+- The Catacombs (https://thecatacombs.org)
+-- Forum: Catholic Resistance (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+---- Forum: Sermons and Conferences (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=57)
+---- Thread: Archbishop Lefebvre 1988: Stupefied by the Lack of Resistance (/showthread.php?tid=4971)
Archbishop Lefebvre 1988: Stupefied by the Lack of Resistance - Stone - 03-10-2023
Archbishop Lefebvre: Stupefied by the Lack of Resistance
Spiritual Conference, Econe, 8 October, 1988
Adapted from here
Spiritual Conference, Econe, 8 October, 1988
Adapted from here
What would the Archbishop think about the current betrayal of the SSPX, and especially about the lack of resistance against those who are actively trying to place the SSPX under the authority of Conciliar and modernist authorities? The following spiritual conference the Archbishop gave in 1988 gives us the answer in no uncertain terms: "lamentable", "stupefied", "really sad"..
And so we must also pray for all those who are hesitating or who are troubled in the current situation!
For us, there is no problem, as we are always in the framework of the Society, in the framework of the Church of all time, in fidelity to the Church of all time. But there certainly are [problems] for those who, as for example the monks of Le Barroux or the nuns of Le Barroux, many who are anguished or who are struggling to make a decision.
I also think of all those people in parishes who are hesitating. There is the case of the Guitton parish, and, I don’t know if it’s true, of Marly, of Port-Marly. So, for a certain number of people, they are wondering what they should do, whether they should leave the parish, to leave, to resist, to try to change the priest, whatever, it’s proving a real problem for them.
I don’t know for sure, but there’s a rumor it’s the same in Versaillles. I must admit that I doubt this a little bit because of two letters Canon Porta wrote me after the consecrations, assuring me of his fidelity. I’d be very, very surprised if it is true. There, that would cause some problems for all those who go to Notre-Dame-des-Armées, which is quite an important group. Will these questions and hesitations also arise for Wagram? It’s not certain. There may well be some hesitations in this area too.
So really, we must pray for all those faithful who are faced with difficult problems, even though no doubt most of them are with us, follow us and have no intention at all of leaving the Society. But faced with priests who are kind of abandoning them, and who are encouraging them to put themselves under the modernist authority of bishops, this is quite serious, obviously, and this poses a serious problem.
So if we have the opportunity either to correspond or to have contact with people who are in this situation, let us not be afraid to help them make courageous and firm decisions : we must remain in the Church of all time. There’s no question of us wavering.
No doubt you’ve all read the article in ‘Si Si No No’, which luckily was translated for ‘Courier De Rome’, which shows quite well that it is not just since today we’ve had to make these choices. It’s not just since the consecrations. It is since the Council! This article, ‘Neither Schismatic, Nor Excommunicated’ is in my opinion quite well written. In fact, this evening I received a letter from the Dom Putti’s nuns who take care of the publication of ‘Si Si No No’, in which they told me that this same article was fortunately a real big success. They gave me the example of a person of the village of Gênes who asked them for 1500 copies, which he all distibruted. I think it was written in a most admirable way, if you ask me. It really summarizes our position right from the start. It justified our position from the start right up to and including the consecrations, giving the reasons for the consecrations and resolving the difficulties one may have on this subject. It’s admirable and I find this a really extraordinary article.
So when they said at the start, effectively, Catholics are torn apart, it is really like that of course. This is how they put it:
Quote:Thus, to take a few examples, he has to choose between St. Pius X's encyclical Pascendi which condemns modernism and the present openly modernist ecclesiastical orientation. He has to choose between the monitum from the Holy Office in 1962, condemning the works of the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin and the present ecclesiastical trend, which does not hesitate to quote these works, even in papal speeches. He has to choose between the already defined invalidity of Anglican ordinations and the present-day ecclesiastical orientation in pursuance of which, in 1982, a Roman pontiff, for the first time, took part in an Anglican rite in the Canterbury Cathedral and jointly blessed the crowd with the lay primate of this heretical and schismatic sect. He has to choose between the ex cathedra condemnation of Martin Luther and the present ecclesiastical trend which, "celebrating" the 5th centenary of the birth of the German heretic, declared in a letter signed by His Holiness, John Paul II, that today, thanks to the "common researches made by Catholic and Protestant scholars ...has appeared the deep religiosity of Luther."
And a little further..
Quote:He has to choose between the historical truth of the Gospels and the present ecclesiastical orientation. He has to choose between the Holy Scripture which declares the Jews unbelievers "by hatred of God," according to the Gospel, and the present ecclesiastical orientation which, in the speech of the first pope to visit the synagogue in Rome, discovers in the Jews, still unbelievers, "the elder brothers" of ignorant Catholics.
And so, I think that is exactly how it is, one must choose. There’s nothing else to do. We must choose the faith of all time. That is why I think, as in the declaration I had the opportunity to make after the first visit of these Belgian prelates who came in 1974, on the 11 November, and as in the declaration I had to make on the 21 November, saying : “We choose eternal Rome. We don’t want modernist Rome. We don’t want the new Rome, which is modernist.” That is what I said!
So, for us this poses no problem, I’d say because we find ourselves in a framework that allows us to do that [i.e. make these choices]. But among all these poor faithful who are pulled to the left and to the right, there are some who are truly troubled, it’s really serious!
