suspicion is normal, given the circumstances, we must also be realistic enough to acquire a good grasp of things as they are, to see them objectively. We are sure (and it is faith which tell us this) that no crisis in the Church can last indefinitely. Is there the beginning of a re-awakening today, is there some anticipatory sign? It is hard to say. We must be careful not to confuse our desires with reality.

In the present situation, several points are to be considered. First of all, if there were an opening-up or a proposition, it would be a Roman initiative, not something solicited by us. This particular point obliges us to examine the situation very carefully, to see whether Providence is showing its hand.

Then, while it is essential for us to be concerned for our unity and our selfpreservation, this should not make us forget our obligation to serve the Church according to our means and opportunities. If there is a chance, just one chance, that contact with Rome could bring a little more Tradition back into the Church, I think we should seize it.

I am not sure whether some opening-up on the part of Rome today could lead to complete agreement. There are too many serious points dividing us, and we have no intention of modifying our principles or our line of action. But I think it is possible to get things to move forward on many of these points. I am convinced that a movement has been started, a movement which, little by little and in the long term, will force Rome to revise Vatican II, abandon the errors which this Council contains and return to something more solid. But how long will this take? Decades, probably, without the extraordinary intervention of God himself. However, every stage has its importance, and today we are in one of these stages.

So, I am still in a state of waiting; I try to see and appreciate things as they happen, to know whether to go or stay, to take action or not. Everything will depend on the way Rome acts or reacts.

What signs from Rome would restore your confidence?

If they let us exist in freedom as we have existed so far, letting us continue to do as we have been doing. For the life, we are leading yields manifest fruits, fruits of grace, fruit for the Church. So let us hope they will let us continue working as we have been doing. I think we must see this freedom which Rome has publicly granted us as a sign of benevolence, of an evolving attitude. More concretely, if the traditional Mass were granted to the whole world (and I underline: to the whole world, and not only to us), it would also be a sign that Rome was trying, at least a little, to move back. Obviously this would only work provided they did not create a mountain of obstacles and conditions which would effectively neutralize the permission given.

Do you think that, humanly speaking, these hopes and wishes could be fulfilled in the months and years to come?

I do not exclude the possibility. It would seem to be completely contrary to the current of the times, but the demand for the Tridentine Mass is a growing movement, and I am sure it will continue to grow. Rome will not be able to resist this pressure in the long run, particularly when it comes from the young clergy.

Let us suppose that the traditional Mass were permitted, without conditions, to all who wanted it. Do you think that a significant number of priests would return to it, at least partly?

I think one must draw a distinction as regards the clergy. As for the older clergy, I don't think so; they are happy with their New Mass and will stay with it. I think that it is from the young clergy that we shall see some interesting developments. But we must not dream. It would require a miracle for a great number of priests to suddenly return to the old Mass. I don't think that's how things will happen. However, I really believe that there are many who aspire to the Tridentine Mass and, if they had the opportunity to say it, would do so.

One danger, if permission were given for the traditional Mass, would be that no one would be interested in it, and then Rome could say, "You see, you are the only ones left; we were right to suppress it!"

No, it's not like that. I know that, in Rome itself, a Cardinal said, "It's not just a case of the Fraternity; there are a good many priests who want this Mass." No, there is a fairly general movement. In the United States, for instance, there are more than a hundred dioceses where the traditional Mass is celebrated "officially", whereas the Fraternity of St. Peter is only in about thirty places. There is a desire for it on the part of the faithful. Is there an absolute correspondence between the desire of the priests and the desire of the faithful? We may suppose that there is, but I am not certain. At all events, it is clear that this wave of a return to the old Mass would be accelerated if every priest were given true liberty.

What would be the Society of St Pius X’s place in this movement of return?

I think that the Society represents a hidden treasure in the Church. It is a real treasure of the Church and for the Church, with an absolutely extraordinary richness, which we have received - let us not forget - from the hands of Archbishop Lefebvre. This treasure is not we ourselves, of course, but the good things we are maintaining and cultivating, which are the goods of the Church: the Holy Mass above all, the priesthood, the faith. Up to now, by the force of events and because of the crisis, this treasure has been cultivated within an enclosed area. Is this the moment? Do we have to go on waiting until the whole Church can benefit from this treasure? The answer is in the hands of God. But I think it will be possible to spread these treasures more widely in the coming years.

If the liberty to celebrate the traditional Mass were universally granted, would you see the Society devoting itself to the formation of priests for this Mass, or concentrating on the doctrinal struggle?

It would have to be both. Everything crystallizes in the Mass, but it is far from being the entirety of the present crisis. Doctrine is even more important than the Mass, if one can say so, and therefore the doctrinal battle will continue. The young priests, whose priestly formation is often poor, are thirsting for true and proper knowledge. I think that there must be the two: the Mass and doctrine. Perhaps we should teach doctrine through a knowledge of the Mass.

Our conversation is taking place ten years after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre. Do you think that the Fraternity's Founder is still a strong figure?

To me, it is as if he is always with us, but there is clearly a real danger that his features will fade as time goes by. So it is our task to make his presence always felt here and now, by recalling his teaching and the example of his life. I hope that Bishop Tissier de Mallerais's work on his biography will soon be available so that everyone, not only the seminarians but also the faithful, may be able to read it with great joy. Archbishop Lefebvre's personality stamped itself on his era. I don't think there is anyone today whose personality makes its mark on the world in the same way. Of course, we don't have his personality and his personal aura. On the other hand, his heir, the Fraternity of St. Pius X, by its faithfulness continues to represent something important and essential in the life of the Church: her Tradition.

 (Interview edited by Fr. Gregoire Celier)