 |
The
six Protestant ministers who collaborated in making
up the New Mass (left to right): Drs. George (upictured),
Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith, and Thurian. |
Max
Thurian: "Catholic priest" (?) and member of the
International Theological Commission.
THE
FACTS
We
heard that he had become a "Catholic priest" without
ever knowing if he was even a Catholic.1
Then, on September 30, 1992, we learned that he had been
named by John Paul II as a member of the International Theological
Commission. To set the record straight about Max Thurian,
let us speak a little about this brother from the "community"
of Taizé.
Created
in 1969, the International Theological Commission has the
job of advising the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith. Its members (thirty at the most, known as the "High
Council of Thirty") are designated by the pope, upon
recommendation by the Cardinal Prefect of the above Congregation,
who is also the Commission's president (presently Card.
Ratzinger). It was Paul VI's wish that its members represent
the various theological trends. Which "theological
trend" would Thurian represent in this organization?-the
obviously heretical "ecumenical" trend of "double
adherence" to two different confessions? Unfortunately,
everything leads us to think this.
"DOUBLE
ADHERENCE"
Born
in Geneva in 1921, the Protestant minister, Max Thurian,
along with Roger Schutz, founded the "community"
of Taizé. Both men had been invited as non-Catholic
"observers" to the Council. In 1966, along with
five other non-Catholic "observers," Thurian also
participared in the Consilium, which had the responsibility
of preparing the liturgical reform of the Catholic Church.
The new rite, he declared in a satisfied manner, can be
celebrated by Catholics as well as Protestants.2
Would he have become a "Catholic priest" if he
had to celebrate the Tridentine Mass?
The
two Protestant "observers" from Taizé were
to exert a considerable amount of influence at Vatican II.3
Roger Schutz described a typical day from that period
of time in the following manner:
"Before
noontime, while leaving the Council meetings, we would
meet up with the bishops we had made appointments with,
and bring them to our apartment....There was no lack of
conciliar work to discuss. For example, we would closely
study the evolution of the texts, write up notes, and
give our point of view when asked. Signs of friendship
toward us were impressive. One could even say that they
expected too much [involvement] from us….4
In
spite of these signs of friendship, Roger Schutz and Max
Thurian remained profoundly attached to their Protestant
origins. Their understanding of the "Church" was
such that they wanted Catholics and Protestants to be considered
as part of the same "Church." On May 25, 1975,
at Katowice, Poland, Roger Schutz made the following statement:
What
we ask of the bishop of Rome [sic] is that a reconciliation
come about without requiring non-Catholics to repudiate
their origins. Even with truly...catholic communion
in view, repudiation goes against love. Besides this,
repudiation is alien to the thinking of modem man.5
Then,
in Rome, during a conference held at the Studies Center
of St. Louis of France on March 11, 1976, Max Thurian stated
the following: "For a Protestant, belonging to the
visible Church is in the order of faith [this is true],
even if certain institutional aspects are excluded from
it. In this sense, if a Protestant has the conviction that
the Catholic Church, following the Second Vatican Council,
rediscovered conformity with the apostolic Church, he can
then consider himself to be a member of that Church without,
however, renoucing his adherence to another ecclesial community.”6
In other words, “double membership,” as if God has
revealed opposing truths. From this arises the question
of whether Max Thurian converted to the Catholic Faith before
being ordained a “Catholic priest” in Naples. Had he truly
converted, or was he merely convinced that it was the Catholic
Church that had converted after having "rediscovered"
conformity with the apostolic Church? Who knows? The community
of Taizé, when asked whether Thurian had repudiated
his Protestantism, responded: "No, certainly not. No
abjuration of the Protestant religion took place."1a
Although
Catholic authorities have been pressured to respond to this
very serious and legitimate question, it has been impossible
to obtain a single word from them about this matter. Moreover,
the ordination performed by Card. Ursi in Naples was kept
secret until May 11, 1988.