It is sad to think that all these monks and nuns who went back to Le Barroux or to the Benedictines went back precisely because they made this choice. They did not return to modernist monasteries, who are under the Conciliar Church, who are under this modernist Church. They expressly chose Le Barroux in order to remain with Tradition, to remain with the Faith of all time. And now, they put them under the authority of the Conciliar Church. So we are really stupefied to think that, despite the things they surely see, and despite what they surely know, no.. they stay! They don’t make this decision to move on or to found another monastery, or to demand the resignation of Dom Gérard so he can be replaced, no, nothing.. they just obey.
That was also the case with Fontgombault, where Dom Roy has accepted the new mass. It was the case with Dom Augustin, who also accepted the new mass. And on it goes.. with Randol, and Jouques, the Benedictines of Jouques, these Benedictines who are very close to Tournaye. And it is lamentable to see with what ease a monastery that was with Tradition is placed under the authority of Conciliar and modernist authorities. And the whole world is quiet. It’s a pity and really sad to see this.
As for us, we rejoice when we see such clear articles as the one in ‘Courier De Rome’, which can really open the eyes of the faithful and give them the courage to resist and to persevere.
Likewise it is with the declaration which the good Father Thomas Aquinas made. Truly, his declaration is included in the little journal which our Swiss colleagues have started. Well, the statement is there and I note especially what it says here, and which is very clear:
Quote:We don’t follow Msgr. de Castro Meyer or Msgr. Lefebvre as ringleaders. We follow the Catholic Church. And at this moment, these two confessors are the only bishops who are against the auto demolition of the Church. It is not possible for us to disassociate ourselves from them. And so it is now as it was in the fourth century during the time of Arianism, when it was a sign of orthodoxy to be in communion with Athanasius.
That is very true. He is right, it shows the reason for the choice he made. Fortunately, there are at least a few monks who managed to escape the clutches of the Conciliar Church.
Then of course there are those who, like Dom Gérard and his Sisters, says:
Quote:But we haven’t changed in any way, there is no change with us. We continue the same office, the same liturgy, the same laws. What change is there in us ? Why are you disturbed ? There is no reason, we continue as we always have. We just continue under a different authority.
There is the danger! This other authority really exists. And she has already made herself felt. It is enough to look up in this same journal the declaration of the Archbishop of Lyons. That much is clear, when he concludes:
Quote:Let’s help one another along this road, to remain firmly attached to the second Vatican Council, to the whole Council, which is part of the Traditions of the Church. Let us carry on our apostolic work with full confidence. Let us give our best to announce the gospel, that is the essential part. That is the objective of our diocesan Synod, whose preparation will start in October.
The diocesan Synod, which will regulate the relations between the diocese and the monastery! And what will be the guidelines that will be given at that point in time ? That’s something we will have to find out. It’s all well to say that nothing has changed, but let’s wait a little bit.
So, we did not have to wait long for the decisions they took, for example those in regard to Fr. Bissig and Fr. Baumann. You know, they both used to be.., one was rector of a seminary and the other vice-rector. They were professors for a good number of years. They have taken our seminarians, they gathered them up, they guard them and they look out for them. We should believe they are not as bad as that? And then, in this seminary that is to be erected, how is this going to work in this seminary that, in principle, is supposed to remain with Tradition ? This seminary will need to make a pilgrimage to Igraspa, which is right on the border between Austria and Germany. And during this pilgrimage they will only celebrate the new mass, completely submitted to the bishop of Augsburg, and the professors and rector of the seminary will be diocesan priests, instead of Fr. Bisig and Fr. Baumann, who themselves will have to attend [the seminary] for a year and then pass an exam with the bishop in order to take up their assignment, if they get one at all! Can they not see this coming? This is exactly the stranglehold, not just on the formation, a formation which will be given by priests who are clearly Conciliar, of the Conciliar Church, but also on the liturgy. They will be forced to submit to the new liturgy. What will these seminarians do then? Will they accept all that, just like that ? Incredible ! They won’t say : “O, nothing has changed, nothing has changed..” So wherever possible, the Conciliar Church will immediately subject them to obedience to the Conciliar Church.
Obviously, with Dom Gérard it seems to be more difficult, more delicate. They don’t want to move too fast, because they know that if they went a little too hard and too fast, maybe they would cause the monastery to go back, and that would mean a step backwards. So they proceed skilfully, gently, a little bit at a time. What will probably happen, is that they will tell you:
Quote:“You must accept that the priests who will come on retreat with you, the diocesan priests, that they will be allowed to say the new mass, obviously, because they are used to the new mass. There’s no question about that. Then, when these diocesan priests present themselves to you for communion in the hand, we’ll permit them to receive communion in the hand in all the diocesan parishes. We don’t see why, now that you are part of the diocese and now that you share in the pastoral work, why you should be able to refuse communion in the hand to these diocesans who present themselves to you."
What will they do then, at that point, these monks of Le Barroux? Well, they will probably do what Dom Augustin did, accept. They now give communion in the hand at Dom Augustin’s. That’s how it is, there’s nothing they can do about it. This transfer of authority, that’s what’s grave, that’s what makes this really serious. It is not enough to say: “we haven’t changed on a practical level”. It’s this transfer [of authority] which is very serious because the intention of these authorities is to destroy Tradition. It is clear, the destruction of Tradition. We can’t do that. "Everyone must submit", this is what Cardinal Ratzinger very clearly said in an interview with the Frankfurt paper. He said: “It is inadmissible that there are Catholics who don’t submit to the thoughts of the whole of the episcopate.” That much is clear.
So let us pray for these brave people who need to make some decisions, that they may be firm and that they keep the faith.