Human
law, initially the means for providing internal order within a society has been
corrupted, and so estranged from its proper end, that it is now the means for
causing disorder within society. The
“Four Sins That Cry To Heaven For Vengeance” have become protected acts under
law in the United States.
The
upshot of Vatican II, one might say its spirit, was the pathological desire to
make the Church of Jesus Christ conform to the world. Hitherto, the Church had always been the
mother of high culture. Where there was
one priest faithful to Catholic doctrine, morals and worship, there was
culture. St. Damien among the lepers in
Molokai is a good example of the transforming power of a single priest. There are countless other examples in the
history of the Church. This secularizing
spirit has exercised a corrupting influence on canon law, the human law of the
Church, divorcing canon law from its proper end, and enrolling it in the
service of ecumenism. Ecumenism is not a
Catholic doctrine. It is not a moral
obligation. It is nothing more than a
bureaucratic policy of operation. So,
what is the proper end of canon law?
The
Church, like all creation, is hierarchical in every sense and only in
understanding this structure can a Catholic have a true sense of the place and
purpose of canon law. St. Pius X in Pascendi says "every society needs
a directing authority to guide its members toward the common end, to foster
prudently the elements of cohesion, which in a religious society are doctrine
and worship. Hence the triple authority
in the Catholic Church, disciplinary,
dogmatic and liturgical” (emphasis his).
Note carefully that the purpose
of the "directing authority" (i.e. disciplinary, canon law) is to
direct the Church "toward the common end" which are "doctrine"
(dogmatic) and "worship" (liturgical).
This
"triple authority in the Catholic Church, disciplinary, dogmatic, and liturgical” corresponds to the
governing, teaching and sanctifying power of the Church. The power of jurisdiction concerns the governing
of the Church. It concerns matters of
discipline. It is the teaching and the
sanctifying power of the Church that is concerned with matters of dogma. The purpose of the jurisdiction is to protect
and facilitate the teaching and sanctifying work of the Church by its
legislative, judicial and coercive powers.
Canon law cannot be employed in any other sense. It cannot be used as a weapon against
doctrine, morals and worship. Outside of
its proper end, it has no power. Just as
no parent has the parental authority to command what is manifestly unjust, no
bishop possesses the jurisdictional authority to forbid any of the immemorial
traditions of the Roman Rite, including the traditional Roman Rite Mass. And should he ever do so, as our local
ordinary and his judicial vicar have done, let it be known that they "will
incur the wrath of Almighty God and the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul" (Quo Primum).
Since
Vatican II, the name “Catholic” has become meaningless. When anyone describes himself as Catholic you
can tell no more about what he believes than if he said he was a Rotarian. To overcome this problem we have now Liberal
(i.e. modernists), Conservative and Traditional appellations. The Conservatives are impotent, sterile
grumblers who can do no more than get in the way. The fight for the Church is between the
Liberals who have made the brotherhood of man their end, and the
Traditionalists who have God as their end.
Some elements in this conflict have remained the same with each group
over the past thirty years, but others have changed dramatically.
The
liberal Novus Ordo Church has seen an unparalleled decline in their
numbers. Only 20% of Catholics keep the
precepts of the Church. Eighty-percent
reject the Catholic doctrine of the True Presence. There is poverty in vocations and
conversions. The religious houses are
empty. The liturgy is the very essence
of bland spectacle. They have made
clerical attire the butt of late night jokes. Church closings and parishes
without priests are common news. From
the very beginning, the Liberal Catholic attacks against Traditional Catholics
in the fields of doctrine and morals have been thoroughly routed. That is
because these attacks require the structure of real arguments. In the field of arguments, the Liberal
Catholic is disarmed. Their one and only
weapon has been the unjust use of canon law as a club to force their
innovations on those who would have no part with them. The comments made by Rev. William J.
King are the same unreasoned swinging of
this club we have suffered under over the last thirty years, except in that
Rev. King has not enough intellectual insight or imagination to structure a
case without exposing himself as a liar.
I
mailed Rev. King the canonical opinion of Rev. John Huels, CJD, erstwhile head
of the Servites, erstwhile professor of canon law at the Catholic Theological
Union in Chicago and erstwhile assistant dean of canon law St. Paul’s
University in Ottawa. Rev. Huels, like
Rev. King, is a priest; Rev. Huels, like Rev. King, is a canon lawyer; Rev.
Huels, like Rev. King, is a confirmed enemy of Catholic Tradition; Rev. Huels,
like Rev. King has no history of using canon law to protect the Church against
pedophiles. Rev. Huels had himself
recently laicized after his long history as a homosexual predator was
publicized.
