Documenta Lefebvriana Omnia

Secret Consistory of the Holy Father Paul VI for the Naming of Twenty Cardinals (Monday, May 24, 1976)

Unofficial translation from the Italian version.

Venerable Brothers of Ours,

Since the day when, now more than three years ago, by fixing the number of Cardinal electors, we had filled the vacancies created in your College, it has suffered the painful losses of our Brothers, whom we all remember with affectionate regret; moreover, on the other hand, some of its members have reached the established age, meaning they can no longer participate in the election of the Roman Pontiff. Therefore, we have convened you today to create new Cardinals; and, at the same time, both to promulgate episcopal appointments and to ask you to pronounce the final vote concerning the causes of canonization of three Blesseds, and finally to receive the postulations for the pallia.

These are traditional and well-known aspects of every Consistory; but they are no less evocative in their ecclesial meaning and historical significance, so much so as to make the celebration of this event of the Roman Church full of singular interest every time. Yes, the Consistory is a particularly important and solemn moment. We see you comprehend this, through your participation and presence; and for this, first of all, we thank you.

I. The Representativeness of the Sacred College

To remain on the circumstance that most polarizes the attention of the Catholic community today, and indeed of all public opinion—the creation of new Cardinals—we wish to emphasize that, with it, we wanted to delay no longer in providing for the needs of the Sacred College, especially after the publication of the Apostolic Constitution Romano Pontifici eligendo, in which we underlined the particular and supreme duties of its members, called to the election of the Pope. And in filling the vacancies, as we were saying, we have followed the criteria that we care about most: the representativeness and the international character of the Sacred College. It wishes to, and must, present to the world an image as faithful as possible of the Holy Catholic Church, gathered from the four winds into the one fold of Christ (John 10:16), open to all peoples and all cultures, to assimilate their genuine values and make them serve the good cause of the Gospel, which is the glory of God and the elevation of man.

Thus—in addition to the due recognition of the most faithful servants of the Apostolic See in the Pontifical Representations and in the Roman Curia—we have thought first and foremost of the residential Sees, turning our gaze in particular to the young communities with a promising and bright future, together with and on the same level as those with an illustrious past and a secular history, rich in works and holiness. It is like an overarching gaze that embraces the entire horizon of the world, where the Church lives, loves, hopes, suffers, fights: no one, from the extreme points of the horizon, even from the most distant lands, is absent. And if the representativeness of the Eastern Churches seems reduced today, this does not mean that our esteem and consideration for those regions is any less, which were the cradle of the Church, still guard with jealous care the most precious treasures of piety, Liturgy, and Doctrine, and find in their Pastors, the Patriarchs, our most beloved, together with their collaborators of the respective sacred patriarchal synod, encouragement, light, and the force of cohesion. Indeed, we are pleased to take this opportunity to attest to them our most affectionate benevolence, assuring them of our remembrance, our veneration, and our prayer.

II. Joy and Concern in the Life of the Church

The Consistory, as we were saying, is a particularly grave and solemn moment for the life of the Church unfolding in time: and we cannot let this occasion pass, which brings us into contact with you, without discussing in your presence aspects and issues that are very close to our hearts and that we consider of great importance; without sharing with you the sentiments we harbor within. They are sentiments of gratitude and joy, on the one hand, but also of concern and pain on the other.

1. Reasons for Optimism and Joy

The first sentiment is born from that innate optimism—founded on the unfailing promises of Christ (cf. Matt 28:20; John 16:33) and on the observation of ever-new and consoling phenomena—that we habitually harbor in our hearts: it is the vitality, the youthfulness of the Church, of which we have so many signs. We had proof of this in the recent Holy Year, which still radiates its influence in our spirit. The essence of Christian life lies in the spiritual life, in this supernatural life which is a gift of God: and we find the greatest comfort in seeing it develop in so many countries, in the testimony of faith, in the Liturgy, in rediscovered and relished prayer, in the joy guarded in the clarity of spiritual vision and in the purity of heart.

Yes, our Venerable Brothers, the Spirit is truly at work in all fields, even in those that seemed most barren!

