INTERVJU MED KARDINAL MEDINA-ESTEVEZ

ur Présent

Tisdagen 2 november 2005





Cardinal Medina Estevez firar regelbundet pontifikalhögmässa
enl. den traditionella riten - här i Rom 6/11 2005




- At the end of August Bishop Fellay was received by Benedict XVI; the synod of bishops on the Eucharist has just ended, and we know that the question of the Mass of St Pius V was raised, even if the final text makes no mention of it....Eminence, is there an evolution of the traditional question ?
- The question isn't felt everywhere with the same sensibility. There are people who say that they are in favor of bigger views on many subjects and others who on the contrary show themselves to be very rigid as far as the use of the old Roman Rite is concerned. There are some who advocate a greater liberty in the Church, but who, to my great astonishment, do not want to allow a greater survival of the old form of the Roman Rite. It's curious that they tolerate, willingly or unwillingly abuses in the celebration of the recent form of the Roman Rite. For my part I energetically wish that the Holy Father would make a declaration in favor of allowing a greater freedom in the use of the old Roman Rite.

- You came in the Spring to the abbey of Our Lady of the Annunciation. You're quite a regular at the house. You came the first time for the thirtieth anniversary of Le Barroux, then for the (installation of the) new Mother Abbess, and last for the new Father Abbot; in addition, you willingly celebrate, when asked, the old Rite. You are, after a fashion a "recidivist". Why do you do that ?
- There are several aspects to consider. The first is that the old form of the Roman Rite is the rite of my priestly ordination. I celebrated the old Mass for a good fifteen years and I appreciated its riches; that does not mean that I do not appreciate the riches of the reform determined by Pope Paul VI.
The second point: my nomination by Pope John Paul II to the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei, which has as its goal to help Catholics attached to the old form of the Roman Rite. It seems to me to be a valid reason.
Finally the third reason: we must emphasize that, in the Church, there are many forms of legitimate spirituality which merit the respect of all Catholics. This diversity does not constitute a threat for the unity of the Church, but rather a richness.
If, then, for these three reasons, I can be of service to the communities who follow the old form of the Roman Rite, I do it willingly; although I habitually celebrate in the new rite, because I have lost, after thirty odd years, a little familiarity with the old form. But from time to time, I willingly celebrate the rite of St Pius V. That is part of my duties.

- You do it more easily than certain other cardinals.
- I began to use the old rite from time to time after having been invited to Le Barroux. Before that first visit I no longer celebrated it. After this visit - I was at the time the Prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship - there were quite a bit of negative reactions. Some even lacked grave respect due to my person and to a rite which the Church accepts. And it was from that moment that I began again to willingly offer this little service.

- Without any particular difficulty ?
- No. I must say that there are certain prayers of the old Rite, notably the offertory prayers, which seem to me to possess a truly extraordinary richness, which ought at least, in my opinion, to have been kept as an alternative. I tried in the publication of the third edition of the Roman Missal but was blocked by quite strong opposition...and I had to give it up. Without backtracking, of course, on my impression that there are some beautiful things that it would have been necessary to keep for the richness of the spiritual life and above all because they greatly highlight the sacrificial character of the Holy Mass
Because the three aspects of the Eucharist: the sacrifice, the Real Presence and the Communion are interlinked, and the primary one of them is the sacrificial aspect. Communion flows from the sacrificial aspect; and it is the Real Presence that gives the deeper meaning to the sacrificial offering. I have always been very aware of this aspect since my youth. I recall that the first theological article that I wrote after my priestly ordination was on the Mass as a sacrifice more than 50 years ago. That's why I enormously appreciated the last encyclical of John Paul II on the Mass as a sacrifice Ecclesia de Eucharistia, where the word "sacrifice" appears at least 42 times.

- In an interview you granted to La Nef and then to L'Homme nouveau you brought up the progress that has taken place since the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei. Is there an atmosphere of appeasement or a concrete reality ?
- There is a psychological problem - to a certain point. Some think that an attachment to the old rite might go hand in hand with a refusal of the teaching of the Second Vatican council and the affirmation that the new rite is heretical or invalid. But this excess is not the case with all those who are attached to the old rite and not even the majority of them. If we are able to overcome this psychological difficulty, I think that, little by little, we are going to have a peaceful acceptance (of the old rite). And even a joyous one: the solution that Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos came up with for Campos has been an extraordinarily positive example. A community with a particular tradition and a completely recognized hierarchy constitutes a valuable fruit and experience.

