Page Two

A basic tenet of the Roman Catholic Church has always been that it is the one true Apostolic Church. Catholics have been taught that the unity of the church is proof of its authenticity. But today Catholics are confronted with a church that is divided on questions of theology, morals, church government, and liturgy.

Papal decisions on important matters of faith and morals are being contested by Catholic theologians and are not being followed by many of the faithful. A Catholic archbishop has set up an international chain of seminaries for training dissident priests. More and more sincere Catholics are perplexed and ask, ‘Why is my church divided?’

Cracks in the Edifice

By Awake! correspondent in France

THAT day the massive towers of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris seemed to symbolize the solidity of the traditional Roman Catholic Church. In the large square in front of the 12th-century edifice, an official church procession commemorated the Assumption of Mary.

Strange to relate, however, on that same August 15, 1986, just a few hundred yards away across the Seine River, a rival procession formed in front of the Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet Catholic church. As the procession wound its way through the streets of the Latin Quarter, it was followed by several thousand Catholics, reportedly many more than were at the official ceremony held at Notre Dame. Yet, both processions were organized by priests of the Roman Catholic Church, and both were in honor of Mary. Why two rival processions to celebrate the same Catholic feast?

This incident well illustrates the cleavages that now divide the Catholic Church. They are spreading in all directions, running through the edifice and splitting it from left to right and from top to bottom.

Progressive Versus Traditional Catholics

To the left are the progressive, or liberal, Catholics. Many of these are tempted by so-called liberation theology, which originated in Latin America. For these, ecumenism, socialism, and even communism are not scare words. But even in Latin America, not all Catholics are in agreement with liberation theology. In Brazil, for example, the Catholic clergy itself is divided between the progressives and the traditionalists.

Traditionalist Catholics are mostly right-wing conservatives who feel that the Second Vatican Council opened the door to reforms that betray traditional Catholicism. They insist that Mass be said in Latin and refuse to fraternize with Protestants or political leftists.

In between are the mainstream Catholics, doubtless the most numerous but not necessarily the most fervent. Both the progressives and the traditionalists feel that middle-of-the-road Catholicism is losing its soul as a result of either too few or too many reforms. Many progressives feel that the reforms do not go far enough and that the church’s political involvement in favor of the poor is too timid. The traditionalists are convinced that post-Vatican II Catholicism is reforming itself out of existence.

Running through these main tendencies are further cleavages, at all levels. Catholics are divided on matters of faith and morals. On questions of faith, or beliefs, such official Catholic dogmas as hellfire, purgatory, original sin, and even the Trinity no longer go unchallenged within the Catholic Church. A recent poll in France, said to be “the oldest daughter of the church,” showed that 71 percent of French Catholics interviewed expressed doubts about life after death, 58 percent denied the existence of hell, 54 percent expressed disbelief in purgatory, and 34 percent did not accept the Trinity.

Admittedly, there are many members of the Catholic Church throughout the world who still fervently believe in these doctrines. But that only serves to prove that Catholics are divided on matters of faith.

“The Central Issue . . . Is Obedience to Rome”

As to morals, Catholics are deeply divided over such matters as sex before marriage, adultery, and homosexuality. Many sincere Catholics are deeply shocked by the permissive attitude of members of their church, including some of the clergy and even certain theologians. Catholics with good morals may be comforted by the fact that the pope has come out strongly against sexual immorality. But does this not simply underscore the disquieting truth that more and more Catholics are challenging the pope’s authority in such matters?

The London Observer recently wrote: “Tensions between the Pope and many of his flock have been expressed in well-publicised disagreements about abortion, artificial birth control, the admission of women to the priesthood and the participation in communion of divorced Catholics. The central issue underlying them is obedience to Rome.”

Bishop James Malone, former president of the National (American) Council of Catholic Bishops, warned of “a growing and dangerous disaffection of elements of the church in the United States from the Holy See.” He spoke of “dissent,” “division,” and “developing estrangement.”

