Edward Pentin reprinted Fr. Bux’s interview on the Modern Mass after it was removed by Blogspot when they took down the entire “Mass in Latin” blog based in Italy.
Here it is, which I copy and paste from Edward Pentin:
In his interview with Messa in Latino, whose Italian text is now accessible on Fede e Cultura’s website, Father Bux shares his reaction to the revelations of the survey results, discusses his appeal, made in his book, to Pope Leo XIV to lift restrictions on the TLM, and shares his ideas on how liturgical peace can be restored to the Church.
***
MiL: Father Bux, you describe the post-conciliar liturgical reform as a clear deviation from the genuine intentions of Vatican II and Sacrosanctum Concilium. In your opinion, what was the gravest mistake in implementing the reform?
FR BUX: Placing the participation of the faithful—now seen as a “right”—above the rights of God, who by His Presence makes it possible for us to enter into relationship with Him. This is divine worship, cultivating our relationship with the Lord. The liturgy is “sacred” for this reason; otherwise it becomes mere public ceremony, subject to display, spectacle, or entertainment—what in America is called “litur-tainment.”
MiL: You say that the liturgy has become a “battlefield.” Do you think this conflict will persist, or do you foresee possible peace in the Church’s liturgical life?
FR BUX: Article 22c of Vatican II’s Liturgical Constitution warns that absolutely no one, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything. We must abandon the idea that the sacred liturgy is at our disposal; it comes from above and is to be served, not “animated”—the Holy Spirit animates it, not us. There must be a “liturgical code,” already foreseen in the pre-conciliar reform, with precise penalties for infractions. The scholar Daniele Nigro wrote about this in I diritti di Dio “The Rights of God” (Sugarco 2012, with a preface by Cardinal Burke). Those who advocate deformations in the Novus Ordo are not without sin, but neither are those of the Vetus Ordo proponents who do not adhere to the latest edition of the Roman Missal of 1962, as prescribed by Benedict XVI’s motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. Only by observing order can peace come, also liturgical peace.
MiL: In your book, you speak of the Real Presence of Christ in traditional dogmatic terms: “true, real, substantial”. What do you see as the greatest threat today to the faithful’s belief in this central mystery?
FR BUX: It’s not just a threat but a widespread reality: the reduction of the Sacrament—Most Holy—to a convivial symbol or common food. He, the Lord, is “the medicine of immortality” and must be adored before being consumed. The delicate medicines are not taken but received with the utmost care. This is essential to faith in the Eucharist, more important than catechesis on Communion.
MiL: You quote the words of Benedict XVI: “What was sacred to previous generations remains sacred and great for us too”. How do you respond to those who see the traditional liturgy as a symbol of ideological opposition to the Pope and Council?
FR BUX: Instrumentalization by individuals or groups exists but is not prevalent. Instead, there is a renewal of the Sacred—the Lord’s Presence—in people’s hearts (adoration, Communion on the tongue, silence, vocations...). Visit countries where Benedict XVI’s motu proprio was prudently implemented and you’ll see this. The patience of charity in obedience to the Church has prevailed.
MiL: You speak in your book of the “Messa spezzatino” (the “stewed Mass”), the result of the linguistic and symbolic fragmentation of the current liturgy. What practical measures would restore coherence and a sense of the sacred to the Mass?
FR BUX: Above all we must focus on Christ, which in the Eastern Liturgies is achieved by turning to the East, from where He came, comes, and will come. This cosmic and eschatological dimension is key to divine worship. The orientation of the priest ad Deum (towards God), towards the Cross, especially from the Offertory to Communion, is crucial in restoring the lost vertical dimension. Orientation matters more than Latin, though Latin remains vital for perception of the “sacred” in worship, especially in the Eucharistic Prayer and other priestly prayers.
MiL: What, in your view, was the mentality behind Pope Francis’s Motu Proprio?
FR BUX: A contradiction: he praised the mystery in Eastern liturgies but refused to see that the ancient Roman rite, the greatest of Western rites, parallels the Byzantine in the East and responds to faith crises in the West—sparking evangelization, resisting sects in Latin America, encouraging conversions, adult baptisms, family life, religious life, and vocations. Pope Francis fell victim to his own “anti-clericalism.”
MiL: Why, in your view, did Francis provide false reasons for issuing Traditionis Custodes?
FR BUX: Ideological prejudice, a psychiatric problem? In Buenos Aires they know. His will was law. Courtiers are always to be found, collaborators less so.
MiL: In your appeal [to Pope Leo XIV], you ask for a return to the celebration of the Traditional Mass without restrictions, as essentially provided for in the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. How do you address concerns that returning to an unrestricted traditional Mass would undermine papal authority or create division in the Church?
FR BUX: The Church is circumdata varietate (surrounded by variety): thanks to the Holy Spirit, many rites exist, so what’s there to fear? It seems Pope Leo holds this vision. The authority of the Pope and Bishop lies in promoting and synthesizing charisms for the Church’s mission, does it not?
MiL: You write that “the Catholic Church is not an absolute monarchy”.
How does your proposal harmonize with the principle of hierarchical obedience that characterizes the Church?
FR BUX: For sixty years, the ancient Roman rite has survived every attempt at suppression: we should apply Gamaliel’s principle [as presented in the New Testament (Acts 5:38-39), the principle suggests that if a movement or idea is of human origin, it will eventually fail, but if it is of divine origin, it cannot be stopped, and attempting to do so would be fighting against God.] If it were merely the work of man, wouldn’t it have already vanished? What if the Lord is using it as an instrument for the reform of His Church?
MiL: You refer to synodality as a principle that is invoked but not respected. In what sense do you believe that transparency and collegiality have been betrayed in the current liturgical and doctrinal management?
FR BUX: Synodality is a style of collegiality—it sets in motion the Church’s four marks: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, and is subject to them. Authority is exercised in various ways: ultimately, the priest in the community, the bishop in the diocese, and the pope in the universal Church—otherwise, the Church becomes a parliamentary assembly. Those who conceived Traditionis Custodes and its annexes didn’t practice synodality. Not only that, they also falsified the synodality manifested by the bishops in their responses to the questionnaire. Regarding “sins against synodality,” a mea culpa is needed and a gradual return to the previous state. The whole Church would benefit from it.
