An Interview with His Excellency, Bishop Rifan

A very candid conversation with the traditional Bishop of the Diocese of Campos

By John Grasmeier
Angelqueen.org
April, 2006

I recently received a call from our "French Connection", who contributes greatly to Angelqueen.org but still wishes to remain anonymous. From this point forward we'll refer to him as "FC". FC often calls just to chat, but just as often the purpose of his contact goes beyond friendly conversation. This was one of those times.

Recently, Bishop Rifan has spent some time in Europe where he gave several semi-private and public talks. It was at one of these talks in France that FC  - having an uncanny knack for being in the right place at the right time - managed to strike up a conversation with His Excellency and build enough rapport in a short period of time to convince the good bishop to agree to an exclusive interview with AQ.

After FC informed me of the development, I gave it some thought and told him that although I appreciated His Excellency's generosity, if the interview was to occur, I wasn't about to toss him a bunch of softballs for him to hit out of the park. Of course I would be kind and give due respect to Bishop Rifan, but there were many lingering questions I and other traditionalists would like for him to answer. FC agreed this was the correct approach.

After some further discussion with FC and getting input from him on what type of questions he felt should be asked, I put together the interview. After reading though it however, I feared that because some of the questions touched on delicate and controversial topics, that His Excellency would become angry or perhaps immediately send my email to his "deleted items" folder. This turned out not to be the case.

Very shortly (literally hours) after I somewhat apprehensively hit the "send" button in my email program, I received a kind reply directly from the good bishop himself, blessing me and thanking me for the opportunity to be interviewed. No auto-responders or assistants, and no hesitation whatsoever to tackle the interview. I was impressed.

When I got the interview back from Bishop Rifan, I realized that he not only answered every question posed to him, but he answered them thoroughly and with due care. Although he is a very busy man, he took the necessary time to give an excellent interview. At times, he is plucky and direct, but honest and forthcoming.

Enjoy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

AQ: You recently gave several talks in Europe, one attended by several hundred people. What was the purpose of your trip? Did you find it fruitful? 

Bishop Rifan: Three things:
       
1) The purpose of my trip
2) The message of my conferences
3) The contacts and fruits.

The purpose
I have some friends there – priests who just fixed their irregular canonical situation, and they invited me to help them with some suggestions or advise regarding the path to follow. I accepted this invitation as a way of being charitable with them, as the Holy Father Benedict XVI told me during the meeting I had with him. What he had told me as a cardinal – is that the Campos Apostolic Administration is an example for all the groups attached to traditional liturgy, on how to maintain liturgical tradition in communion within the Church. Cardinal Castrillon encouraged me this visit. The pope told me he is happy with the peace in Campos, between the local diocese and his bishop and us. Cardinal Castrillon told me that the existence of Campos and the life of the Apostolic Administration, with its independent churches and proper rite, in perfect co-living with the local diocese – unity in diversity – shows that this is possible. I think demonstrating that co-living is possible is a useful point both for progressives and for traditionalists. For progressives believe such is not possible, fearing unity of Church would be undermined if they open the door for traditionalists, and traditionalists fear the may loose their identity with this co-existence. No! Peace is possible with liturgical diversity, disciplinary diversity and of course fidelity to doctrine.

The message
A newspaper in France surmised my visit by writing: “Mgr Rifan appealed to unity and warned traditionalists against radicalism and fundamentalism.” I spoke about how we must adhere to the Magisterial Church and I insisted on the necessity of communion with Hierarchy and the “sensus Ecclesia”. I warned them against mixing political issues and liturgical matters. Speaking about the crisis, I explained it brought wrong to the progressives – and to traditionalists as well.

I said that if I were to speak to progressives I would repeat what Cardinal Ratzinger said once: “While there are many motives that might have led a great number of people to seek a refuge in the traditional liturgy, the chief one is that they find the dignity of the sacred preserved there. After the Council there were many priests who deliberately raised 'desacralization' to the level of a program... they have despoiled the churches as much as they could of that splendor which brings to mind the sacred...” (Cardinal Ratzinger's Conférence to the Bishops of Chile, June 13, 1988). That is to say: you, progressives, you are guilty of the lack of sacred and of the generalized desacralization in the Church. You are guilty of the traditionalist phenomenon.