On the other hand, traditionalist Catholics are in open rebellion against the pope because they feel that he is not strict enough. The leading figure in this revolt is a French Catholic archbishop. He has created a movement that has further divided the Roman Catholic Church, as the following article will explain.

The Rebel Archbishop

THE French journalist jumped into a taxi in Rome and asked to be driven to the Rospigliosi-Pallavicini Palace. The taxi driver gave him a knowing look and said “Si,” he would drive him to “il vescovo ribelle!” (the rebel bishop).

For days everybody who was anybody in Rome had been in a state of excitement. To the great indignation of Vatican authorities, Princess Elvina Pallavicini, a member of one of Rome’s leading patrician families, had agreed to help dissident French Catholic archbishop Marcel Lefebvre air his views in Rome, even sending out hundreds of invitations to a semiprivate press conference. She had placed at Lefebvre’s disposal the family palace that had housed a pope and several cardinals among her ancestors. To make matters worse, she would allow him to hold his conference in the throne room under the huge canopy of Pope Clement IX.

In spite of much pressure brought to bear on her by Vatican dignitaries, the princess stood by her decision. The Roman press reported fully on this meeting, considered to be a “provocation” right “at the Vatican’s doorstep.” The taxi driver was obviously up-to-date on the local news!

The Church “Is No Longer Catholic”

Princess Pallavicini justified her decision, stating that the Catholic Church is divided and that such “serious problems cannot be solved by ambiguous silence but only by courageous lucidity.” By offering Archbishop Lefebvre the opportunity to express his views, she hoped to foster “peace and serenity within the Catholic world.” The prelate thanked his hostess and blessed her and her household, congratulating them for having “kept the traditional faith.”

About a thousand persons attended the meeting, mainly traditionalist Catholics representing several countries, including many press representatives and TV journalists. The archbishop expressed his profound disagreement with official church policy since the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). French daily Le Monde commented: “For nearly two hours [Archbishop Lefebvre] aired grievances against the new Church ‘that is no longer Catholic.’ He spared nothing: the catechism, seminaries, Mass, ecumenism, not to mention ‘collectivizing the sacraments’ and ‘Communist-oriented cardinals.’”

Archbishop Lefebvre concluded: “The situation is tragic. The Church is moving in a direction that is not Catholic and that is destroying our religion. Should I obey or remain a Catholic, a Roman Catholic, a lifelong Catholic? I have made my choice before God. I do not wish to die a Protestant.”

Cardinal Poletti, Paul VI’s vicar in the diocese of Rome, stated that by organizing this conference in Rome, “Monsignor Lefebvre offended the faith, the Catholic Church, and her divine Lord Jesus [and] personally offended the pope, abusing his patience and attempting to cause trouble within his apostolic see.”

How the Rebellion Began

That conference was held on June 6, 1977. But even as early as 1965, before the Second Vatican Council had ended, there was talk of a “schism” in the Catholic Church. Many conservative Catholics felt that Vatican II was bringing in reforms that betrayed traditional Catholicism.

Archbishop Lefebvre, former archbishop of Dakar, Senegal, and bishop of Tulle, in south-central France, had taken part in the Second Vatican Council. In 1962 he was elected superior general of the “Holy Ghost Fathers” in France. But increasing disagreement with Vatican II policies being applied within the Catholic Church brought about his resignation from that position in 1968.

In 1969 a Swiss Catholic bishop authorized the dissident archbishop to open up a traditionalist seminary within the diocese of Fribourg, Switzerland. The following year, Archbishop Lefebvre founded what he called the “Saint Pius X Sacerdotal Fraternity” and opened up a seminary at Ecône in the Swiss canton of Valais. He did this with the approval of the Catholic bishop of Sion.

To begin with, this seminary was only marginally dissident. The seminarians did, of course, wear black cassocks and received a solidly traditionalist education. Mass was said in Latin, whereas Pope Paul VI had decreed that a revised Mass should be said in a vernacular language. But the seminary was tolerated by the official church authorities because Archbishop Lefebvre did not at that time propose to train the future priests right up to their ordination. He had hoped that they would be able to complete their education at what he considered to be the last two remaining bastions of traditional Catholicism, the Latran Pontifical University in Rome, and Fribourg University in Switzerland.