2. Motives of Bitterness and Concern

But there are also motives for bitterness, which we certainly do not wish to veil or minimize: and they arise especially from the observation of a polarization, often irreducible in certain of its excesses, which manifests in various fields a superficial immaturity, or a stubborn obstinacy, essentially a bitter deafness to the appeals for that healthy equilibrium, a reconciler of tensions, originating from the great lesson of the Council, now more than ten years ago.

a) The Traditionalist Opposition

On one side, there are those who, under the pretext of a greater fidelity to the Church and the Magisterium, systematically refuse the teachings of the Council itself, its application, and the reforms that derive from it, its gradual application by the Apostolic See and the Episcopal Conferences, under our authority, willed by Christ. Discredit is cast upon the authority of the Church in the name of a Tradition, for which respect is attested only materially and verbally; the faithful are drawn away from the bonds of obedience to the See of Peter as well as to their legitimate Bishops; today's authority is rejected in the name of yesterday's. And the fact is all the more grave inasmuch as the opposition of which we speak is not only encouraged by some priests, but headed by a Bishop, nonetheless always venerated by Us, Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre.

It is so painful to note this: but how can one fail to see in such an attitude—whatever the intentions of these persons may be—a placing of oneself outside obedience and communion with the Successor of Peter and therefore of the Church?

For this, unfortunately, is the logical consequence, namely, when it is maintained that it is preferable to disobey under the pretext of preserving one's faith intact, of working in one's own way for the preservation of the Catholic Church, while at the same time denying it effective obedience. And this is said openly! They dare to affirm that the Second Vatican Council is not binding; that the faith would also be in danger because of the Post-conciliar reforms and orientations, that there is a duty to disobey in order to preserve certain traditions. What traditions? Is it this group, and not the Pope, not the Episcopal College, not the Ecumenical Council, that determines which among the countless traditions must be considered as the norm of faith? As you see, our Venerable Brothers, such an attitude sets itself up as the judge of that divine will which placed Peter and his legitimate Successors as Head of the Church to confirm the brethren in the faith, and to feed the universal flock (cf. Luke 22:32; John 21:15 ff.), which established him as the guarantor and guardian of the deposit of Faith.

And this is particularly grave when division is introduced exactly where congregavit nos in unum Christi amor (the love of Christ has gathered us together into one), in the Liturgy and in the Eucharistic Sacrifice, by refusing obedience to the norms defined in the liturgical field. It is in the name of Tradition that we ask all our children, all Catholic communities, to celebrate with dignity and fervor the renewed Liturgy. The adoption of the new Ordo Missae is certainly not left to the discretion of priests or the faithful: and the Instruction of June 14, 1971, provided for the celebration of the Mass in the old form, with the authorization of the ordinary, only for elderly or sick priests who offer the Divine Sacrifice sine populo (without the people). The new Ordo was promulgated to replace the old, after mature deliberation, following the requests of the Second Vatican Council. In no different way did our holy Predecessor Pius V make the reformed Missal mandatory under his authority, following the Council of Trent.

We demand the same disposition, with the same supreme authority that comes to us from Jesus Christ, toward all the other liturgical, disciplinary, and pastoral reforms that have matured in these years in application of the conciliar decrees. Any initiative that aims to obstruct them cannot claim the prerogative of rendering a service to the Church: in fact, it causes it grave damage.

Several times, directly, through our collaborators and other friendly persons, we have called the attention of Monsignor Lefebvre to the gravity of his attitudes, the irregularity of his main present initiatives, the inconsistency and often falsity of the doctrinal positions upon which he bases them both, and the damage that comes from them to the entire Church.

It is with profound bitterness but with paternal hope that we turn once more to this Brother of ours, to his collaborators, and to those who have let themselves be dragged along by them. Oh, certainly, we believe that many of these faithful, at least initially, were in good faith: we also understand their sentimental attachment to habitual forms of worship or discipline that for a long time had been their spiritual support and in which they had found spiritual nourishment. But we are confident that they will be able to reflect with serenity, without bias, and will be willing to admit that they will find the support and nourishment they seek today in the renewed forms that the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and We ourselves have decreed as necessary for the good of the Church, its progress in the contemporary world, and its unity. We therefore exhort, once again, all these brothers and children of ours, we implore them to become aware of the deep wounds they otherwise cause to the Church, again we invite them to reflect...

