Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre - Volume II

[Stone]

Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 2, Chapter IX

Predictions of Excommunication
3 July 1977

A number of journals predicted with confidence the impending excommunication of the Archbishop. The 30 June issue of the International Herald Tribune claimed that: "Most observers believe that the Pope must now respond sharply to Mgr. Lefebvre’s challenge, either by excommunicating him or defrocking him as a priest, to preserve papal authority." A similar report was carried in the 30 June edition of the Tribune de Genève. In England The Times had already published an editorial (28 June) predicting somewhat pompously: "It is now evident that the Pope is moving with great reluctance towards the excommunication of Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, the former Archbishop of Dakar." The Paris correspondent of The Daily Telegraph had written in a report published on 27 June: “A warning by the Vatican last week makes it appear that this will be the last straw for Pope Paul. He is expected to excommunicate Monsignor Lefebvre, thereby creating or acknowledging the existence of a schism inside the Church of Rome.”

Subsequent events proved these suggestions to be groundless, nevertheless, it is far from impossible that the threat of excommunication was floated unofficially by the Vatican in an attempt to intimidate the Archbishop into cancelling the ordinations at the last minute.


Mass in a Casino

Volume I of the Apologia included a memorable cri de coeur by Father Henri Bruckberger, 0. P., contrasting the welcome traditionally reserved for newly ordained priests with that accorded to those from Ecône.1 He commented:

It was Cardinal Marty who initiated this contemptible ostracism; at last he has shown himself in his true colors. While all types of liturgical abuses are tolerated in our churches; while one church in Paris is used for Moslem services, it is these young priests alone who find the doors of their parish churches closed in their faces; young priests of Jesus Christ, the anointing oils of the ordination still fresh upon their hands; young priests who bring no threat, but solely their new powers of Consecration. Ousted from their parish churches, they are forced to celebrate Mass in secret as during the Reign of Terror. One blushes with shame at the very thought.

Father Bruckberger's indignation could hardly have been justified more dramatically than when, on 3 July 1977, one of the priests ordained five days previously, had no option but to celebrate his "First Mass" in a casino. Here is the account given in the 4 July 1977 issue of the International Herald Tribune.

Nice, July 3

The Most Rev. Marcel Lefebvre, who is in danger of being excommunicated by the Catholic Church, helped celebrate Mass today before an estimated 3,000 to 4,000 persons in one of the biggest casinos on the Riviera.

“We are a little like the Church of the catacombs,” Archbishop Lefebvre said when asked if he was upset that the Mass was being celebrated in the Palais de la Mediterranée. "We are hunted everywhere. So we are forced to do as the priests during the (French) Revolution who had to hide to say the Mass. We call to our friends. Look at this room. It is almost as beautiful as a cathedral."

The Mass, held five days after the Archbishop ordained fourteen priests in his seminary in Ecône, Switzerland, and celebrated by one of them, the Rev. Jacques Seuillot, took place on the landing at the top of a great staircase in the main hall leading to the gambling rooms.

A closed-circuit television system was installed to allow those in the back of the hall to see the ceremony. Observers said the traditionalists chose the casino, on the Promenade des Anglais, because they wanted to attract a large crowd.

In a 30-minute homily, the Archbishop repeated his attacks on Vatican reforms, ecumenism, and socialism.

“How can one still know the difference between truth and error?" he asked. "It is by questioning and denouncing ecumencial conferences, where one mixes religions and gives the impression that there is no difference between Catholicism and Protestantism.

“We are in total confusion. The holy Catholic Church alone possesses the truth. We are accused of wanting to separate from Rome. This is not true. We are Romans. We ask only of the Pope to be the successor of Peter."

Rightist Tracts

At the conclusion of the Mass, rightist militants, apparently sympathetic with the Archbishop's movement, distributed tracts in the casino.2

The Pope has suspended Archbishop Lefebvre from priestly functions. On his arrival in Nice yesterday, the Archbishop, 71, said he did not think "that the rupture was consummated with Rome. But if that does happen, I will take no account of a decision of excommunication. I don't think the Pope explicitly said that he would excommunicate me. If ever that happens, I'll take no account of it."

15 July 1977
Report in the Catholic Telegraph (U. S. A.)

Anglican bishop 3 and theologian Dr. Arthur Michael Ramsey, former archbishop of Canterbury, has been given an honorary doctorate by the Pontifical University of Salamanca, Spain, in recognition of his theological work and quest for Christian unity. At the recent ceremonies, Dr. Ramsey cited the historic meeting between him and Pope Paul VI in 1966 as the occasion which launched the Anglican- Roman Catholic study commission.

