A Schismatic Pilgrimage?

2024 Notre Dame de Chrétienté Chartres Pilgrimage
To refuse to celebrate the same Mass as the Sovereign Pontiff, one must have sufficiently serious reasons. So writes Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, SSPX, in this following article.
The New Mass of Paul VI at the Chartres Pilgrimage?
1. “Rumors and tensions surrounding Masses in Latin.” The reflection developed by Jean-Marie Guénois, in the columns of the newspaper Le Figaro of December 12, fortunately re-published by Le Salon Beige [1] is recommended once again.
The title of the article intends to put things back in their place, to consider them in their true light. It is all about an “insistent rumor, reported by the daily newspaper La Croix according to which the Mass according to the old rite, called that of St. Pius V, could be banned by Rome during the next pilgrimage of Christendom to Chartres, scheduled for June 7 to 9, 2025.”
It is difficult to know whether the newspaper La Croix would in this case take its wishes for reality, but the fact remains that the journalist from Le Figaro notes for his part that “neither the Vatican nor the Dicastery of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments have sent a letter on this subject to the Conference of Bishops of France, to the bishopric of Chartres or to the organizers of the ND de Chrétienté pilgrimage.”
2. This pilgrimage had 18,000 registered participants in 2024. The so-called traditionalist movement – more precisely the Ecclesia Dei movement – continues to grow, despite the austerity measures decreed by the motu proprio Traditionis custodes of July 16, 2021, to drastically limit the use of the Mass of St. Pius V, to the point that “many bishops and cardinals, in France and in Rome, consider that such a ban on the Chartres pilgrimage would be a long-term pastoral error.”
The unity of the Church is at stake, notes Jean-Marie Guénois, and this could encourage Pope Francis to be cautious.
But the crucial point of the story remains the one raised by the journalist at the end of his article: “It so happens that the Church is asking the organizers of the pilgrimage to accept that Paul VI Masses according to the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council be offered to pilgrims who are not all familiar with the old rite, which the organizers refuse. For them, the old Mass is the DNA of the pilgrimage.”
3. “The DNA of the pilgrimage”: the expression has become so popular among the Ecclesia Dei that it now serves as their reference argument [2]. Its disadvantage is that it does a poor job of concealing the tautological nature of the statement and of evading what the real reasons for refusing the Paul VI Mass should be. Because it is indeed a refusal, and the bishops of France are not mistaken. They expect reciprocity, at least, notes Jean-Marie Guénois.
“They do not have the tolerance for the new rite that they demand of us for the old rite," comments one bishop, speaking about the organizers of the pilgrimage and, through them, about all the Catholics of the Ecclesia Dei movement. Paradoxically, the latter find themselves forced into a position that, in the eyes of the bishops of France at least, should be seen as much more than simple intolerance and presents all the appearances of a schismatic attitude.
While, by the admission of those who decided to dissociate themselves from the Society of Saint Pius X on the occasion of the June 30, 1988 consecrations, it was precisely to avoid schism that this movement was constituted following the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei afflicta of Pope John Paul II.
One fact is worthy of note: in the very earliest time of Christian antiquity, schism was conceived – and it is St. Cyprian who attests to this – as rupture with the legitimate bishop, the most visible form of which was the erection of another altar against the Catholic altar [3].
“To erect altar against altar”: such is the most manifestly schismatic attitude, in the eyes of ordinary mortals. And, it must be recognized that in the eyes of the ecclesiastical authorities, such appears to be the attitude of the organizers of the ND de Chrétienté pilgrimage.
The Real Reasons for the Refusal
4. Having ourselves the intimate conviction of not deserving this accusation of schism, all the less justified as it is more reiterated by others in the Church [4], we cannot reproach the Catholics of the Ecclesia Dei movement for their refusal of the Mass of Paul VI – when they refuse it. What is problematic is not the refusal, but the reasons invoked to justify it.