 Taize
is at the same time a small village in Burgundy, and
a Protestant monastic community, which began there in
1940. From the 1960's it has been highly regarded in
Catholic circles. In launching this idea of double identity
- the same person can be Catholic and Protestant together
- its Prior, Roger Schutz (shown at right embracing
the Holy Father), inaugurated a new form of ecumenism.
However Taize really teaches a Protestant doctrine and,
notable, an erroneous notion of the unity of the Church.
"Unity: does it not consist in loving our brothers,
still separated from us, whom we desire to have living
with us in the same house?...Unity today in the churches
exists as we renounce all our divisive ways, only holding
to the fundamental faith which saves and joins us."
(Max Thurian as quoted in La Croix, January 26, 1984) |
A
RESPONSE
Without
knowing whether he is a Catholic or a Protestant, we will
look for an answer in his last book, L 'identité
du Pretre (Identity of the Priest). Msgr. Bruno
Forte, the Neapolitan "theologian" of the Italian
Bishops Conference, presents this book to us, sounding its
praises in terms that arouse our suspicions. He writes that:
...(T)he
oft-repeated differences [in this book] between the Catholic
position and that of the Reform are not to be seen as
polemical in nature, but rather as being the echo
of two souls working deeply within the conscience
of this significant testimony of our times, arriving at
the choice of "fulness." This fulness does
not deny the value of what evangelical spirituality and
theology have given to the author, but rather
includes it within the very conscience of "catholicity,"
whose roots are to be found in Scripture and the great
traditions of the Christian faith. To have "Apostolic"
intentions does not mean having "polemical"
intentions: Brother Max demonstrates throughout this book
such a great love for his Mother Church [the
sect he is from-Ed.], that nothing of what
he has received [in his Protestant sect],
starting from baptism, can be considered as lost
[Not even heresy and schism?-Ed.].
In
fact, this is what Thurian says about the so-called "Reform"
in his book: "The division [sic] that came about over
eucharistic considerations in the 16th century does
not make sense. Some [the Catholics] wanted, in
particular, to underscore the aspect of sacrifice, supplication,
intercession and propitiation. Others [the Protestants]
wanted to stress, exclusively the aspect of communion, praise,
and thanksgiving....Both sides forgot that it is impossible
to separate these elements, which are indissolubly linked
in the eucharistic prayer." Thurian apparently forgets
that the Reform was not simply a "division...over eucharistic
considerations," (as if it were merely an argument
over a disputed question between two Catholic theological
schools of thought), but that it was, rather, a violent,
heretical assault by the Reformers on the sacrificial aspect
of the Mass. He also forgets that at the time of the Reform,
there was not only an inevitable clash between Catholics
and "Protestants," but that the Church solemnly
and infallibly intervened through the Council of Trent,
defending and reaffirming the Catholic Faith against the
heresies of the "Reformers." To say that Catholics,
like the Protestants, were mistaken in separating the indissoluble
elements of the eucharistic prayer, (besides being an historical
untruth), is the same as saying that in the 16th century,
the Catholic Church (which, for Thurian, is not infallible)
had deviated, as much as the Protestant sects, from "conformity
with the apostolic Church." It is supposedly this conformity
that allows Thurian to consider himself to be a member of
the Catholic Church, without having to abjure his Protestantism.7
This is exactly what Thurian said (and has never repudiated)
in Rome during a meeting on March 11, 1976. This is also
the very same pretension held by ecumenists, a pretension
that Pius XI condemned in the following manner:
While
you may hear many non-Catholics loudly preaching brotherly
communion in Jesus Christ, yet none will you find to whom
it ever occurs with devout submission to obey the Vicar
of Jesus Christ in his capacity of teacher or ruler [and
in fact, one searches in vain in Thurian's book for references
to the papal magisterium...with the exception of the writings
of John Paul II!] Meanwhile they assert their readiness
to treat with the Church of Rome, but on equal terms,
as equals with an equal. But even if they could so treat,
there seems little doubt that they would do so only on
condition that no pact into which they might enter should
compel them to retract those opinions which still keep
them outside the fold of Christ. (Pius XI-Mortalium
Animos, Angelus Press Edition. Price $3.75 postpaid)
A
"PROPHETIC GESTURE"
Finally,
what conclusions are we to draw concerning Thurian and his
teachings? Are we supposed to think that "the Catholic"
is not the Catholic Church, but that it is rather the ecumenical
Super-Church which is silently, though actively being built
up before our eyes, in which the one true Church of Christ
is merely a "Christian tradition" amongst others?8
Are we to understand that the ordination (without
abjuration of heresy) of a Protestant is one of those "prophetic
gestures" so loved by modernists?