The trouble really began when Archbishop Lefebvre concluded that even these two Catholic universities could not be relied upon to train future priests in what he considered to be the true Catholic tradition. He decided that he himself would ordain the future priests trained at the Ecône seminary. To make matters worse, in 1974 he published a manifesto that expressed violent opposition to most of the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. By then Ecône had over a hundred seminarians trained by a group of traditionalist professors.

In 1975, acting through the local Swiss bishop, the Vatican withdrew its authorization from the Ecône seminary. Disregarding this, Archbishop Lefebvre continued to ordain new priests as they completed their studies. For this, in 1976 Pope Paul VI suspended him from all priestly functions, including saying Mass, officiating at first communions, administering sacraments, and, as bishop, ordaining priests. Since Ecône continued regardless, this brought about the paradoxical situation of an ultra-Catholic seminary producing scores of ultratraditionalist Catholic priests ordained by a disavowed bishop claiming to be more Catholic than the pope!

Extent of the Rebellion

The rebellion of this French archbishop would not be worth the telling if it were limited to a seminary tucked away at the foot of the Swiss Alps. But Archbishop Lefebvre quickly became the rallying point for an influential segment of Catholicism throughout the world. In his book L’Église Catholique 1962-1986​—Crise et renouveau (The Catholic Church 1962-1986—​Crisis and Renewal), author Gérard Leclerc wrote: “The traditionalist controversy does not reflect the tendency of a tiny minority. It expresses the feelings of a large part of the faithful.”

Archbishop Lefebvre has received the financial backing of many conservative Catholics throughout the world. This has enabled him to travel widely, often at the invitation of groups of traditionalist Catholics. He has criticized Vatican II before large audiences in many countries, saying Mass according to the Latin liturgy of the 16th-century Council of Trent, called the Tridentine, or Pius V, liturgy. These traditionalist meetings were sometimes held in the most unusual places, such as an unused supermarket north of London, England.

This wide financial support has enabled the rebel archbishop to open up additional seminaries for training traditionalist Catholic priests in France, Germany, Italy, Argentina, and the United States. In February 1987, French daily Le Figaro reported that these institutions were then training 260 seminarists. Archbishop Lefebvre has been ordaining between 40 and 50 priests a year from many parts of the world, including Africa.

Many of these traditionalist priests operate from the 75 “priories” that Archbishop Lefebvre’s “Fraternity” has established in 18 countries in North and South America, Europe, and Africa. These priests celebrate Mass in Latin for conservative Catholics in those countries.

Traditionalist services are often held in specially created chapels. But more and more right-wing Catholics are waging a fight with the orthodox Catholic hierarchy in order to obtain the right to use regular Catholic church buildings for their services. This has given rise to situations that have deeply disturbed many sincere Catholics.

Fights Over Church Buildings

Ever since 1969, when Pope Paul VI introduced the new Mass that involves the use of the vernacular and other reforms, traditionalist Catholics have organized private Masses using an older Latin liturgy. In Paris, France, hundreds of them would gather in the Wagram Hall, near the Arc de Triomphe. Since the new liturgy was obligatory at that time, the local Catholic archbishop refused to allow them to use a church.

Finally, on February 27, 1977, the traditionalists took matters into their own hands and, led by a conservative priest, forcibly occupied the church of Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet, in the Latin Quarter. The regular Catholic priests and parishioners found themselves evicted from their own church. When they tried a few days later to hold Mass inside the church, a fight broke out. One priest had to be taken to the hospital, and the others took refuge in the nearby presbytery.

At present, ten years later, Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet is still occupied by traditionalist Catholics, in spite of two court orders expelling them. About 5,000 people attend the five Latin Masses celebrated there every Sunday. Services are held by a priest ordained at Ecône by Archbishop Lefebvre, and the “rebel prelate” regularly comes to this church for the confirmation of traditionalist Catholic children.