These reasons are as hallow as those given by Ecclesia Dei to not join the Society of Saint Pius X in its refusal of the Mass of Paul VI. The exclusivism of the Mass of St. Pius V is in fact explained by the former and the latter for fundamentally different reasons. The Ecclesia Dei movement claims a factual refusal while the Society claims a refusal in principle.
And the criticism leveled by members the Ecclesia Dei movement to deny the Society of Saint Pius X its right to reject, in principle, the new liturgy of Paul VI is revealing. It highlights the fundamental incoherence of those who, in order to avoid a supposed schism, end up being criticized for the very attitude they wanted to denounce as contrary to the unity of the Church.
For finally, in order to rightly refuse to celebrate the same Mass as the Sovereign Pontiff, it would be more than useful to claim sufficiently serious reasons, in any case, reasons other than the simple metaphorical pirouette equivocating the Mass of St. Pius V to an entirely liturgical DNA.
5. Refusing the celebration of the Novus Ordo Missae of Paul VI, even though it was imposed on the whole Church by the supreme authority of the Vicar of Christ as the ordinary form of the celebration of the Mass, can only be justified if this imposition represents an abuse of power. And this is not just any abuse, but one that seriously endangers the common good of the whole of Catholic society. Now, this is precisely the reason invoked by the Society to support of its refusal of the New Mass.
And this reason draws both its origin and its legitimacy from the Brief Critical Examination presented to Pope Paul VI by the two cardinals: Ottaviani and Bacci. We note that the New Mass represents, “both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent, The ‘canons’ of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier against any heresy which might attack the integrity of the Mystery” [5].
This “departure” is serious because it results in surreptitiously emptying the Mass of its Catholic content, considered in light of its four causes: material (the Real Presence), formal (the sacrificial nature), final (the propitiatory purpose), and efficient (the priesthood of the priest). This serious failing prohibits us from regarding this new rite as legitimate and even authorizes us to doubt the validity of the celebrations in more than one case.
The Masses celebrated in conformity with the Novus Ordo are not only less good than those celebrated according to the traditional Ordo of St. Pius V; they are bad, because they are dangerous for the Faith.
In the January 11-12, 1979, interrogation regarding the question posed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: “Do you maintain that a faithful Catholic can think and affirm that a sacramental rite, in particular that of the Mass approved and promulgated by the Supreme Pontiff, can be non-conforming to the Catholic Faith or favens haeresim?”, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre replied:
“This rite in itself does not profess the Catholic Faith in a manner as clear as the old Ordo missae and consequently it can favor heresy. But I do not know to whom to attribute it nor if the Pope is responsible for it. What is astonishing is that an Ordo missae of Protestant flavor, and therefore favens haeresim, could have been disseminated by the Roman Curia” [6].
6. This is the fundamental reason that justifies the refusal of Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of Saint Pius X, and it will be noted that it is a reason of internal criticism. If the Brief Critical Examination shows in fact that the Novus Ordo “moves away impressively, in the whole as in the detail” from the Catholic definition of the Mass, it does so through intrinsic criticism starting from the four causes of the Mass.
We can add to this fundamental and already sufficient reason, enhanced by the moral authority of two cardinals of the holy Roman Church (one of whom was Prefect of the Holy Office), another reason of external criticism. This new rite of the Mass is in fact part of a whole. The other sacraments have also been reformed.
Now, these changes implemented by those who made and put into practice the Second Vatican Council, whose harmful fruits are notorious, whose teachings accomplished “the conversion of the Church to the world” [7] and consecrated “the triumph of liberal ideas” [8].
The promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae of Pope Paul VI therefore occurs in a very particular context, due to which the Catholic faithful no longer have the moral certainty of the well-soundness of the reform. Even if this observation still makes many of those who did not want to recognize the legitimacy of the June 30, 1988 episcopal consecrations grind their teeth, the Society of Saint Pius X is no longer the only one to formulate it.