But since I spoke mainly for traditionalists, I first spoke about the great qualities of traditionalists groups, of their great love for the Church, their zeal for sacred, and so on; traditionalists are “those who do not look to the liturgy for a spiritual show-master but for the encounter with the living God in whose presence all the "doing" becomes insignificant since only this encounter is able to guarantee us access to the true richness of being.” (Card. Ratzinger – for Claus Gamber)

But for the sake of truth, I also collected of the seven capital sins of the traditionalists, that is temptations and dangers where they can fall in, and sometimes do fall:

1. Pride – feeling like we have some exclusive and personal knowledge of truth, cultic idea that we are the only Catholics, the Church’s savers.

2. Systematic lack of charity - “See how they hate each other” That’s the contrary of what pagans said about the first Christians. The art of changing one’s friends into enemies. The spirit of division.

3. Rash judgement - Spirit of suspicion. Conspiracy theory.

4. Scandalmongering – Criticism as a sytem. Ministery of criticism.

5. Spirit of dispute - Systematic disobedience. Independence toward hierarchy and Church’s Magister.
 

6. Cultish group spirit - "no salvation outside of us”.
 

7. Pessimism - against Christian hope (In spe gaudentes). To some point, satisfaction with the anormality of one’s situation - and with  errors by the human part of the Church – like if this could justify one’s own position.

Contacts and fruits
I asked to meet with - as I usually do - the bishops of the dioceses I would be visiting. This was also a way of indicating to traditionalists the necessity of communion. Hence, I visited Mgr Vingt-Trois in Paris, Cardinal Ricard in Bordeaux, I had lunch with Mgr Pansard in Chartres and I was received by the nuncio in Paris. They all treated me like a brother. Mgr Vingt-Trois wrote me afterward very kindly: “I heard good reports on your stay and I thank you for the ecclesial words you spoke to the auditories. We pursue our pastoral effort at the service of communion and we put our efforts under the intercession of the Most Holy Virgin. I received many good repercussions of my talks. Many, many traditionalists have appreciated my conferences. I have spoken the truth of my convictions. I think I did my duty even if I could not please everybody. 

AQ: Could you explain what the difference is between an Apostolic Administration as exists in Campos and a Sacerdotal Society like the SSPX or the FSSP? 

Bishop Rifan: An Apostolic Administration, as exists in Campos, is not a group or a religious society or congregation, but is a normal and official ecclesiastical circumscription of the Catholic Church, the same as a Diocese or a Prelature or an Ordinariat, that is, a particular church, part of the Universal and unique Catholic Church. Because of that the Bishop of the Apostolic Administration has the same power as an diocesan bishop, in his jurisdiction.

AQ: As a traditionalist Bishop, how is your relationship with the other Brazilian bishops? Have you run into any political problems or other issues that may stem from your unique status? 

Bishop Rifan: As a catholic bishop in full communion with the catholic church, I have good relationships with the other Brazilian bishops. I am present in all of the bishop's meetings and I receive all the consultations as would any other bishop while conserving my peculiarity and individuality, primarily regarding the traditional liturgy. The bishops respect this independence and this peculiarity of our proper rite, as the Holy See erected it. And because of this good relationship, we have many dioceses outside of Campos which now allow the traditional Mass.  

AQ: Since the establishment of the apostolic administration in Campos, do you feel at all stifled in communicating your thoughts regarding the direction of Holy Mother Church, the Novus Ordo liturgy and traditional Catholicism? 

Bishop Rifan: No. I don’t feel at all stifled in my right of criticizing everything wrong in the Church. We are limited only by catholic doctrine or theology. This right is placed expressly in our declaration, according the Canon 212 of the Canon Law.  

AQ: Do you have any authority outside of the diocese of Campos? Would you be able to administer confirmations in the United States or any other country? If so, what conditions would have to be met? 

Bishop Rifan: I have jurisdiction in the full territory of the Diocese of Campos. My jurisdiction is cumulative with one of our Diocesan Bishop, with the difference that mine is personal and his is territorial. Outside of my diocese, as every any bishop, in order to minister sacraments I would need the approval of the local bishop. This is the way I have administered the sacrament of confirmation and the sacrament of holy orders in several other dioceses, in Brazil and elsewhere.  

