Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer

new

« Prev
1
Next »

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer Apr 17, 2018 12:09:09 GMT

Post by Admin on Apr 17, 2018 12:09:09 GMT

The Religion of Man - Since the Council there has been a new Church
By Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer

Diocesan bulletin, April 1972

Because of the difficulty of the undertaking, or be it by a compromise with the spirit of the times, the fact is:

In the implementation of the plan outlined by Vatican II, in most of the Catholic world, the attempt to adapt has gone beyond simply a means of expression more in conformity with the mentality of the day.

It has even touched the essence of Revelation itself. They do not preoccupy themselves with explaining revealed Truth in such a way as to enable man to understand it more easily; rather their goal, by using ambiguous and flowery language, is to put forward a new Church to man’s tastes formed according to the maxims of the modern world.

With that, they now spread, more or less everywhere, the idea that the Church must undergo a radical change in its morality, in its liturgy, and even in its doctrine. In what has been written and done in Catholic milieu since the [Vatican II] Council, the thesis has been spread that the Traditional Church, such as it existed until Vatican II, is no longer adequate for the needs of modern times, so that it must be completely transformed.

A profound observation on what has taken place in Catholic circles leads to the conviction that, truly, since the Council there is a new Church that is essentially distinct from the one we knew prior to the Council, as the unique Church of Christ. Indeed, human dignity is now exalted as an absolute and untouchable principle to whose rights truth and good must submit.

A similar idea launches the Religion of man. It makes us forget Christian austerity and the beatitude of Heaven.

As for morality, the same principle causes us to forget about Christian asceticism, and it is full of an indulgence for pleasure, even sensual pleasure, because it is on earth that man must find his fulfillment.

As for family and married life, the Religion of man celebrates love and puts pleasure over duty, thus justifying contraception, weakening opposition to divorce, and favoring homosexuality and co-education, without a fear of the ensuing moral disorders, inherent in this attitude as the consequences of original sin.

In public life, the Religion of man does not understand hierarchy, and defends the egalitarianism proper to Marxist ideology (and which is contrary to both natural and revealed teaching) which assures the existence of a social order which nature itself demands.

In the field of religion, the same principle encourages, for the benefit of man, an ecumenism which reconciles all religions and wishes to establish a church that resembles a society of social assistance, and renders the sacred unintelligible, because it can only be understood in a society based on hierarchy.

Whence this excessive preoccupation with the promotion of clergy, whose celibacy is now considered to be absurd, along with the restraint of a priestly life which is intimately tied to the character of a consecrated person wholly devoted to the service of the altar.

In the liturgy, the priest is reduced to a simple representative of the people. The changes are such and so numerous that the liturgy ceases to represent, suitably, in the eyes of the faithful, the image of the Spouse of the Lamb, one, holy and immaculate.

It is evident that the relaxation of morals as well as the liturgical breakdown cannot co-exist with the immutability of dogma. In reality, these changes indicate already alterations in the concept of revealed truths. A reading of the new theologians, understood spokesmen of the Council, demonstrates how, in fact, in certain Catholic milieu, the words used to state the mysteries of the Faith imply concepts completely different from those of traditional theology.

"So let us be confident, let us not be unprepared, let us not be outflanked, let us be wise, vigilant, fighting against those who are trying to tear the faith out of our souls and morality out of our hearts, so that we may remain Catholics, remain united to the Blessed Virgin Mary, remain united to the Roman Catholic Church, remain faithful children of the Church."- Archbp. Lefebvre 1980

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer Apr 17, 2018 12:35:30 GMT

Post by Admin on Apr 17, 2018 12:35:30 GMT

The New Mass

Adapted from The Angelus, August 2000

This is a letter written two months before the imposition of the New Mass by H.E. Antonio de Castro Mayer to Pope Paul VI, heretofore unpublished in English, explaining his objections to the oncoming use of the Novus Ordo Missae.

LETTER TO POPE PAUL VI

Campos

September 12, 1969

Most Holy Father,

After a close examination of the Novus Ordo Missae, which will enter into use on November 30 next, and after having prayed and reflected a great deal, I consider that it is my duty, as a Catholic priest and bishop, to lay before Your Holiness my anguish of conscience, and to formulate, with the piety and confidence that a son owes to the Vicar of Christ, the following request.

The Novus Ordo Missae shows, by its omissions, and by the changes that it has brought to the Ordinary of the Mass, as well as by a good number of the general rules that describe the understanding and nature of the new Missal in its essential points, that it does not express, as it ought to do the theology of the Holy Sacrifice as established by the holy Council of Trent in its XXII session. The teaching of the simple catechism cannot overcome this fact. I attach below the reasons that, in my opinion, justify this conclusion.