Footnotes
1. pp. 227-231.

2. The Archbishop’s enemies have continually attempted to discredit him by associating him with extreme right wing political movements. This tactic was examined in detail in Vol. I, pp. 256-8. It will suffice to state here that if right-wing groups distribute literature outside buildings in which the Archbishop is celebrating Mass or giving a lecture he is powerless to prevent it. This does not prove that he is fascist any more than the fact that my own bishop took part in an antiracialist protest march with communists and homosexuals proves that he is a communist homosexual.

3. It should not be necessary to point out that Dr. Ramsey was not a bishop, simply a heretical layman-and yet he was awarded an honorary degree by a pontifical university which would certainly not have permitted Mgr. Lefebvre, who is a bishop and a Catholic, to set foot on its campus. This is the Conciliar Church with a vengeance!

[Stone]

Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 2, Chapter X

Predictions of Excommunication
July 1977

The 29 July 1977 edition of the National Catholic Reporter carried the news of the reconsecration of Queen of Angels Church in Dickinson, Texas. The local bishop had sold the building in the belief that it would be demolished to make way for a parking lot. He was extremely indignant when he learned that it was to be used as a church again. Built in the Spanish Colonial style, it had been restored fully to its former beauty, and was reconsecrated by the Archbishop on 10 July 1977. It now forms the center of one of the most successful traditionalist "parishes" in the world, and is also the location of The Angelus Press-the official English-language Publishers and Editor for Archbishop Lefebvre and the International Society of St. Pius X. Hundreds of thousands of books and pamphlets explaining the traditionalist Catholic caused have been printed in Dickinson and distributed throughout the world.

The Reporter article mentioned that: "Lefebvre told his supporters in Dickinson, Texas, that 'they must be careful adopt not to adopt positions of being schismatic-carrying resistance of Vatican policy to the point of denying the jurisdiction o f the Pope over the Church’.”

It then referred to the fact that the Archbishop had been refused entry to Mexico. This incident is not without some ironic humor. According to the Vatican II  Declaration on Religious Liberty the State should not prevent any individual expressing his religious views in public. Indeed, State interference is condemned by this document (see Volume I, Appendix IV). But, according to the Reporter: "A spokesman for Mexico's Interior Ministry said the government consulted on Lefebvre's visit 'with several sectors, especially the Mexican bishops,' according to wire service reports." This report seems to confirm a long article in the 20 July 1977 issue of the French daily L 'Aurore, claiming that the Vatican had launched a massive diplomatic effort to minimize the effect of the Archbishop's visit to South America. It stated that furnished with messages from Cardinal Villot, the Apostolic Nuncios in South America visited governments and national hierarchies demanding that the Archbishop should not be allowed to pass ("Mot d'ordre: Mgr. Lefebvre ne doit pas passer"). The same article also reported a second Vatican campaign, emissaries of the Pope pretending to be sympathetic to the traditionalist cause, had visited Econe, obtained details of seminarians and their families, and then pressured the families into persuading the seminarians to leave.1 It claimed that a dozen had done so.

Mexico was the only country which actually prevented the Archbishop from entering, but difficulties were placed in his way in other countries by the State authorities, and he was subjected to a veritable tirade of abuse from spokesmen for national hierarchies. Some idea of this invective can be gained from a report in The Citizen (Ottawa), 16 August 1977:

Before, during, and after his visit Lefebvre was the target of a hostile barrage from Roman Catholic prelates in Latin America. The friendliest comment came from Argentine Archbishop of Parana, Adolfo Tortolo – a conservative-who said: "Not everything is negative in the demands of Monsignor Lefebvre. But his way of going about things is completely negative."

Other Church leaders were less inhibited. Chilean Cardinal Raul Silva Henriquez said Lefebvre was "a traitor to the Church and to the Pope, a Judas.” Colombian Cardinal Anibal Munoz pronounced: “Those who are loyal to Monsignor Lefebvre are disloyal to the Pope.” The Archbishop of Buenos Aires threatened any priest who let Lefebvre use church facilities with punishment according to Canon Law. A Patagonian bishop said he prayed daily to "God and the Holy Mother to preserve me from such attitudes” as Lefebvre's.