It
would be unjust to conclude from this association that Rev. King is himself a
pedophile, but guilt by association is the sort of game that Rev. King likes to
play. What it does establish is clear
evidence of Rev. King’s priorities.
Excommunication is the most potent weapon that can be employed by Church
authority. Rev. King is now on record as
having threatened this penalty against Traditional Catholics for doing what
they have always done when they were simply known as Catholics. We should be grateful that this is not the
Middle Ages or we might find ourselves, like St. Joan of Arc, burning at the
stake.
Stop
for a moment and appreciate the hypocrisy of Rev. King. He affirms against the Traditional Catholics
of SS. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission, without providing a single shred
of evidence, that “many of their doctrines and practices contradict Biblical
revelation and authentic Catholic teaching,” and that “their theology contains
certain doctrinal errors.” He then
exudes a paternal concern and threatens with excommunication any Catholic who
would be associated with these supposed “errors.” Yet this is the same priest
that permits Catholic children to attend Lutheran Bible Camps for their
doctrinal formation. He is the same priest who endorses ecumenical prayer
services with Moslems and Jews where the name of Jesus Christ is conveniently
expelled. These allegations against
Traditional Catholics are pure calumny.
They will only convince those who are buried in doctrinal indifferentism
and moral subjectivism. The real problem
for the liar, Rev. King, is that his audience is already convinced.
As
for Rev. King’s remarks that attendance at the Traditional Roman Rite
(Tridentine) Mass offered in the Church of SS. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic
Mission “does not satisfy the obligation for Catholics to participate in the
Mass” and that anyone attending these Masses are in “schism,” I offer the same
reply that was mailed to Rev. King last July:
……charge
of “schism” leveled by Rev. King has been made before. Bishop Ferrario, of
Honolulu on January 18, 1991 made the charge of schism against several lay
Catholics and formally “excommunicated” them for doing the same thing that we
are doing in the Diocese of Harrisburg.
The “excommunication” was nullified on appeal to Rome by Cardinal
Ratzinger on June 4, 1993. Apparently,
Rev. King does not distinguish the difference between disobedience and
schism. He would accuse the “man born
blind” in the gospel of St. John, chapter 9, of being a “schismatic.”
As
for the Sunday obligation, I frankly wonder if Rev. King even knows what the
obligation actually entails. Be that as
it may, Rev. Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia
Dei and no friend of Catholic tradition, wrote a private letter on September
27, 2002 that was published in part in the Remnant. Msgr. Perl wrote a follow up public letter on
January 18, 2003 that was intended to provide further clarification of the
private letter written in September. In
the letter of January 20, 2003 Msgr. Perl said:
“In
response to the question, Points 1 and 3 in our letter of 27 September 2002 to
this correspondent are accurately reported. His first question was "Can I
fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass" and our response
was:
"1.
In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass
celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X."
The
Office of Bishop Dattilo has confirmed that any parish has the standing
“permission” of Bishop Dattilo to conduct an ecumenical prayer service in the
sanctuary of a Catholic Church with Mohammedans, Talmudic Jews, and Novus Ordo
Catholics to pray to their “common god.”
Since Jesus Christ is formally expelled from these prayer services, it
remains a mystery as to what god these prayers are directed. It is little wonder that Bishop Dattilo, who
has the hubris to believe that he can nullify the First Commandment, would have
any trouble prohibiting the Traditional Roman Rite of the Mass.
Before
sending this to Rev. King, we could only accuse him of negligent incompetence
with regard to his canonical opinions.
Now that we know that he has been informed, we can call him a liar. He knows the truth of the matter, but like
other canonists before him over these past thirty years, he will never let
truth stand in his way.
Furthermore,
Rev. King should certainly be aware of the ad hoc commission of eight
cardinals convoked by Pope John Paul II to answer two important questions: Was the Tridentine Mass every outlawed?; and,
Does every priest possess the right to offer this Mass? Cardinal Alfonse Strickler was a member of this
commission and published its findings.
Seven of the eight ruled that the Tridentine Mass had never been
outlawed. They ruled unanimously that every priest has the perpetual right to
offer the Traditional Mass.
Thus
in the Motu Proprio, Ecclesia Dei, the Pope said, “To all those Catholic faithful who feel
attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms of the Latin
tradition, I wish to manifest my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion
by means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for their rightful
aspirations. In this matter I ask for the support of the bishops and of all
those engaged in the pastoral ministry in the church." Here a proper
distinction is made between "liturgical and disciplinary" categories.