The pastoral reasons that could, perhaps, be invoked, initially, in favor of the new structure of the Mass cannot make us forget the doctrinal arguments that point in the opposite direction. Furthermore, they do not seem to be reasonable. The changes that prepared the Novus Ordo have not helped to bring about an increase in the faith and the piety of the faithful. To the contrary, they remain very disturbed, with a confusion that the Novus Ordo has increased, for it has encouraged the idea that nothing is unchangeable in the holy Church, not even the most holy sacrifice of the Mass.

Moreover, as I indicate in the attached reasons, the Novus Ordo not only fails to inspire fervor, but to the contrary, diminishes the Faith in central truths of the Catholic life, such as the Real Presence of Jesus in the most Holy Sacrament, the reality of the propitiatory sacrifice, the hierarchical priesthood.

I hereby accomplish an imperious duty in conscience by demanding, humbly and respectfully, that Your Holiness might deign, by a positive act that eliminates every doubt, to authorize us to continue using the Ordo Missae of St. Pius V, whose effectiveness in bringing about the spread of Holy Church and an increase in the fervor of priests and faithful has been proven, as Your Holiness reminded us with so much unction.

I am convinced that Your Holiness's fatherly kindness will bring to an end the perplexities that have risen in my heart of a priest and bishop.

Prostrate at Your Holiness's feet, in humble obedience and filial piety, I implore your Apostolic Benediction.

+ Antonio de Castro Mayer
Bishop of Campos, Brazil

+++

Comments on the Novus Ordo Missae

The Novus Ordo Missae consists in general norms for the text of the Ordinary of the Mass. Both the text and the norms propose a new Mass that does not consider sufficiently the definitions of the Council of Trent concerning this matter, and constitutes, for this reason, a grave danger for the integrity and purity of the Catholic Faith. We have only examined here a few points, that, we believe, establish that which I have affirmed.

1. Definition of the Mass

In its No. 7, the new Ordo gives the following as a definition of the Mass: "Cena dominica seu Missa est sacra synaxis seu congregatio populi Dei in unum convenientis, sacerdote praeside, ad memoriale Domini celebrandum. Quare de sanctae ecclesiae locali congregatione eminenter valet promissio Christi: 'Ubi sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in medio eorum' (Mt. 18:10)."¹

In this definition:

There is insistence on the Mass understood as a meal. Moreover, this way of seeing the Mass can be found frequently, all along the general norms (cf. v.g. nos. 8, 48, 55d, 56 etc.). It seems even that the intention of the new Ordo Missae is to inculcate this aspect of the Mass, to the detriment of the other, which is essential, namely that the Mass is a sacrifice.
In fact, in the quasi-definition of the Mass given in Article 7, the character of the sacrifice of the Mass is not signified.
Likewise, it attenuates the sacramental character of the priest, that distinguishes him from the faithful.
Furthermore, nothing is said of the intrinsic value of the Mass, independently of the presence of the assembly. Much to the contrary, it is supposed that there is no Mass without the "congregatio populi," for it is the "congregatio"that defines the Mass.
Finally, the text allows a confusion to exist between the Real Presence and the spiritual presence, for it applies to the Mass the text from St. Matthew which only concerns the spiritual presence.

The confusion between the Real Presence and the spiritual presence, already seen in Article 7, is confirmed in Article 8, which divides the Mass into a "table of the word" and a "table of the Lord's body." But it also hides the aspect of sacrifice in the Mass, which is the principal of all, since the aspect of a meal is only a consequence, as can be deduced from Canon 31 of the XXII session of the Council of Trent.

We observe that the two texts from Vatican II, quoted in the notes, do not justify the concept of the Mass proposed in the text. We also note that the few expressions, that are more or less passing references, in which are found expressions such as this, at the Altar: "sacrificium crucis sub signis sacramentalibus praesens efficitur" (No. 259) are not sufficient to undo the ambiguous concept, already inculcated in the definition of the Mass (No. 7), and in many other passages in the general norms.

2. The Purpose of the Mass

The Mass is a sacrifice of praise to the Most Holy Trinity. Such a purpose does not appear explicitly in the new "Ordo." To the contrary, that which, in the Mass of Saint Pius V, shows clearly this sacrificial end is suppressed in the new "Ordo." Examples include the prayers "Suscipe, Sancta Trinitas" from the Offertory and the final prayer "Placeat, tibi, Sancta Trinitas." Likewise the Preface of the Most Holy Trinity has ceased to be the Preface for Sunday, the Lord's Day.