AQ: Your relationship with the SSPX was quite friendly before the Campos reconciliation, not long after it became less friendly. How would you describe your relationship with the Society currently, in particular with Bishop Fellay?

Bishop Rifan: We were together during the conversations with the Holy See in order to regularize our canonic situation; We were even invited by them and were very grateful to them for this. When the Holy See offered them and us an Apostolic Administration they refused, and we in good conscience couldn’t refuse this offer, or more to the point this explicit will of the Holy Father. After that, they began to attack us. They removed our Masses from the list of the Traditional Mass in the world. I sent an invitation to my Episcopal consecration to the four bishops of the SSPX and they refused. I offered many times myself in order to help them in order to get a canonical regularization, and they refused. This month, during my visit in France, a friend invited one of their Bishops to speak with me and he refused, saying that it was not necessary. So, I continue to pray for them.  

AQ: If a Catholic lives in an area where a Novus Ordo church and an SSPX chapel are the same distance from his home, where would you advise this person to attend Mass?  

Bishop Rifan: The attendance to the Sunday Mass is an obligation for every catholic. For me, of course, the Traditional Mass is better than the Novus Ordo Mass, so I guide people to the Traditional Mass. But the Novus Ordo Mass is a valid catholic Mass, of course. The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei stated that attendance at Mass in an SSPX chapel is valid. The problem is the ambience. In the Novus Ordo, the modernist ambience must be considered and in some cases avoided. In the SSPX, the anti-roman ambiance must be considered and in some cases avoided. It depends on each case. As someone said me in Rome, the problem is not the rite, the problem is the sermon!

AQ: There exists a document called “62 Reasons Why One cannot, In Good Faith, Attend The Novus Ordo”, published by “Padres de Campos” (Fathers of Campos). Most of these priests are now under your charge. Would you consider the “62 Reasons” a document that the faithful should take to heart?

Bishop Rifan: There not exists this document, signed by nobody. There exists a list of reasons against the Novus Ordo, created many years ago, collected by a priest of Campos from many different sources. This document is not official. The reasons must be considered each one, and its authority depends of the document from where they have been collected. Most of these reasons are really artificial, saying, for instance, about the apostasy of priests, etc, with no necessary causal relationship with the Novus Ordo.

We can have critics against the Novus Ordo, but inside the limits allowed by the catholic doctrine and by the Magisterium of the Church. 

AQ: It has been said that you concelebrated a Novus Ordo Mass on September 8, 2004 in Brazil. What was your role at the Mass? Were you at all disturbed by anything that went on at the Mass? 

Bishop Rifan: In this day, September 8, 2004, it was a great feast of the centenary of the Coronation of the Patroness of Brazil, Our Lady Aparecida, for which all bishops of Brazil were invited, with a official representation of the Brazilian Government,  and so I judged necessary to be present, mainly to show our public devotion to Our Lady, attacked by the protestant sects in Brazil. I have not concelebrated sacramentally: I was only present with the Episcopal ornaments, as the catholic Bishops (only the Anglican bishops, sometimes present by courtesy, use the coral vests, without ornaments, because they cannot concelebrate). But if I had concelebrated I would not have committed any sin, of course. I don’t understand this scandal made about it, as I had committed a very big sacrilege.

But I think that the best answer of this question is already done by our spokesman, with my agreement, as follows:           

NOTE ON THE PARTICIPATION IN MASS CELEBRATED IN THE RITE OF PAUL VI:  

Some persons have questioned the occasional participation of Dom Fernando and some of his priests in Masses celebrated in the Rite of Paul VI.            

Dom Fernando is a Catholic bishop, member of the Catholic episcopate, in communion with the Holy Father the Pope.  Thus, like every Catholic bishop, even those of a different rite, he must demonstrate this full communion practically.           

No one can be Catholic while remaining in an attitude of refusal of communion with the Pope and with the Catholic episcopate.  In fact, the Church defines as schismatic those who refuse to submit to the Roman Pontiff or to remain in communion with the other members of the Church who are his subjects (canon 751).  Now, to refuse continually and explicitly to participate in every and any Mass in the rite celebrated by the Pope and by all the bishops of the Church while judging this rite, in itself, incompatible with the Faith, or sinful, represents a formal refusal of communion with the Pope and with the Catholic episcopate. 