As
far back as 1975, Fr. Toinet of the Ecumenical Institute
of Paris wrote to Max Thurian:
You
would have us understand that the doctrine of Vatican
II...is favorable to a call to the kind of "reconciliation"
that would not require Protestants to totally abandon
their Church. But this would mean leaving the definition
of the words "reconciliation," "require,"
"abandon," and "Church" in the greatest
confusion. It would also suggest interpretations whose
dogmatic consequences would be endless, interpretations
that would go against every Catholic tradition....On
the day that the Church founded by Peter should officially
adopt the underlying thesis of "double adherence,"
She would simply cease to exist, having admitted the equality
of Her doctrines with the various reformed doctrines,
thereby rejecting the very idea of orthodoxy; at that
point the [schismatic] Eastern Church could justifiably
consider Her to be heretical.9
Canisius
Courrier
de Rome, October 1994
N.B.
Recently, Max Thurian has been appointed as an adviser for
the Congregation for the Clergy (cf. L 'Osservatore Romano,
February 20, 1994).
FOOTNOTES
1.
Présent from May 19, 1988: "Max Thurian,
prête catholique...et toujours pasteur Protestant"
("Max Thurian, Catholic Priest,...and still Protestant
Minister"); SÌ SÌ NO NO, June
15, 1988, p.8; September 30, 1988, p.2; January 15, 1989,
p.8. The ordination in Naples by Card. Ursi on May 3, 1987,
was only made known on May 11, 1988.
2.
sì sì no no a. X. n°16. "The
Indult?"
3.
Rousselot, "L'influence de Taizé" in Palestra
del Clero, October 1, 1986, pp.1194-1207; see also F.
Spadafora, Fuori della Chiesa non c'è salvezza,
Krinon, ed., 1988, pp.91-99.
4.
J.L. Gonzales-Balado, Le défi de Taizé,
Editions du Seuil, 1977, p.13.
5.
Ibid., p.60.
6.
La Documentation catholique, April 18, 1976, p.370.
1a.
Présent from May 19, 1988: "Max Thurian,
prête catholique...et toujours pasteur Protestant"
("Max Thurian, Catholic Priest,...and still Protestant
Minister"); SÌ SÌ NO NO, June
15, 1988, p.8; September 30, 1988, p.2; January 15, 1989,
p.8. The ordination in Naples by Card. Ursi on May 3, 1987,
was only made known on May 11, 1988.
7.
On the subject of Protestants adhering to the Catholic Church
without renouncing their Protestantism, see Courrier
de Rome, n°90 (290) of March 1988: "Taizé:
use apostasie sous couvert de bons sentiments"
8.
Courrier de Rome n°147 (337) of June 1993: "Urs
von Balthasar, le père de l'apostasie oecuménique,"
p.3.
9.
Nova et Vetera (periodical), Geneva, July 1975, cit.
by Fr. Spadafora in Fuori della Chiesa non c'è
salvezza, Krinon, ed., 1988, Caltanisetta, p.99.
Courtesy of the Angelus
Press, Kansas City, MO 64109
translated from the Italian
Fr. Du Chalard
Via Madonna degli Angeli, 14
Italia 00049 Velletri (Roma)
|