As well as being the "sacrificium laudis Sanctissimae Trinitatis,"² the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice. The Council of Trent insists greatly on this aspect, against the errors of the Protestants (Chap. 1 and Can. 3). Such a purpose does not appear explicitly in the new "Ordo." Here and there can be found a reminder of one or other expression that could be understand as implying this concept. But it never appears without the shadow of a doubt. Also, it is absent when the norms declare the purpose of the Mass (No. 54). In fact, it is insufficient to express the theology of the Mass established by the Council of Trent to simply affirm that it brings about "sanctification." It is not clear that this concept necessarily implies that of propitiation. Moreover the propitiatory intention, so clearly visible in the Mass of Saint Pius V, disappears in the New Mass. In fact the Offertory prayers "Suscipe Sancte Pater" and "Offerimus tibi" and that for the blessing of the water, "Deus qui humanae substantiae...reformasti," have been replaced by others that make no reference to propitiation at all. It is rather the sense of a spiritual banquet that they impress.

3. The Essence of the Sacrifice

The essence of the sacrifice of the Mass lies in repeating what Jesus did at the last Supper, and this not as a simple recitation, but accompanied by the gestures. Thus, as the moral theologians have said, it is not enough to simply say again historically what Jesus did. The words of consecration must be pronounced with the intention of repeating what Jesus accomplished, for when the priest celebrates, he represents Jesus Christ, and acts "in persona Christi."³ I In the new "Ordo" there is no such precise statement, although it is essential. To the contrary, in the passage that speaks of the narrative part, nothing is said of the properly sacrificial part. Thus, when it explains the Eucharistic Prayer, it speaks of the "narratio institutionis"⁴ (No. 54d) in such a way that the expressions: "Ecclesia memoriam ipsius Christi agit"⁵ and another at the end of the consecration: "Hoc facite in meam commemorationem"⁶ have the meaning indicated by the explanation given in the preceding general norms (No. 54d). We remark that the final phrase of the (traditional) consecration "Haec quotiescumque feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis"7 was much more expressive of the reality that in the Mass, it is the action of Jesus Christ which is repeated.

Furthermore, placing other expressions in the midst of the essential words of consecration, namely "Accipite et manducate omnes"⁸and "Accipite et bibite ex eo omnes,"9 introduces the narrative part into the same sacrificial act. Whereas in the Tridentine Mass the text and movements guide the priest naturally to accomplish the propitiatory sacrificial action and almost impose this intention on the priest who celebrates. In this way the "lex supplicanda"¹⁰ is perfectly in conformity with the "lex credendi."¹¹ We cannot say this for the New Ordo Missae. However, the New Ordo Missae ought to make it easier for the celebrant to have the intention necessary to accomplish validly and worthily the act of the Holy Sacrifice, especially given the importance of this action, not mentioning the instability of modern times, nor even the psychological conditions of the younger generations.

4. The Real Presence

The sacrifice of the Mass is bound to the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the most holy sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. The Real Presence is a consequence of the sacrifice. By transubstantiation the change of the substance of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Savior is accomplished, and thus the sacrifice takes place. As a consequence the perpetual Victim is present on the altar. The Blessed Sacrament is nothing other than the Victim of the sacrifice, who remains once the sacrificial act has been accomplished. As a consequence of the new definition of the Mass (No. 7) the new "Ordo" allows ambiguity to exist concerning the Real Presence, which is more or less confused with the simply spiritual presence, indicated by the phrase "where two or three are gathered in my name."

Moreover, the suppression of nearly all the genuflexions, traditional expression of adoration in the Latin Church, the thanksgiving seated, the possibility of celebrating without an altar stone, on a simple table, the equating of the Eucharistic banquet with a spiritual meal, all lead to the obscuring of the faith in the Real Presence.

The equating of the Eucharistic banquet to a spiritual meal leaves open the idea that Jesus' presence in the Blessed Sacrament is bound to its use, as His presence in the word of God. From this it is not difficult to conclude with the Lutheran error, especially in a society that is little prepared to think on a higher plane. The same conclusion is favored by the function of the altar: it is only a table, on which there is not normally place for the tabernacle, in which the Victim of the sacrifice is customarily kept. The same can be said for the custom for the faithful to communicate with the same host as the celebrant. By itself, this gives the idea that once the sacrifice is completed, there is no longer any place for reserving the Blessed Sacrament. Thus none of the changes in the new "Ordo Missae" lead to greater fervor in the faith towards the Real Presence, but they rather diminish it.