As Lefebvre sailed for home Church authorities prepared the faithful at ports of call. Montevideo Archbishop Carlos Parteli drew up a pastoral letter in which he said Lefebvre was “scandalizing the faithful” with his behavior. Parteli also denounced the use of Latin in the Mass saying: “The Church cannot go on using an archaic language which nobody understands any more.”

In Rio de Janeiro, bishops' conference president, Monsignor Aloisio Lorscheider, himself something of a conservative, fired a parting volley by saying that anyone who takes part in a Mass given by Lefebvre is committing a mortal sin.

It is, then, hardly surprising that many of those who would like to have heard what the Archbishop had to say were browbeaten into staying away.

After visiting Colombia and Brazil, the Archbishop arrived in Chile. The following report appeared in The Times (London) on 19 July 1977:

Santiago, July 18: About 800 people defied the Chilean Roman Catholic hierarchy here last night to hear Mgr. Marcel Lefebvre, the rebel archbishop, celebrate the traditional Latin Mass in the reception room of a luxury hotel.

It ended with shouts of "long live the faithful archbishop" and the singing of the Chilean national anthem.

During the service Mgr. Lefebvre declared: "We cannot change religion. For the last 15 years we have been well aware that there are those who wish change. The heart of the Church remains the same."

The Pope has accused him of provoking a schism in the Church after his refusal to accept reforms of the Second Vatican Council. The local hierarchy had advised Catholics not to attend any ceremonies he might perform.

When he flew in from Colombia, 500 people greeted him at the airport.

There were no moves to ban his visit here as happened in Mexico last week when he was refused an entry visa. But apparently there are plans to prevent his arrival in Argentina which he plans to visit later this week.

The Argentine Ambassador in Bogota informed his French counterpart yesterday that the Argentine government would consider such a visit inappropriate. - Reuter.

The Archbishop next went to Argentina.

Unfortunately, among those supporting him during his visit to Argentina were members of fascist and anti-semitic organizations. It was explained in Volume I that the Archbishop has never been associated with any right-wing political movement, and that if members of such movements give him public support or distribute literature outside buildings in which he is present there is nothing he can do about it. Not surprisingly, the Archbishop's enemies used the support of these fascists as an excuse to brand him with their opinions. The report in The Citizen (Ottawa), which was very hostile to the Archbishop, admitted that he and his permanent entourage were appalled by some of the views expressed by the fascist groups. The committee which had sponsored his visit issued a statement saying that the Archbishop "is not an ex-Nazi, is not anti-Semitic nor anti anything else. He is only preaching the traditional doctrine of the Church."

The following report on his visit to Argentina appeared in the 7 August 1977 issue of The National Catholic Register:

Buenos Aires (NC): Police prevented Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre from saying Mass at a makeshift altar in a suburban barracks and told some 300 of his followers there that security laws did not allow any public demonstrations.

About 200 persons had welcomed him at Ezeiza International Airport July 20, but only one priest responded to repeated invitations by an organizing committee to greet the French churchman.

Archbishop Lefebvre had been warned that his presence would not be welcomed in Argentina. Argentine diplomats in Switzerland, where he has his headquarters, and in Colombia, where he visited a sister, had said that the government was supporting the Vatican's stand in suspending the archbishop, and did not want to allow further public display of disobedience.

After learning of the ban on the Mass at the barracks, the archbishop’s followers angrily called police “Communists.”

Archbishop Lefebvre has repeatedly denounced the Church renewal that followed the Second Vatican Council and said it has opened the Church to Communist infiltration. Under Argentina's rightist military regime, police and security forces have been repressing leftist groups under state of siege, allegedly to protect national security. In this context, observers said, calling police "communists" makes little sense.

Archbishop Lefebvre's followers are identified in Argentina as members of several conservative organizations: Phalanx for Faith, the Knights of Queen Mary, and groups affiliated with the Defense of Family, Fatherland and Property organization.

Sponsors of the rightist magazine Roma also joined Faith Forever, the umbrella organization that made preparations for the visit of the Archbishop.

About 30 persons attended a Latin Mass Archbishop Lefebvre said at a private home in Buenos Aires a few hours after his arrival. Newsman and photographers in large numbers gave coverage to every move by the archbishop. Spokesmen for Faith Forever said he was to spend six days in Buenos Aires but did not plan to visit other places in Argentina.

Foreign Minister Oscar Antonio Montes said that Archbishop Lefebvre had been admitted into the country under "freedom of worship laws.”

Cardinal Juan Carlos Aramburu of Buenos Aires issued a warning to all pastors, reminding them that "no place of Catholic worship should be made available to the archbishop for any religious services, under pain of canonical sanctions."