- Is this in every case the sense of your activity and conviction ?
- Yes. In the rite of St Pius V, it would be necessary to accept, however, some aspects of the new rite, for example updating the calendar. There are the new saints who are of great importance and who are not found in the old rite: Padre Pio, the Martyrs of Vietnam, the Philippines, China, Mexico who are pillars of these Christian nations.
There is also the question of the lectionary. The new lectionary, in my opinion, constitutes a richness. At Vatican II a Chilean bishop had asked me what he could propose to the Council and I had replied: a wider use of Holy Scripture. This doesn't affect in any way the richness or the tradition of the ancient form of the Roman Rite.

- As regards the calendar, the pontificate of John Paul II has been such a source for new saints and blesseds that we wouldn't be able to integrate them all...
- We must distinguish between the officially declared saints and blesseds who have been inserted into the Roman Martyrology around about 7000 names of which 25 % are the result of John Paul II and between those who have been incorporated into the universal calendar. There is no question of incorporating all of them. But some are emblematic saints. For example, for Latin America, Saint Juan Diego the Seer of Guadalupe....not all could be included, but a revision of the Roman Calendar seems necessary it seems to me.

- There is sometimes the impression of a difficulty of comprehension: sensitivity and discipline, on one side; dogma and theology, on the other. Isn't there a difficulty of getting along on the same level?
- Personally, I believe that there was in catholic theology certain completely orthodox progress which was not assimilated by certain traditional Catholics. For example, the scriptural interpretation produced valid elements - and there are certain positions which are not acceptable. Sometimes, any progress was refused, and one sees heresies everywhere, whereas it is a question of true progress, or simple opinions which do not constitute a threat for unity or catholic orthodoxy. Certain publications suspect all that is said in the catholic Church as heresy, or infidelity to orthodoxy. Even the writings of Cardinal Ratzinger are savagely criticized there; publications where a such an orthodox document like Dominus Jesus was not received; where this jewel of catholic orthodoxy that is the encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia was not well received because it lacked (i.e. omitted) the word propitiation there. However it is necessary to rightly understand this word which I know was rightly used by the council of Trent, and which belongs to Catholic doctrine: because, if used in a rigid way, it would be a question of appeasing an enraged God; which leads to a completely anthropomorphic vision of God who is before all else love and mercy. I believe that the deeper sense of "propitiation" would include the notion of "reparation", "the grace of conversion" and even "purification". At the bottom it is the love towards God who gives the deeper sense to the true religious attitude. These type of questions poison the discussions.

- Can that be overcome ?
- I believe so; but I fear that certain people arrive there only with difficulty...

- One does not always have the impression that the recent documents, in particular on the liturgical norms, had a real impact, especially in Europe. Is this the effect of the custom of doing one's own thing ? Is it possible to make people accept these texts?
- Towards the end of my mandate as prefect of the Congregation for the divine worship, I had started to collect the experiments throughout the world on the ars celebrandi, the correct, exact and elegant way of celebrating the liturgy of the Church. Moreover the liturgy is a public act, and not a private one which as such would depend on personal impressions or tastes. The Minister of the Eucharist is a servant of the Church, and must thus celebrate as the Church wants it. Moreover, the liturgical reform established certain norms which allow alternatives, and they leave a prudent latitude for the circumstances and the choice of the priest and the community. For marriage, the ritual contains about thirty biblical texts that the bride and groom can choose. There is not one rigid schema alone to apply equally everywhere. Even for the exchange of the assent, there are two ways of doing it. For Holy Mass, you have three formulas for the penitential rite at the beginning; with the possibility of using the Nicene Creed, or that of the Apostles; the rather broad possibility, according to the general Institution of the Roman Missal, to distribute Holy Communion under two species...
Therefore, in the official texts, there are very interesting pedagogical possibilities that the priest can choose, whilst always having as a goal the spiritual good of the people, and not his personal taste. In the new form of the Roman Rite, there are at least eight canons of the Mass...
That corresponds to a desire to have broader possibilities of reasonable changes. But in certain areas one often exceeds the rules of the worthy celebration which the Church has established. For example, obligatory use of vestments, that is all the vestments required. Or else there are "small" defects, like the bad habit of leaving the cruets on the altar. The altar is not a table where you can put just anything; the altar is the table of sacrifice. Therefore, all that is needed on the altar is the chalice, the host, candlesticks, the missal and the cross. Anything else doesn't agree with the dignity and the nobility of the altar as a liturgical whole.