Most recently, Bishop Joseph Strickland, bishop emeritus of Tyler, Texas, said the same thing: “It is a fact that the New Mass represented a break in centuries of Liturgical continuity. And with that has come a massive decline in Mass attendance, vocations, and belief in core Catholic teachings.” [9] This is essentially what Archbishop Lefebvre said in his November 21, 1974 statement, which was also cited by this American prelate.
The Denial of the Ecclesia Dei Movement
7. To these serious reasons, what answer do we get from those within the Ecclesia Dei movement who would also like to refuse the celebration of the Mass of Paul VI but without making common cause with the Society, reputed to be schismatic? The traditional liturgy of the 1962 Missal is “their DNA,” in other words, their particular liturgy.
The emphasis is placed on the preferential value of the Ordo Missae of St. Pius V, without considering a criticism of the Novus Ordo leading to its rejection in principle. The refusal, if any, remains entirely factual and relative, for reasons of personal sensitivity (or “DNA”) that will no longer convince anyone when it comes to evaluating things from the point of view of the common good of the whole Church, taken as such.
8. From this point of view, the conciliar authorities cannot accept the refusal of the Mass of Paul VI, the one that is officially celebrated by the Sovereign Pontiff and which represents, in his eyes, the major expression of the common good of the whole society. Or more precisely, as Benedict XVI wanted to call it, the ordinary form of the Roman Rite.
And from this same point of view, the Society of Saint Pius X, as well as all Catholics who strive to preserve the dogmatic and disciplinary Tradition of the Church, cannot admit, either, a rejection of the Mass of Paul VI an an expression of a particular preference, and which does not see in the Novus Ordo Missae an open door to heresy and a grave danger for the common good of the unity of faith and worship.
Real Schism and Imputed Schism
9. After having tried to escape the accusation of schism, the Ecclesia Dei movement is now suffering the redoubled assaults of the members of the hierarchy, who will end up addressing to it the very reproach they formerly launched against Archbishop Lefebvre, beginning with the 1976 ordinations.
As far as it concerns the Society of Saint Pius X, the claim that the traditional liturgy is simply optional, and, at best, preferred alongside the new liturgy of Paul VI, amounts to endorsing the schismatic tendency which defines the conciliar Church as such.
10. How indeed can we claim an intolerant tolerance, a one-sided tolerance, from authorities who appear all the more schismatic the further they move away from the principles of the true unity of faith and worship, because of the false principles ratified by Vatican II and the liturgical reform of Paul VI?
11. The choice is therefore no longer, at the moment, only between two schisms: the real or the apparent.
[1] https://lesalonbeige.fr/le-figaro-sinteresse-aux-rumeurs-concernant-la-…
[2] We find an echo of it on the lips of Fr. Marc Guelfucci and Anne Le Pape in the Club des Hommes en Noir program, hosted by Philippe Maxence. https://hommenouveau.fr/video/interdiction-du-pelerinage-de-chartres-7x…
[3] Yves Congar, “Schisme” in the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, t. XIV, first part, Letouzey and Ané, 1939, col. 1289.
[4] This conviction can now be supported by statements by Msgr. Joseph Strickland, Bishop Emeritus of Tyler, Texas. Cf. https://fsspx.news/en/news/bishop-strickland-lauds-archbishop-lefebvre-…
[5] Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, “Preface to Pope Paul VI” in Brief Critical Examination of the Novus Ordo Missae, p. 6. On this point, see also the articles published in the September 2021 issue of the Courrier de Rome.
[6] “Archbishop Lefebvre and the Holy Office,” Itinéraires No. 233, May 1979, pp. 146–147.
[7] Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him, Angelus Press, 1988, p. 217.
[8] Archbishop Lefebvre, ibid., p. 219.
[9] https://fsspx.news/en/news/bishop-strickland-lauds-archbishop-lefebvre-…
(Source : Courrier de Rome n° 681, décembre 2024 – FSSPX.Actualités)
Illustration : Association Notre Dame de Chrétienté