A few months after Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet was first occupied by the traditionalists, several hundred progressive Catholics held a meeting to protest against the forcible occupation of this church. Several priests and Catholic professors from the Sorbonne and the Institut Catholique de Paris took part. Suddenly, a group of traditionalist Catholic youths forced their way into the hall and broke up the meeting, using iron bars and a smoke bomb. Several people were injured, and one Catholic professor had to be taken to the hospital.

The Catholic bishop of Strasbourg in eastern France was harassed by traditionalist Catholics when he tried to enter a church they had occupied in order to celebrate Mass in Latin. In Paris “commandos” of traditionalist Catholics burst into Catholic churches to break up services. They did this because a woman was being used to read the gospel during Mass or because Protestant and Orthodox ministers were present for an ecumenical service.

In March 1987 traditionalist and regular Catholics almost came to blows in Port-Marly, just west of Paris, and had to be separated by the police. The fight was over who was to occupy the Catholic church of Saint Louis. The following month traditionalist Catholics used a battering ram to break down a walled-up door and enter the church to celebrate Palm Sunday Mass in Latin. The Times of London, England, reported on this under the headline “Battle of St Louis​—French Catholic rebels back in contested church.” Latin Mass was said for them by a priest ordained by the rebel archbishop Lefebvre.

A Wound in the Church’s Flank

Catholic author Gérard Leclerc writes: “Over 20 years after the [Vatican] Council, the traditionalist dissent remains an open wound in the Church’s flank.” And in their book Voyage à l’intérieur de l’Église catholique (A Journey Inside the Catholic Church) Jean Puyo and Patrice Van Eersel state: “If Rome is so dismayed by Monsignor Lefebvre’s activities, it is because he is asking basic questions. Bishop Mamie of Fribourg and Geneva, who found himself obliged to condemn the activities of his rebellious confrere, told us frankly: ‘The distress of those of the faithful who have followed him is not without foundation. The thousand-year-old doctrine of the Church is in mortal danger.’”

Thus, from the luxurious patrician palaces in Rome to millions of humble abodes throughout the world, many sincere Catholics are deeply perplexed. They are asking: “Why is my church divided?” The reason why, and what some Catholics are doing about it, will be considered next.

[Picture on page 6]

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

[Credit Line]

UPI/​Bettmann Newsphotos

[Picture on page 7]

Ecône, the rebel archbishop’s traditionalist seminary in the Swiss Alps

[Picture on page 9]

Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet church, in Paris, illegally occupied by traditionalist Catholics for the past ten years

Why Is My Church Divided?

THE divisions within the Catholic Church are so visible that many sincere Catholics feel as did the apostle Paul, who wrote to the divided Corinthian Christians: “It is clear that there are serious differences among you. . . . Has Christ been split up?”​—1 Corinthians 1:11, 13, The New Jerusalem Bible.

Many observant Catholics realize full well that Christianity should not be “split up.” Catholics, more than most other claimed Christians, are conscious of the oneness of the true Christian religion. They thought they were practicing such a united religion in the Catholic Church. They considered Protestantism to be a confused mix-up of contradictory religions. For them, the Catholic Church represented stability and, above all, unity. Now they are confused.

Why Divided?

The Catholic Church is divided between left-wing progressives, right-wing traditionalists, and the Vatican II mainstream. Many left-wing liberal Catholics are preaching various liberation theologies that justify political revolution. Some have come very near to adopting a Marxist approach and are even justifying armed revolt. Yet, the Founder of Christianity told his disciples: “You do not belong to the world, because my choice of you has drawn you out of the world. . . . Mine is not a kingdom of this world.”​—John 15:19; 18:36, NJB.

The traditionalists are defending man-made traditions and a Latin liturgy that does not go back to Bible times, since the language of primitive Christianity was Greek, not Latin. Furthermore, by their intolerance and their aggressiveness, are they not belying their claim to being Christians? Henri Fesquet, former religion columnist in the French daily Le Monde, wrote: “The exhibition of Christians [Catholics] lampooning each other and quarreling over places of worship is a counter-witness that can only backfire on them. Of what use is it to preach the light in the name of the Gospel if one’s acts belie one’s words?”

