LETTERS

LETTERS
February 2004

---

A GREAT DISSERVICE

You have done your readers a great disservice in sub-titling your interview with Father Van Der Putten, "His Return to Rome." [See "An Irregular Situation," December 2003 Faith.] Surely his language ("you have to follow your conscience," "those opposing the Society like to make things black and white," "a very complicated canonical question," the use of "Rome" instead of the "the Pope" or "the Vatican") must have reminded you of other dissenters whom you rightly criticize in your pages. To say that "the Society has never been formally declared schismatic" shortly after discussing the excommunication of the Society's bishops is the same kind of logic dissenters use.

So-called "independent" priests do a lot of damage among the faithful. The question is not whether or not they belong to the Society of St. Pius X, but whether they're in union with the local bishop. If they're not in union with the local bishop, then they're not in union with the pope -- it doesn't matter that they're not SSPX priests.

I was kicked out of an American seminary for being "too rigidly orthodox," went to Europe, was ordained for a diocese in eastern Europe, and after three years of ministry there, came to a diocese in California, where -- with permission of both bishops involved -- I'm working with a view toward incardination. All I can say is that it has been great, and I really have to wonder about the apostolic zeal of a priest who would rather celebrate the Tridentine Mass for a dozen people than the new Mass for a thousand-plus families.

Father Michael Moore,
Administrator,
Sacred Heart Church, Exeter

Editor's reply: Before we received certain information about Father Van der Putten, detailed in this issue, we saw no reason to doubt Van der Putten's good will; he said he had left the Society of St. Pius X and had been reconciled with the pope for reasons of conscience. Thus, it seemed, he had indeed returned to Rome, even though some of the opinions he expressed may not have been fully correct. In such a situation, one would allow some leeway in hopes of further progress. As for his being independent, he claimed to possess a celebret in view of regularization in a diocese or religious foundation -- a claim, it appears, that was, at least, once true.

TOP