The objective fact cannot be denied that the rite of Paul VI is the official rite of the Latin Church, celebrated by the Pope and by all the Catholic episcopate.  

If we consider the New Mass in itself, in theory or in practice, as invalid or heretical, sacrilegious, heterodox, sinful, illegitimate or not Catholic, we would have to hold the theological conclusions of this position and apply them to the Pope and the entire episcopate residing in the world -- that is, the whole teaching Church:  that the Church has officially promulgated, maintained for decades, and offers every day to God an illegitimate and sinful worship -- a proposition condemned by the Magisterium -- and that, therefore, the gates of hell have prevailed against her, which would be a heresy.  Or else we would be adopting the sectarian principle that we alone are the Church, and outside of us there is no salvation, which would be another heresy.  A Catholic, either in theory or in practice, cannot accept these positions.           

Our participation, therefore, is based on doctrinal principles.  And it does not mean that we do not have reservations about the new rite, as we have already respectfully brought to the attention of the Holy See.  Neither does our participation signify approval of everything that may happen.  To be united to the hierarchy of the Church and in perfect communion with her does not mean approval of many errors that grow in the bosom of the Holy Church, provoked by her human part.  And, of course, we lament profoundly with the Holy Father that the Liturgical Reform has given room for "ambiguities, liberties, creativities, adaptations, reductions and instrumentalizations" (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, n. 10.52.61) and also has given "origin to many abuses and led in a certain way to the disappearance of the respect due to the sacred" (Cardinal Edouard Gagnon, Offerten Situng -- Roemisches, nov.dez. 1993, p. 35).  Above all, we reject every profanation of the Liturgy, for example the Masses in which the "Liturgy degenerates into a 'show,' where one is tempted to make religion interesting with the help of silly changes in fashion...with momentary successes for the group of liturgical fabricators", as Cardinal Ratzinger criticized (Introduction to the book La Réforme Liturgique by Mgr. Klaus Gamber, p. 6).           

For all these reasons, we preserve the venerable rite of St. Pius V, but "cum Petro et sub Petro", in full communion. 

Pe. Gaspar Samuel Coimbra Pelegrini

Spokesman of the Apostolic Administration 

Perhaps, another question, linked to that, is why we conserve and celebrate the Traditional Mass, what are the thru reasons. Because of that, I think it is good to add this explanation, I published in our bulletin: 

Why do we love, preserve and prefer the classic liturgical form of Roman rite,  The Traditional Mass? 

Would it be only because we are nostalgic or sentimentally attached to past forms of liturgy? Only this reason would be not enough.

Would it be because we deny the power of the Pope to modify and promulgate liturgical laws? It would be against supreme Pope’s power dogma! 

Would it be because we just consider the New Mass, or Paul VI’s Mass, invalid, heterodox, sinful, sacrilegious or not catholic? These statements would be against Church’s indefectibility dogma and unity of cult dogma, and they have already received the Teaching Church’s anathema, so it is an universal liturgical law, promulgated by Church’s supreme authority 34 years ago and adopted unanimously by the whole Teaching Church. 

The real reasons are: 

for a question of better and more precise expression of our Faith in Eucharistic dogmas,

for safety, for protection against abuses,

for the good of whole Church, in contribution for liturgical crisis’ reform,

for wealth and solemnity of rites,

for better precision and rigidity of rubrics (giving no space to “ambiguities, liberties, creativities, adaptations, reductions and instrumentalizations”, as complains the Pope – Ecclesia of Eucharistia, n. 10, 52, 61),

for the sense of sacredness,

more wealth and precision of prayers’ formulas, in reverence,

for personal and ritual humility,

for elevation and nobility of ceremonies,

for respect, beauty, good taste, piety, sacred language, tradition

and legitimate right recognized by Church’s Supreme Authority. 

AQ: Your Lordship’s final message.

Bishop Rifan: I think that the present crisis is mainly a crisis of Faith, of Hope and or Charity. Lack of Faith in the Church, in his divinity and indefectibility – to look too much the human part or the Church, forgetting his divine part. Because of that, lack of hope and, consequently lack of love of God, lack of love for the Church as our family and lack of charity for the brothers. Prayer and spirit of Faith, this is the solution.