Jesus told the Pharisees: “For the sake of your tradition you have nullified God’s word.” (Matthew 15:6, The New American Bible) Many sincere Catholics feel the same way about modern-day traditionalists.

Both the progressives and the traditionalists (for opposite reasons) consider that the Vatican II council has produced a mass of wishy-washy mainstream Catholics. Authors Puyo and Van Eersel interviewed French Catholic philosopher Jean Guitton, member of the French Academy. They summed up his feelings as follows: “The Catholic Creed, the essence of the Church, is flying into contradictory pieces, the most zealous among the faithful are devoting themselves exclusively to politics, young Christians [Catholics] calmly make love before marriage, nobody knows how to apply the [Vatican] Council correctly, and God’s people are all at sea.”

Understandably, sincere Catholics are asking, ‘Why is my church divided?’ The answer is: Because not one of its various segments accepts the Bible as the one authentic authority for defining the position of true Christians on all matters. They are therefore divided by diverse theologies and interpretations of traditions.

What Can Sincere Catholics Do?

On one occasion in 1981, traditionalist Catholics broke up an ecumenical service being held in a Catholic church in Paris. Archbishop (now Cardinal) Lustiger of Paris told those who remained in the church after the disturbance: “We came here to request the gifts of the Spirit that reunite scattered sons. Instead, we have seen a mirror of the divisions among Christians, the specter of Babel.”

Babel was where God confused the language of those practicing false worship. (Genesis 11:1-9) Later, it was the site of the city of Babylon, the source of a confused pantheon of gods and goddesses. In the Bible it became a symbol of a worldwide religious system of confused religion. A Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament states: “Even as late as the first century A.D., [the apostle] John referred to the religious system, Babylon, as the ‘Mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth’ (Rev 17:5).”

Referring to this symbolic Babylon, or world empire of false religion, the Bible invites all sincere persons to act quickly, saying: “Depart from her, my people, for fear of sinning with her and sharing the plagues inflicted on her!”​—Revelation 18:4, NAB.

Many sincere persons are leaving Christendom’s organized religions. For example, a formerly dyed-in-the-wool Catholic living in the French Alps spontaneously wrote the following to the French branch office of Jehovah’s Witnesses: “In line with the 1,000-year-old tradition of the Catholic Church, I was baptized from birth into the Catholic faith. I was an active Catholic for some 50 years. Around 1980, I became convinced that the Catholic Church was wrong. I became demoralized and deeply shocked. I had many arguments with priests who were not respecting their vows. For several years I had heard about Jehovah’s Witnesses, mostly unfavorably. After a long period of reflection, I opened my door to them. They helped me to see that the Bible contains the answers to our questions. I also realized that after 50 years of active service within the Catholic Church, I knew nothing about the Bible, even though I possessed one. It was the Witnesses who helped me ‘discover’ the Bible.”

Ginette, who lives near Paris, was also a staunch Catholic. In fact, when her husband began studying the Bible with Jehovah’s Witnesses, she did all she could to prevent him, and she maintained her opposition for several years. What made her change? She writes: “I lost confidence. The church was no longer doing me any good. To start with, I arranged a face-to-face meeting between my priest and the Witnesses. But I soon saw that the priest was unable to answer their questions.” Ginette accepted a study of the Bible with the Witnesses. Now she and her husband are happily serving God within the united international family of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

If you are perplexed and distressed because of the divisions within your church, we invite you to seek further information from the Witness who supplied you with this magazine or write to the editors. Jehovah’s Witnesses will be happy to help you find a loving international family of Christians who are truly united in their worship of God.

[Blurb on page 11]

“Of what use is it to preach the light in the name of the Gospel if one’s acts belie one’s words?”​—French daily Le Monde

[Blurb on page 12]

“We have seen a mirror of the divisions among Christians, the specter of Babel.”​—Cardinal Lustiger of Paris