- Europe suffers from a manifest lack of priests. What is the explanation for this hemorrhage ?
- I think that we need to look into this. The situation is very different from one country to another, even in Latin America. I do not speak about Chile from where I come. But look at Mexico: a country which has benefited from the apparition of Guadalupe; a country which has had since the 16th century its martyrs, a constant throughout the centuries; a country which profits - if I am not mistaken in the number... - from three million men who take part in nocturnal adoration: three million Mexicans who rise at night to adore the Blessed Sacrament; a country where popular piety is very alive, supported by the priests; a country where one has, certainly, sins, but where people go to confession ; a country where there are acts, even habits against chastity, but which are still seen as negative things, as sins. In Europe, there is in certain places a weakness of faith, there is a disaffection with respect to the Church, the sense of the sacred has been lost, chastity is no longer prized... In the United States there is an association of young people made up of a half-million members, who promise to remain a virgin until marriage. There is thus good reason to ask for a greater freedom for the old form of the Roman Rite
The diocese of Guadalajara, where there are nocturnal adorers, where there is a roll of a hundred beatifications of martyrs during the last persecution, has a major seminary with 500 seminarians, and a minor seminary with 700 seminarians. I went to the Eucharistic Congress at Guadalajara, the day of the procession of the Virgin of Zapopan, there were four million people on the ten kilometers between the two cities - ten kilometers ! That tells you something...

- What's to blame for the crisis in Europe?
- There are several, and one could not establish them in a mathematical way. It is very difficult. But there is a whole host of factors, among which the weakness of faith, first of all, and the contempt of chastity, they constitute the most important sources of the situation. Saint Paul says it: "the just live by faith"; and it is impossible, without the faith, to be pleasing to God. And martyrs: we are soon going to beatify a group of Mexican martyrs. We have the letter of a boy, shot at 14 years. The day before, he was allowed to write a letter to his mother, in which he says: "Mama, it has never been easier to go to heaven today: I will be shot tomorrow. I kiss you. Your son." If one were to see that it is a true joy to be shot in order to go to heaven, one is in another atmosphere. But Saint Augustine says it in one of his sermons: one thinks of heaven as something where one should arrive as soon as possible!

- What about the state of necessity which Fraternity of St Pius X uses to defend its position ?
- It is necessary to recognize in the Fraternity of Saint Pius X the care to preserve certain values which are real. What I cannot accept, is the refusal of the legitimate authority of the Church, and the refusal of the solution suggested at the time by the servant of God, Pope John-Paul II, through the mediation of Cardinal Ratzinger a solution which was precisely a pledge of balance, orthodoxy and sincerity. Certain people go as far as considering that the apostolic seat is vacant. A booklet published by the Fraternity at the time of the Jubilee states of the 260 popes faithful to the Tradition the last four are not, and there is no question of the name of the current pope. If one goes that far, things become extremely difficult.

- Then there is the question - the central one, and one you raised earlier - in these discussions of the liberalization of so-called traditional mass, which, without being forbidden, needs to be authorized...
Personally, I hold that one cannot prove that the old rite was abrogated. There are good reasons to affirm that it is still in force. Others hold the contrary. But, since there is doubt, one should admit freedom. There is nevertheless a pastoral problem, which deserves careful attention, because, if in a parish, there are different rites without order, that can create a certain confusion for the faithful. It would be necessary to have a certain flexibility on the one hand, and a good order on the other. I think that Ecclesia Dei Indult ought to be seen as a test to establish certain criteria for good ecclesiastical order. I think besides that if the Holy Father wanted to authorize the general use of the old rite, the priests who would like to celebrate it would be very few: perhaps a few hundred at the most. The majority of priests would continue to celebrate the rite of Pope Paul VI. It remains to be hoped, for my part, that certain elements eliminated from the old rite should become alternatives in the new rite; for example, the offertory prayers, and the prayer at the end of the mass, like the offering of the sacrifice to the Holy Trinity - extremely beautiful and pedagogical prayers in my opinion.