Catholics must also abstain from participating in any Mass offered by the archbishop, the warning said. Instead, they "should pray so that the Lord will touch his heart and Archbishop Lefebvre will renounce his rebellious attitude," the cardinal said.

Cardinal Raul Primatesta of Cordoba, who chairs the Argentine Bishops' Conference, said the French prelate's visit should not be magnified and reminded Catholics they can identify the true Church by the time-proven formula: "Where Peter is, where his successor the Pope is, there is the Church."

Traditionalists announced plans to open a seminary in Argentina under Archbishop Lefebvre's Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X, from which the Vatican has withdrawn recognition. The archbishop was suspended of all priestly functions a year ago after performing illicit ordinations.

Later, at a stormy press conference, Archbishop Lefebvre said he does not have "bellicose intentions" in his opposition to Church renewal and the Vatican.

About 150 local followers of the suspended French archbishop entered the hall of a downtown hotel where the press conference took place and booed 50 newsmen every time the followers disapproved of the questions.

The bitterest reaction came when a newsman asked whether a book written by Archbishop Lefebvre, A Bishop Speaks, did not raise the issue of disobedience and arrogance.

Once calm was restored, Archbishop Lefebvre replied that obedience is a relative obligation. He stated:

"As soon as authority fails its mandate, it also loses its right to obedience. When the Pope by his policies leads us into contacts with Protestants and other religions, in such a way that we lose our faith, in that case the Pope forfeits the right to obedience by his subordinates."

At another point the followers of the Archbishop requested that photographers leave the hall. After vigorous protests from the press, organizers said they could stay.

Asked how he felt about his suspension from priestly ministry by the Vatican a year ago, Archbishop Lefebvre commented:

“I have no awareness of committing a grave sin by keeping my Catholic Faith.”

He said that, in his view, the post-conciliar liturgical changes “are leading the faithful, almost unconsciously, to a conversion into Protestantism.”

To another question the archbishop replied that he did not seek to form “another church.”

“I hold no bellicose intentions, I do not wish to fight anyone. I am not opposing the Pope, I am just asking him to be the Pope, the successor of Peter. I am perhaps the son who loves the Pope most, but I pray to God that he may show a constant concern to preserve the Catholic faith in every place and at each opportunity,” he said.

Footnote
1. The relevant section of the article reads, in French; "La seconde offensive, plus secèrte encore, se déroule à Ecône même. Des émissaires du pape, envoyés en observateurs, et qui se montrent au début plutôt bienveillants à I'égard de I'exérience 'traditionaliste,' passent en revue les séminaristes, contactent leurs familles, et, progressivement, s'efforcent de les ramener dans le 'droit chemin' de I'Eglise."

[Stone]

Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 2, Chapter XI

An Irony of History
13 August 1977

This book is concerned primarily with the conflict and the negotiations between Mgr. Lefebvre and the Vatican, and not with the activities of the Society’s priests. I am making an exception in the case of Father Edward Black’s first public Mass in Edinburgh in view of the irony of its proximity to the canonization of St. John Ogilvie. My account of the Mass which follows appeared in the 31 August 1977 issue of The Remnant.


The Wheel Turns Full Circle

In 1976 Pope Paul VI canonized the Scottish martyr priest Saint John Ogilvie. His principal crime had been to travel around Scotland  offering the Mass of St. Pius V. This Mass was not permitted in any of the Scottish churches. Those who attended them took part in a vernacular service celebrated upon a table, a service from which every reference to sacrifice had been removed.

On Saturday, 13 August 1977, Father Edward Black, a young Scottish priest ordained at Ecône on 29 June this year, celebrated his first public Mass in the city of Edinburgh.

Like St. John Ogilvie, he had had to be trained and ordained abroad, and, like St. John Ogilvie, he could not celebrate Mass in a church because the Mass he was offering was according to the Missal of St. Pius V. In the Scottish Catholic churches now, this Mass is forbidden, and in its place is used a vernacular service from which, where Canon II is used, almost every reference to sacrifice has been removed, and altars have once more been replaced by tables. If the ghost of John Knox ever walks in Scotland, he must certainly be laughing!