It is with profound bitterness but with paternal hope that we turn once more to our Brother Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, and to his collaborators; we invite them to think of the grave warnings of Christ regarding the unity of the Church (cf. John 17:21 ff.) and the obedience due to the legitimate Pastor placed by Him over the universal flock, as a sign of the obedience due to the Father and the Son (cf. Luke 10:16). We await them with an open heart, with arms ready to embrace them: may they know how to rediscover in humility and edification, to the joy of the People of God, the path of unity and love!

b) The Progressive/Radical Opposition

On the other hand, in the opposite direction regarding ideological position, but equally a cause of profound sorrow, there are those who, mistakenly believing they are continuing along the line of the Council, have placed themselves in a position of preconceived and sometimes irreducible criticism of the Church and its institutions.

Therefore, with equal firmness, we must say that we do not accept the attitude:

Such Christians are not very numerous, it is true, but they make a lot of noise, believing too easily that they interpret the needs of all Christian people or the irreversible direction of history. In doing so, they cannot appeal to the Second Vatican Council, because its interpretation and application do not lend themselves to abuses of this sort; nor can they appeal to the demands of the apostolate to approach those who are distant or unbelieving: the true apostle is sent by the Church to bear witness to the doctrine and life of the Church itself. The leaven must be distributed throughout the dough, but it must remain evangelical leaven. Otherwise, it too becomes corrupted by the world.

III. Conclusion and Creation of New Cardinals

Venerable Brothers of Ours! We thought of entrusting you with these reflections, mindful of the hour that strikes for the Church. It is and will always be the ensign raised among the Nations (cf. Isa 5:26; 11:12), because it has the mission of giving to the world that watches it, sometimes with an air of defiance, the truth of that faith which illuminates its destiny, the hope that alone does not disappoint (cf. Rom 5:5), the charity that saves from the selfishness that, under various forms, seeks to invade and suffocate it. This is certainly not the time for abandonment, desertion, or concessions; nor, much less, for fear. Christians are simply called to be themselves: and they will be so to the extent that they are faithful to the Church and to the Council.

No one, we think, will want to harbor doubts about the sum of indications and encouragements which, during these years of our Pontificate, we have given to the Pastors and the People of God, and indeed to the entire world. We are grateful to those who have made a program out of such teachings, given with an intent always supported by a lively hope, by a serene optimism not separated from concrete realism. If today we have dwelled more on some negative aspects, it is because the very unique circumstance and your benevolent confidence have made us deem it appropriate. Indeed, the essence of the prophetic charism for which the Lord has promised us the assistance of his Spirit is to keep watch, to warn against dangers, to scrutinize the signs of dawn upon the dark horizon of the night. Custos, quid de nocte? Custos, quid de nocte? (Watchman, what of the night?) the prophet puts in our mouth (Isa 21:11). Until the serene dawn restores joy to the world, we wish to continue raising our voice for that mission which has been entrusted to us. You, our closest friends and collaborators, can above all and better than anyone else echo this among so many of our brothers and children. And as we prepare to celebrate the Lord who, with the signs of the passion and glorious resurrection, ascends to the right hand of the Father, we must, looking at caelos apertos (the heavens opened - Acts 7:56), remain full of hope, joy, and courage. In Nomine Domini! (In the Name of the Lord!) In this holy Name we bless you all.

Now we are pleased to list the distinguished Prelates whom, for their merits, we have deemed worthy to call to join the most worthy College of Cardinals in this Consistory.

They are:

Furthermore, as for the two Cardinals whom we have reserved in pectore, we now publicly give the name of one of them: it is Monsignor Giuseppe Maria Trịnh Như Khuê, Archbishop of Hanoi, who arrived in Rome only yesterday. However, we still reserve the second, who will be published when it pleases us.

Therefore, by the authority of Almighty God, of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and Our own, we solemnly create and appoint as Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church the Prelates whom we have just mentioned.

Of these Cardinals, the following will belong to the order of Deacons: Opilio Rossi, Giuseppe Maria Sensi, Corrado Bafile, Joseph Schröffer, Eduardo Pironio, Bolesław Filipiak.

The others will belong to the order of Priests.

With the necessary and opportune dispensations, derogations, and clauses. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.