- You say that relatively few priests would return to the old rite. Is this a feeling, or is that based on something more tangible?
- I believe that priests, like everyone, have an acute sense of the practical. Now the old rite is more complex; the old rite has, if you allow the word, fallen into disuse: it is only seen very seldom, people are not used to it, and everyone wants to continue to do what he is used to doing. Thus I think that if one gave the general possibility to celebrate, with the need for a certain order in the dioceses, the priests who would like to celebrate in the old rite would be very few. It is my impression, but I can be mistaken.

- You mentioned the complexity of the old rite...
- The rubrics of the old rite were extremely complex. For example, there were a number of genuflections; there were a number of signs of the cross over the chalice and the host; there were positions which were really very rigid. Today, people are accustomed to broader gestures, which do not constitute in my opinion a lack of respect to the Most Blessed Sacrament; and thus people would not want to willingly return to such rigid rubrics - rubrics which nevertheless are to be held in high regard.
Even myself, when I celebrate the old rite, it often happens I forget that I must keep the fingers joined, because I am accustomed to celebrating the mass according to the new form.

- The Eastern rites, have also preserved this proliferation of the signs of cross and so forth...
- It is not exactly the same case, because the Byzantine rite is a single rite, and was always the same; there are not two forms of them. While, for the Roman rite, there are two forms. For us, people are accustomed to the simplified form.

- Let us come to the recent events which accelerated these last months: the death of Sister Lucy, that of John-Paul II, and the election of Benedict XVI... Some were astonished that he did not quote Vatican II at the time of the sermon of his installation Mass.. Do you think that new Sovereign pontiff will be a kind of prolongation of Cardinal Ratzinger ?
- One cannot say everything all the time. If Cardinal Ratzinger did not quote Vatican II, that does mean that he does not appreciate it; I am sure that Benedict XVI welcomed Vatican II with joy, he took part in it as a theologian. But each Pontiff is different from another; he cannot be the total continuity of his predecessor. If you take Leo XIII compared to Pius IX, there is a change; if you take Pius X compared to Leo XIII, there is a change; if you take John XXIII compared to Pius XII, there is a great change. The change is a human thing, and which forms part, I think, of the providence of God. Each person received gifts from God, charisms, which constitute a richness for the Church. Thus Benedict XVI will be himself. But he declared a very important thing, he said: "I am the servant of the faith of the Church, not of my personal ideas." He said it at least twice, in particular at the Lateran. It is of capital importance, because the Pope is the guardian of the faith, of the catholic faith, of the faith of the Church, and if he has some debatable personal ideas, he will take care not to propose them as though they were the faith of the Church. Even if the Pope has a personal diagnosis on a situation, this one can be acceptable, but not obligatory for everyone. I have a total confidence in the fact that Benedict XVI will be a man extremely faithful to catholic tradition and that, as a servant of the Petrine ministry, he will keep the faith of the Church carefully, and do all that is possible to maintain and develop the certainties of orthodoxy which constitute the fundamental pillar of the unity of the Church.

- You mention your very long knowledge of Cardinal Ratzinger. Since his election we have been able to make certain judgments from the time when he was perceived as a reformer to today where he is seen as a conservative ? Has there been an evolution, or is this an illusion ?
- At the time of the Second Vatican council, there were some (a current) who wanted certain changes in the Church. These changes were right and justified, in my opinion. They were especially expressed in the dogmatic Constitution on the Church, in the dogmatic Constitution on the Divine Revelation, in the Constitution on the liturgy, and in the pastoral Constitution on the Church in the world of today. These four documents which constitute the frame work of the Council - its center being Lumen Gentium - reflect the healthy desire to incorporate in the Church the developments of thought which had opened broader horizons, but perfectly orthodox ones.

If I can take the example of a person who represents, in my opinion, the purest direction of these positive developments, it is Cardinal Henri de Lubac. I knew him personally; he treated me as a friend - even if there was a considerable age gap between him and me; I visited him as often as possible. Lubac was an absolutely orthodox man.