This is not simply a question of the Mass, but of all the Ecclesiastical Traditions
of our Church. The Pope also
acknowledges the "rightful aspirations" of Traditional Catholics and
therefore professes his "will" to perform his duty to "guarantee
respect" for these rights. Further, the Pope is not granting an indult. An
indult is "a faculty granted by the Holy See to bishops and others to do
something not permitted by the common law of the Church" (Catholic Dictionary, Attwater). Hence, a
"rightful aspiration" cannot be the subject of an indult.
The
Pope in asking for “the support of the bishops” has found an appalling deafness
in the ears of Bishop Dattilo and his judicial lackey. The real problem is that the practice of
Traditional Catholicism is an open condemnation of those who are responsible
for the state of the Catholic Church today.
With
the advent of the Internet, any Catholic interested in practicing the Catholic
Faith according to the Ecclesiastical Traditions of the Catholic Church is able
to read our reply to the scurrilous charges made by Rev. King. He also has access to traditional references
to examine the merits of any argument.
It is now the case that an individual Catholic has in his power the tool
to answer the personal injustice of some disordered prelate and effectively
reach his audience, while the disordered prelate has lost both his audience and
his credibility. Soon, everyone, for
whom these questions are of importance, will know that Rev. King is a
liar.
I
have asked Bishop Dattilo to authorize Rev. King to engage in a public debate
regarding his charge that SS. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission “doctrines
and practices contradict Biblical revelation and authentic Catholic teaching”
and that our “theology contains certain doctrinal errors.” This is a most serious charge. This is the charge of heresy, and every
Catholic should demand from Rev. King a specific and detailed elucidation of
his accusation. It is interesting that
two years ago, Msgr. Mercurio Fregapane, on my behalf, formally submitted to
Bishop Dattilo a detailed theological defense of the right of Traditional
Catholics to the Ecclesiastical Traditions of the Church, and requested from
him an authoritative response. Directly
after submitting this request, Msgr. Fregapane was summarily retired. Bishop
Dattilo had a strict moral obligation to respond in detail to any errors in
this document, yet he has failed to do so.
As a matter of fact, Bishop Dattilo has never responded to a single
letter sent to him or copied to him, or answered a simply telephone call from a
Traditional Catholic since he came to Harrisburg.
Contrast
this to the lives of the saints who would stop at nothing to convert the soul
of one heretic: St. Dominic among the Albignesians, St. Francis de Sales
among the Calvinists, St. Louis de Montfort among the Jansenists. It is because their Faith was fully animated
with the virtue of Charity. With Rev.
King, not only is there no Charity, there is good reason to doubt the virtue of
Faith. But we shall see. Let him come forward with his allegations
into the public forum so everyone can see if the insults he has received are
justly merited.
Bishop
Dattilo and Rev. King have both received a copy of the corporate purpose of SS.
Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission:
The members of the Saints Peter
and Paul Roman Catholic Mission have joined together to work toward the
sanctification of their souls by restoring to the Diocese of Harrisburg, and by
defending the Ecclesiastical Traditions of the Roman Catholic Church, the
patrimony and right of all Catholics. The primary focus of these efforts are
the propagation of the traditional Roman Rite of the Mass for the holy and
acceptable public worship of God, as codified by Pope St. Pius V, and in the
providing of sound traditional catechetical instructions for the purpose of
promoting the greater glory of God and to obtain the conversion of souls to the
Catholic Church, "outside of which there is no salvation". The
members observe holy Catholic obedience to our Holy Father, the Pope of Rome
and his delegated representative, the local ordinary of the Diocese of
Harrisburg, in all things that are not contrary to, or could in any way impede,
the restoration and defense of the immemorial traditions of the Catholic
Church.
The
Members, in following the exhortation of Pope St. Pius X to "restore all
things in Christ", bound together in acts of prayer and penance, will
engage in any form of Catholic Action, which is related to the divine mission
of the Church in extending the Kingdom of God to everyone; individuals,
families and society. So help us God.
What
is it in these words that so infuriate them that they can only respond with the
threat of excommunication, calumny and lies that are easily established? What we are doing at SS. Peter and Paul Roman
Catholic Mission is what Bishop Dattilo has a solemn moral and legal obligation
to do himself. He has not done it, and
now others are doing the job for him. Catholics have asked for bread, and he
has given them stones. It really is not
much more complicated than that. Still,
the name of Bishop Dattilo is specifically named in the canon of the
Traditional Masses offered at our Mission.
May God grant that it may do him good.
David Drew
Chairman
SS.
Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission
P.
O. Box 7352
York,
PA 17408
717-792-2789
SS.
Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Chapel
129
South Beaver Street
York,
PA 17403