5. The Hierarchical Priesthood

The Council of Trent defined that Jesus instituted His apostles priests, in order that they, and the other priests, their successors, might offer His Body and Blood (Session XXII, Canon 2). In this manner, the accomplishment of the sacrifice of the Mass is an act that requires priestly consecration. On the other hand, the same Council of Trent condemned the Protestant thesis, according to which all Christians would be priests of the New Testament. Hence it is that, according to the Faith, the hierarchical priest is alone capable of accomplishing the sacrifice of the New Law. This truth is diluted in the new "Ordo Missae."

In this Missal, the Mass belongs more to the people than to the priest. It belongs also to the priest, but as a part of the assembly. He no longer appears as the mediator "ex hominibus assumptus in iis quae sunt ad Deum"¹²inferior to Jesus Christ and superior to the faithful, as St. Robert Bellarmine says. He is not the judge who absolves. He is simply the brother who presides.

We could make other observations to confirm what we have said above. However, we feel that the points that we have raised suffice to show that the new "Ordo Missae" is not faithful to the theology of the Mass, as established definitively by the Council of Trent, and that consequently it constitutes a serious danger for the purity of the Faith.

+ Antonio, Bishop of CamPos

Addendum

His Excellency, Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer made reference to the above letter to the Pope, along with his "Considerations on the Novus Ordo Missae" in the presentation that he made to his clergy of the Brief Critical Examination (otherwise known as the Ottaviani Intervention). This critical study had been sent to Pope Paul VI by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci during this same year of 1969. Bishop de Castro Mayer received it, had it translated into Portuguese and sent it to his priests with this commentary:

Several priests of the diocese have asked me for some explanation of the new Ordo Missae. As the reading of it made me perplexed on several issues, I had written to the Holy Father, explaining them, and asking for the authorization to continue with the old Ordo. Since I received no response, I continued, in accordance with the legislation that is in vigor, with the Tridentine Mass. However, I believe that the booklet of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci is very useful for study by the Reverend Fathers. It is with this in mind that I am sending a translation to my dear collaborators. The priests will understand that the subject is not to be publicly debated.

These two documents were translated from Tradition: Doctrine-Actualité published by the General Headquarters of the Society of Saint Pius X, Menzingen, Switzerland, pp. 23-29.

1. Translation of Article 7: The Lord's Supper or Mass is the sacred assembly or meeting of the people of God, met together with a priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord. For this reason the promise of Christ is particularly true of a local congregation of the Church: "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in their midst" (Mt. 18:20).

2. I.e., sacrifice of praise of the Most Holy Trinity.

3. I.e., in the person of Christ.

4. I.e., the narration of the institution.

5. I.e., the Church commemorates the memory of Christ himself.

6. I.e., Do this in memory of me.

7. I.e., As often as you do this, do it in memory of me.

8. I.e., Take and eat all of you.

9. I.e., Take and drink from it all of you.

10. I.e., the manner of praying.

11. I.e., the rule of our Faith.

12. I.e., taken from among men for those things which are of God.

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer Apr 17, 2018 12:44:12 GMT

Post by Admin on Apr 17, 2018 12:44:12 GMT

Comments by Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer on The 'Priesthood of the Faithful'

The most famous writing by Antonio de Castro Mayer, Bishop of Campos, Brazil, from 1949 to 1981, was his "Pastoral Letter on the Problems of the Modern Apostolate", published in 1953. The letter included a section with 80 erroneous propositions, based particularly on two of the most important Papal documents of the 20th century, the landmark encyclicals of Pope Pius XII on Sacred Liturgy (Mediator Dei, of 1947) and on False Theological Opinions (Humani Generis, of 1950).

Bishop Castro Mayer's letter is an extremely useful tool in the interpretation of several aspects of Mediator Dei and underline the relevance of Pope Pius's warnings. [Below is an excerpt...]

+++

False Opinion: The faithful "concelebrate" the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with the priest.

True Opinion: The faithful participate in the Sacrifice of the Mass.

Pope Pius XII explains the problem in Mediator Dei, 83-104: "...[T]here are today, Venerable Brethren, those who ... assert that the people are possessed of a true priestly power, while the priest only acts in virtue of an office committed to him by the community. ...[W]e deem it necessary to recall that the priest acts for the people only because he represents Jesus Christ, who is Head of all His members and offers Himself in their stead. Hence, [the Priest] goes to the altar as the minister of Christ, inferior to Christ but superior to the people. The people, on the other hand, since they in no sense represent the divine Redeemer and are not mediator between themselves and God, can in no way possess the sacerdotal power. All this has the certitude of faith."

