+ Ad te Domine, clamabo, Deus meus, ne sileas a me; ne quando taceas a me, et assimilabor descendentibus in lacum, the Church sings the Introit of this Holy Mass. “To thee, O Lord, I call; my rock, be not deaf to me, lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like those who go down to the Pit.”

With these first words of Psalm 27 the Sacred Liturgy aptly expresses the distress of many souls in the light of ecclesial events of recent days. Whether or not one accepts that conscientious disobedience to positive (i.e. man-made, not divine) law (in respect of the consecration of bishops) is or was justified in current circumstances, and can therefore tolerate material but not formal (i.e. in fact gravely sinful) disobedience to ecclesiastical authority, we now face a new crisis—one of the pastoral order, whereby the faithful whose sole desire is to be faithful to the Church and save their souls and those of their families are menaced by the threat of the sin of schism and of the penalty of excommunication. Their distress is real and it is compounded by commentary that is often far from accurate and is lacking in the necessary pastoral precision. Rightly, they feel that this is all simply too much. With just cause do many cry out this morning: “To thee, O Lord, I call; my rock, be not deaf to me, lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like those who go down to the Pit.”

So let us be clear: there is no sin (of schism or of any other sort) in simply seeking the salvation of one’s soul through the traditional liturgical rites of the Church, as the prayers for the Pope and the Diocesan Bishop which they contain attest. These prayers in fact bear witness the exact opposite of schism. They are public manifestations at the very heart of our public worship of Catholic unity and of communion, not of sectarian division.

And one is not excommunicated because one’s access to the older liturgical rites is sometimes or usually through a community who, before God, believed that they had no choice other than to engage in conscientious material disobedience to Church law in order to survive and remain faithful to their vocation and mission. Whatever of the culpability of clerics—and this is not the occasion to discuss that—even the official documents cited by the Holy See in recent days make it clear that the lay faithful simply seeking to worship Almighty God and receive the sacraments do not incur the penalty of excommunication thereby. (see: Explanatory Note, Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, 24 August 1996)

In the face of the ongoing brouhaha, one might well say: ‘Keep trad and carry on.’ For it remains true that “what earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” (Benedict XVI, Letter to the Bishops, 7 July 2007)

Of course, this truth was subjected to an orchestrated attack through that scandalous back-room ideological plot fuelled by the paranoia of ageing ecclesiastical liberals and based on downright lies that shamelessly manipulated the will of world’s bishops that we know only too well: the pastoral, liturgical and ecclesial disaster Traditiones Custodes (16 July 2021) that sought to end the peaceful worship of God according to the older rites that increasing numbers had grown fruitfully to love, driving faithful Catholics underground or away from parishes and dioceses and at times even outside of the visible communion of the Church. That orchestrators of this scandal and the high priests of its heartless implementation remain at the centre of power to this day is a cause of very deep concern. It may also go some way to explain the technocratic severity with which the Vatican has acted in recent days. 

That Traditiones Custodes has not yet been set aside—quietly or otherwise—and that diocesan bishops continue to use it to forbid the celebration of the older liturgical rites cries out to heaven for justice. Rightly, this morning, do we sing: “To thee, O Lord, I call; my rock, be not deaf to me, lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like those who go down to the Pit.”

The matter-of-fact severity with which the Vatican has responded to the events of recent days, and indeed the silence of the Holy Father in their wake, is indeed another source of serious concern. For some time now we have been repeating the words of Pope Benedict XVI—a pope who worked earnestly and fruitfully for ecclesial unity and liturgical peace:

“Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden.  This glance at the past imposes an obligation on us today: to make every effort to enable for all those who truly desire unity to remain in that unity or to attain it anew.” (Letter to the Bishops, 7 July 2007)

This morning, unfortunately, his words, are all the more pertinent. More could and should have been done in recent months, weeks and days. More must be done to build bridges and to open doors. The teaching of the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Mt 18:12-14) applies no matter what one thinks of the sheep concerned or how obstinate one believes it or they to be. 

In his pursuit of Church unity, in 2008 Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications from the (then) four bishops of the Society of St Pius X. In his own words, “the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation.” So much so that the Pope found it necessary to write an unprecedented apologia to the bishops of the world. The questions he raised therein are more than pertinent in these days:

“Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who ‘has something against you’ (cf. Mt 5:23ff.) and to seek reconciliation? … Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole? 

…Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 733 priests, 264 seminarians, 5 seminaries, 94 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 144 religious brothers, 250 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 733 priests…I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if…they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim him and, with him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them? [statistics updated to those published in 2025]

Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things – arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc… But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas? And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles?

…During the days when I first had the idea of writing this letter, by chance, during a visit to the Roman Seminary, I had to interpret and comment on Galatians 5:13-15. I was surprised at the directness with which that passage speaks to us about the present moment: “Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another.” …sad to say, this “biting and devouring” also exists in the Church today, as expression of a poorly understood freedom. Should we be surprised that we too are no better than the Galatians? That at the very least we are threatened by the same temptations? That we must always learn anew the proper use of freedom? And that we must always learn anew the supreme priority, which is love?” (Letter to the Bishops, 10 March 2009)

The purpose of these observations is not to declare for or against any group or person, let alone to judge them or to seek to exclude them. Let us not forget that whilst the prodigal son sinned shamelessly, his self-righteous elder brother did so also. (cf. Lk 15:11-32) Both were guilty of grave matter of which they needed to repent. 

And this is most certainly not an attack on our Holy Father—we do know his motivations or intentions, and even if his silence leaves a significant vacuum, we own him the patience that is part of filial respect. Let us pray earnestly for the Holy Father in these days!

The purpose of these observations is solely to recall some fundamental truths and to insist that we are all called to pray and work in whatever way we can for their recognition and for reconciliation and Catholic unity. 

Even as we may share the distress and fear of the psalmist that all may be lost and that we are descending ever more rapidly into the Pit (or that we have already been cast into it) the Sacred Liturgy now takes us up to the Altar of God, where, by the infinite merits of Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross, all that seems lost can be found again, and all that was dead can rise to new life (cf. Lk 15:32). Much as our hearts may be heavy, and much as we may feel wounded and distressed and even abandoned, let us never doubt that if we are faithful the Lord shall hear our plea and save us. For the grace of that fidelity and for an increase of the grace of supernatural hope in ourselves and in others, let us pray earnestly in this Holy Mass. +