Caught In The Lie

(reprinted from the Fall 1996 issue of Latin Mass magazine - the underlined words were added for clarification)

The Society of St. Pius the Tenth is at it again (have they ever stopped?). It resorts to lies and distortions to try to create an image of itself as being composed of Catholics in good standing rather than the schismatics and neo-heretics they are. What follows is self-explanatory, but I've added the address for Fr. Scott in case you'd like to ask him some questions about this. Do let me know if you get a response will you?

The following letter was sent on June 14, 1996, by Fr. Gerald Murray to the US District Superior of the Society of St. Pius X, Fr. Peter R. Scott, of the traditionalist order founded by the late excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. It was written to protest misstatements and to correct misquotations of Fr. Murray's remarks to us (Latin Mass magazine) in the Fall 1995 issue. That issue, together with the Summer 1996 issue in which Fr. Murray changes his position is still available. Place orders to: Back Issues, Latin Mass Magazine, Subscription Department, 1331 Red Cedar Circle, Fort Collins, CO 80524. Cost:$6.50 each, $3.25 a piece if ordering 5 or more copies.

Fr. Peter R. Scott, District Superior

c/o Regina Coeli House

2918 Tracy Avenue

Kansas City, MO 64109

Phone: 816-753-0073, Fax: 816-753-3560

June 14, 1996

I was recently sent a copy of your pamphlet, "Is the Society of Saint Pius X Schismatic? Excommunicated? Rome Says No." In this publication you make use of modified quotations from my interview in the Fall 1995 issue of The Latin Mass. You have intentionally misquoted me and even put words into my mouth. I shall illustrate this flagrant dishonesty below.

But first some preliminary observations. You state that I have a doctorate in canon law (a J.C.D.). I do not have a J.C.D., and nowhere in my interview do I claim to have this degree. You made that up. You also assert that the Gregorian University, where I completed my license and where I am currently studying for a doctorate in canon law, "says that the Society of Saint Pius X is neither in schism, nor is it excommunicated... and that anyone can fulfill their Sunday obligation by attending the Society's Masses." The Gregorian has not said anything of the sort. The contents and conclusions of my license thesis are my own, not the Gregorian's.

My license thesis was approved and graded solely by my moderator -- who, by the way, did not agree with my conclusions regarding the possible invalidity of the declaration of excommunication issued by the Holy See against Archbishop Lefebvre and the other bishops involved. It was incorrectly reported in The Latin Mass that I successfully defended my thesis, thereby implying a public defense by an academic board, but that is not the case. No such public defense before the canon law faculty is required for a license thesis at the Gregorian (but it is required for a doctoral thesis).

In any event, even supposing a public defense, it should be clear that my thesis is my work, and the Gregorian University as an institution is not the author of my conclusions.

Following the publication of my interview and excerpts from my thesis in The Latin Mass, I have rethought and changed some of my conclusions, and I stated those emendations in a letter to be published in the Summer 1996 issue of the same magazine. I enclose a copy of that letter for your interest.

Now as to the specific fabrications and deceptions in your pamphlet, I include below my actual words from the interview in The Latin Mass, and your falsified version:

1) You say that I said: "I have received a doctorate in canon law and I've studied this topic, the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre, for my doctorate thesis."

I actually said: "I have received a license in canon law and I've studied this topic, the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre, for my license thesis."

2) You say that I said: "They're not excommunicated as schismatics, because the Vatican has never said they are."

I actually said: "They're not excommunicated as schismatic as far as I can see, because the Vatican has never said that they are."

3) You say I said: "...You can...show that Lefebvre himself was not excommunicated and therefore no one else was."

I actually said: "Or you can attempt to show that indeed Lefebvre himself was not excommunicated and therefore no one else was."

4) You say I said: "The Holy See has never stated that mere attendance at a Mass said by a priest in the Society of Saint Pius X constitutes a schismatic act."

I actually said: "As far as I can see the Holy See has never stated that mere attendance at a Mass said by a priest in the Society of Saint Pius X constitutes a schismatic act."

5) You say I said: "Could you go to a Society of Saint Pius X chapel to receive good doctrine? That seems better to me than hearing truly heretical sermons, e.g., denying hell, or that divorced and remarried people could receive Communion."

What I actually said in response to a question from the interviewer ("You're not encouraging people to attend these Masses, but you're simply saying -- and by the way, Cardinal Ratzinger implied this, too, in a press interview -- that just attending that Mass doesn't mean they're schismatic." Ratzinger said he knew people who attend SSPX Masses 'in the conviction that they are still in full communion with the Pope.' He called for an 'attitude...of generosity towards these people, many of whom are anguished. 'So you're on the one hand not advocating that people attend these Masses, but, on the other you're saying that it is not a schismatic act, necessarily") was:

"Let's say that you knew that the priest at your parish was teaching things contrary to the moral law or Catholic doctrine. Let's say he denied the existence of Hell, or taught that divorced and remarried people could receive Communion, and you knew that he was being tolerated by your local bishop. Could you go to an SSPX chapel to receive good doctrine? That seems better to me than hearing truly heretical sermons. I may be wrong, but I think you have a more important right to be at peace in your Faith than to listen to heresy."

You have misquoted me extensively in support of your propagandistic assertions. You naturally ignored my critical remarks directed towards the Society of St. Pius X in the interview.

I cannot expect you to cite what is not in your favor. But I can and do expect you to report my remarks truthfully and completely, and in their proper context, in your publication. Instead, you have fabricated and falsified my remarks. This is thoroughly dishonorable and disreputable. And it is entirely shameful to attempt to legitimize your claims by invoking my wrongly alleged status as a doctor of canon law.

I demand that you withdraw this publication from circulation immediately. To do otherwise is to engage in public lying about what I have said. The public record of my remarks in The Latin Mass contradicts you. You have an obligation in truth and justice not to spread falsehoods, and in particular not to represent me as saying things I did not say, while leaving out the things I did say, but which you wish I had not said.

A refusal to remove this misleading pamphlet from circulation would confirm for me that your misrepresentation of my words was indeed wholly intentional, and that you are remorseless regarding your falsification of my actual statements.

I expect you to do the honorable thing and immediately withdraw this pamphlet. If you refuse to remove this pamphlet from further circulation, I will be compelled to take action to uphold my right to be accurately quoted for publication.

Rev. Gerald E. Murray, Rome, Italy