Castro Mayer further explains the papal words:

These two propositions require an explanation. Never can it be said that the faithful "concelebrate" with the priest, for in the Church the expression "concelebrate" refers to Masses with several celebrants. They all actively concur in offering the sacrifice and in effecting the transubstantiation. An example of this is found in the Mass of priestly ordination, in which the new priests concelebrate with the bishop their ordination Mass. Likewise, the proposition in which it is said that the faithful participate in the Sacrifice of the Mass requires an explanation. Many understand it to mean that the faithful "concelebrate" the sacrifice. ...Others understand it to mean that the priest is but a mandatary or delegate of the people, and his priestly acts have no value except insofar as he represents the people. It is not in this way that the proposition is to be understood according to the teaching of Mediator Dei. In fact, the priest is not a delegate of the people, for he is chosen by divine vocation and engendered by the sacrament of holy orders. This does not mean that the priest, in a certain sense, does not represent the people. He does represent it insofar as he represents Jesus Christ, head of the Mystical Body, of which the faithful are the members, and when the priest offers the sacrifice on the altar, he does so in the name of Christ, High Priest, who offers it in the name of all the members of His Mystical Body. So, in a certain sense, the sacrifice is offered in the name of the people. That is why [the faithful] must participate in the sacrifice. In what way must they participate? Mediator Dei tells us:

[T]he people unite their hearts in praise, impetration, expiation and thanksgiving with prayers or intention of the priest, even of the High Priest himself, so that in the one and same offering of the victim and according to a visible sacerdotal rite, they may be presented to God the Father. [Mediator Dei, 93]

Thus there is a definite meaning to the expression participate which can be used if one takes care to exclude every other less exact meaning.

[Emphasis in the original source]

[Bishop de Castro Mayer's Pastoral Letter: On the Problems of the Modern Apostolate was available in a series of articles in the December of 2002 - December 2003 editions of the Angelus Online. We have compiled them into one document, except for those in the February - May 2003 editions. The links to those particular months either don't work or seem to be unavailable. But there is such a wealth of information in the articles that are available, we hope it may be of some use to our readers. - Admin]

Pastoral Letter On The Problems Of The Mode....pdf (427.62 KB)

Last Edit: Apr 17, 2018 13:26:55 GMT by Admin

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer Apr 17, 2018 16:53:55 GMT

Post by Admin on Apr 17, 2018 16:53:55 GMT

The Bishops Speak: Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer

The 1988 Episcopal Consecrations - The Angelus Online - July 2008

This year marks the 20th anniversary of the episcopal consecrations of 1988. For twenty years "Operation Survival" has borne good fruit, and it behooves us to revisit the words of Archbishop Lefebvre on the day of the consecrations. Especially noteworthy is his tranquility, his confidence in following Tradition, knowing that God's will could be discerned in such a fashion. Contrariwise, Bishop de Castro's statement on the same day should remind us that we can only persevere with the grace of God, as the fall of Campos has sadly demonstrated. [The Archbishop's sermon can be found here.]

Declaration of Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer

My presence here at this ceremony is caused by a duty of conscience: that of making a profession of Catholic Faith in front of the whole Church and more particularly in front of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and in front of all the priests, religious, seminarians and faithful here present.

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that there is no obligation to make a profession of faith at every moment. But when the Faith is in danger it is urgent to profess it, even if it be at the risk of one's own life.

Such is the situation in which we find ourselves. We live in an unprecedented crisis of the Church, a crisis that attacks her inner essence, in her very substance which is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Catholic priesthood, two mysteries essentially united because without priesthood there is no sacrifice of the Mass and therefore no form of worship. It is also on this foundation that the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ is built.

For this reason, because the conservation of the priesthood and the Holy Mass is at stake, and in spite of the requests and pressures of many, I am here in order to accomplish my duty: to make a public profession of faith.

It is painful to witness the deplorable blindness of so many confrères in the episcopate and in the priesthood who do not see or do not want to see the present crisis nor the necessity to resist the reigning modernism in order to be faithful to the mission entrusted to us by God.

I want to manifest here my sincere and profound adherence to the position of His Excellency Archbishop Lefebvre, dictated by his fidelity to the Church of all centuries. Both of us, we have drunk at the same spring which is that of the Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church.

May the Most Holy Virgin our Mother, who at Fatima has warned us in her motherly love with regard to the gravity of the present situation, give us the grace to be able by our attitude to help and enlighten the faithful in such a way that they depart from these pernicious errors of which they are the victims, deceived by many persons who have received the fullness of the Holy Ghost.

May God bless Archbishop Lefebvre and his work!