However, some people cast suspicions on his orthodoxy, when he was recognized by the Church in a shining way when the Pope made him a cardinal. I believe that Cardinal Ratzinger represents exactly the position which Cardinal de Lubac had. Among works of Cardinal de Lubac, there is a really outstanding work: Meditation on the Church, which is really one of his major works. And I believe that the Meditation on the Church represents exactly the basis of Cardinal Ratzinger's thought. As it also represented that of Cardinal - even if he did not receive the hat... - Urs von Balthasar. Therefore, after the Council, there were people who, calling upon the spirit of the Council, went much beyond the Council and proposed unacceptable things. These people-are not the prolongation of the thought of Ratzinger; they are people who deviated. It is the case of the group - an extreme one- of the liberation theologians; people who preached the ordination of the women; people who would like to change from top to bottom the morals of the Church concerning sexuality, etc.
However, in my opinion, any catholic must be a conservative, because it is necessary to preserve the deposit of the faith. It is what Saint Paul says: "Depositum custodi." If somebody does not want to keep the deposit of the faith, he is no longer.

- Cardinal Ratzinger has also celebrated according to the old rite. Can one think that Benedict XVI will express the same benevolence?
I do not know what the Holy Father will do, because that depends on the circumstances and the collaboration which he finds. But I allow myself to tell you that the Pope named me his special envoy (one reserves the term "legate" for the cardinal Secretary of State) for the blessing of abbey of the Benedictines of Le Barroux. I came in the name of the Pope, and not only because I am favorable to the situation of Le Barroux. The Pope showed his benevolence. I was invested as the representative of the Sovereign Pontiff. But my nomination was not published in the Osservatore Romano...

- You were the voice of the Conclave, announcing the election of the Pope. One felt in your voice emotion and a certain pleasure...
- We have known each other since 1962. After the Council, in the international theological commission; then, the catechism of the catholic Church in the preparation of which I collaborated. Then, the Compendium ("shortened version"), of which I was also member of the preparatory Commission of Cardinals. We worked together until the day before his election. Our relations were always related to the doctrinal (and pastoral) aspect of the Church. It is a long knowledge, even if it is necessary to keep the distances between a major theologian and a small professor of theology.

- It was almost by chance that it was you who announced it...
- If one can speak about chance, it was by chance; because I was the 5th in order of seniority among the cardinal-deacons. However, one died: Cardinal Schotte; the three others had completed ten years as cardinal-deacons and were to move to the order of cardinal-priests. So I became the first, therefore the proto-deacon... And John-Paul II confirmed me, the very same day of his hospitalization, since I was oldest...
As regards the conclave, one is bound to absolute secrecy, but there are things which are completely public. I started from my apartment for the conclave and I had carried linen for 6 days; and the election happened in 24 hours. I think that it is an extremely happy fact, useful, which shows that the unity in the Church is a happy reality. That even if there are differences here or there, the election of the Pope took place very quickly. One could say with a certain mischievousness that, at the Saint Martha house, we were housed very well, we had excellent food, the service was above par. It was not like the time of the conclave which saw the election of Pope Paul VI. I was a conclavist there: small rooms, small wash-hand basin, chamber pot, a bed, a chair, a small table. We celebrated (Mass) one after the other...
This time, the amenities were great; we could have delayed the election since our hospitality was excellent. And yet it went extremely quickly... That was very, very positive.

- And does the name of Benedict have, in your opinion, a particular significance?
- I was always rather related to the Benedictines, and I believe that the devotion, the veneration with respect to Saint Benedict is a reflection of a certain attitude of spirit. If you read the rule of Saint Benedict, you will see there that it is soaked in a spirit of wisdom and broadness of outlook. It was not conceived as the rule of a religious order, but as the rule of a monastery. The grouping together of the monasteries is a fact that came afterwards. In fact it was the monasteries themselves, who following the same rule, thought it necessary to establish a kind of juridical bond between themselves. It was not like that at the beginning. Thus Saint Benedict is the source of a pluralist stock.
The manner of living the rule in the Benedictines, cistercians, the Trappists is different. And all are Benedictines at root. I once asked a German abbot which of the 22 Benedictine congregations is the true Benedictine congregation. And this abbot answered me: either each one or none. For me, that represents the spirit of the healthy freedom which corresponds to the spirit of Pope Benedict XVI.
I believe that Benedict XVI will be extremely respectful of legitimate differences. He said in one of his books that he is not a man of institutions, systems, offices. But he has a major faith in what constitutes the core of unity of the Church, i.e. the faith, the sacraments, prayer.


Intervju genomförd av Olivier Figueras

Översättning från franska