Quote:Firstly, Fr. [...] is wrong in saying I condemned Bp. Williamson and called him a heretic. This never happened. What is true, is I have called his opinions on the New Mass erroneous and dangerous to the Faith, both to priests and faithful.

In no place, that I am aware of, did Abp. Lefebvre ever say "the New Mass nourishes your faith" and "gives grace," as Bp. Williamson did numerous times. I do hold that the theological position of Bp. Williamson is a wrong opinion and I completely submit my opinion to the Church's decision on these matters, when God grants us a good Pope. But until then, I side with Abp. Lefebvre who never hesitated to call the New Mass a "Messe batarde" an "illegitimate Mass" and one that erodes the Faith rather than nourishes it!

Does the New Mass gives grace? Abp. Lefebvre said it is sterile and doesn't pass the grace. A sacrament is defined in the traditional catechism as "an external sign, instituted by Christ, that gives grace." This is presupposing the "sign" is a Catholic sign, and not tampered and modified to give a Protestant and Modernist expression. The New Mass expresses a sign that is no longer Catholic, but Modernist. This is because the New Mass incorporates some Catholic elements, some Protestant elements and some Modernist elements, all combined into one liturgical action. So, taken as a whole, the sign expressed in the New Mass is a Modernist sign, a Modernist Liturgy, one that no longer expressing the Catholic Faith!

Consequently, it can be debated at the theological level if this New Mass, expressing a non-Catholic sign, actually confers grace, even if it be valid at times. It appears Abp. Lefebvre never thought it did. Bp. Williamson holds that if it is valid then it automatically gives grace. Perhaps, one could argue that POTENTIALLY it could give grace (if it's valid), but ACTUALLY it doesn't, in many cases, because of the lack of dispositions necessary. This, because the priest and many attending the New Mass, have a non-Catholic understanding of the Mass, and if it's merely a "symbol of the faith of the community," as is taught by Modernists, then their lack of Faith and proper dispositions, blocks the transfer of grace in their souls. In this case, for many souls, the New Mass doesn't give grace.

As I said, perhaps there's room to debate at the theological level, but at the practical level, it is extremely dangerous for clergy to promote the erroneous opinion that "the New Mass gives grace" because uninformed souls will take this as a green light to attend it and put their Faith in grave danger! Even Abp. Lefebvre said that he believed the New Mass doesn't fulfill the Sunday obligation, precisely because it expresses a different Faith from Tradition. "Lex orandi, lex credendi," as the axiom from St. Vincent Lerins says, "as we pray, so we believe." If we pray as Catholics, we will believe as Catholics; if we pray as Protestants and Modernists, we will believe as Protestants and Modernists!

I have never condemned Bp. Williamson, who I respect and honor as a seminary professor and the bishop of my ordination, but yes, I have publicly warned souls against the erroneous opinions that he promotes because it is contrary to Abp. Lefebvre's position and for the obvious danger such a message presents. As Fr. Carl Pulvermacher, O.F.M. used to put it, "Do you need proof the New Mass doesn't give grace? Look at the catastrophic fruits! There's your proof! As Christ said, 'By their fruits you will know them.'"

After all is said and done, it is ultimately Mother Church who will authoritatively decide on these matters, when she returns to Tradition, and on this point, I'm sure we all agree and eagerly await. What will Mother Church decide when that day comes? How will she judge the New Mass and New sacraments? We shall see. But it is my humble opinion, that it will be a close repetition of her decision on the Anglican orders, which were all declared invalid (and therefore not grace-giving) by Pope Leo XIII in "Apostolicae Curae" in 1896. Why? Because the Anglican adaptations to the Mass and sacrament of Holy Orders expressed a faith different from the Catholic Faith. This alone sufficed to make them invalid. Do not the New Mass changes do the same?

Tribute to Fr. [...] who did publicly oppose Bp. Williamson's opinion on this point, and warned of the great dangers of the New Mass and Indult Masses, and continues heroically taking care of the scattered souls everywhere, in the aftermath of Vatican II.

Tribute to Bishop Williamson, who in spite of promoting some erroneous opinions and signing the petition to remove the "excommunication" that never was, did at least consecrate bishops for Tradition, which the Conciliar-SSPX bishops will never do. Pray they ALL return to the unwavering stand of Abp. Marcel Lefebvre!

The time of the Church's return to Tradition will come. Until then, Abp. Lefebvre was proven right on many other things, I'll take his side on this point as well. "In doctrinal matters defined by the Church, full consent; in matters of custom, respect; in debatable matters of opinion, always charity."

In Christ the King,

Fr. David Hewko