The Mass itself was celebrated with great beauty and dignity - it was a Solemn High Mass with a young French priest and sub-deacon assisting Father Black. Those who know anything of Scottish history will have heard of the "Auld Alliance" between France and Scotland - history certainly repeated itself on 13 August. Apart from the fact that it had to be celebrated in an hotel, there was nothing to indicate that Scotland is in the throes of a second Reformation. The congregation was well balanced between young and old, the singing was enthusiastic, and there were several kilts in evidence. Father Black preached a fine sermon on the nature of the Mass, which he kept on a very positive note. This in itself provided a useful example for traditionalists to follow; far more will be gained by stressing the positive nature of what we believe and what we uphold than by sterile attacks on those who disagree with us.

At a luncheon in Father Black's honor, he paid tribute to his parents for the fine Catholic upbringing without which he would never have become a priest-and among the others he thanked he made special mention of Miss Mary Neilson, Secretary of the Scottish Una Voce, who had been instrumental in bringing him into contact with Archbishop Lefebvre, and had helped and encouraged him in many ways during his course in the seminary. Miss Neilson gave a short address in which she warned those present to regard any press reports concerning Mgr. Lefebvre with great suspicion. She said that he had explained that if he attempted to correct all the false reports appearing about him in the press he would do nothing else.

In a vote of thanks, Mgr. John McFadyen paid particular tribute to the chairman of Scottish Una Voce, Mr. William Burns, and stressed that the steady progress made by Scottish Una Voce was in no small measure due to his moderate and constructive leadership.

All in all, it was a most encouraging day and any non-traditionalist present would have been very favorably impressed – impressed by Father Black and the young French clerics, by the beauty of the liturgy, and by the relaxed and informal atmosphere at the luncheon. It is a pity that the editors of a number of so-called traditionalist journals circulation in the USA could not have been present. It might have helped them to see, if they have not passed beyond the stage where they can be helped, that is not necessarily those who scream the loudest and have the widest range of invective who serve the Church best. The lives of the British martyr priests tell the same story.

[Stone]

Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 2, Chapter XII

Three Great Gifts of God-A Sermon by His Grace

A Sermon pronounced by His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on the Thirtieth Anniversary of
His Consecration as a Bishop

My dear brothers, my dear friends:

It is kind of Providence that this day of return to the seminary should coincide with the anniversary of my episcopal consecration which took place on September 18, 1947, in my native city. At the request of friends we are celebrating this anniversary in a special way.

In the breviary this morning we read the lesson of Tobias. It was said that the young Tobias, finding himself surrounded by the men of his race, the Jews, adoring a golden calf which had been set up by the King of Israel himself, went faithfully to the temple to offer the sacrifices God had demanded. He was thus faithful to the law of God.

Well, we hope that we too have been faithful to God, faithful to Our Lord Jesus Christ. Later on, Tobias was among the prisoners sent to Ninive and there, the Scripture says, while all his compatriots did homage to the pagan cult, he continued to hold to the truth, retinuit omnem veritatem. He held to the whole truth. I believe this is the lesson Holy Scripture has for us and I hope that we, too, remain faithful as Tobias did, both in his youth and in his captivity Is it not true that we today are in a certain sense in captivity, restraint surrounding us on all sides, imposed on us by those who bow to error both in the world and inside the Church itself? By those who juggle with the truth and who keep truth hidden instead of proclaiming it; we are in a world enslaved by the devil, enslaved by error.

But it is our wish to hold to truth. We want to continue to proclaim it. What then, is this truth? Do we have a monopoly on it? Are we so presumptuous as to say we have the truth, others do not? No, truth does not belong to us. It does not come from us, it was not invented by us. This truth was transmitted to us, it was given to us. It is written. It is living in the Church and in the whole history of the Church. This truth is known. It is in the books, in the catechisms, in all the acts of the councils, in all the acts of the sovereign pontiffs. It is in our Creed, in our Ten Commandments, in the gifts that God has made to us, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments. It is not we who invented this truth. We have only to persevere in it.

Because truth has an eternal character. The truth we profess is God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is God and God does not change. God remains immutable. It was St. Paul who said "vicissitudinis obumbratio." There is not a shadow of vicissitude in Him, not the shadow of changeability. God is unalterable, semper idem, always the same. Certainly He is the source of everything that changes but He, Himself, is unalterable, unchangeable. And by the fact that we profess God as truth we will enter in some way into eternity through truth. We have no right to change that truth. Indeed it cannot be changed. It will never change.

Men have been put on earth to receive a little of that light of eternity as it descends on them. They become in some way eternal themselves, immortal; but according to the extent to which they attach themselves to the things that change, to moving things, they move away from God. And here it is that we feel a need. All men feel this need. They have in them an immortal soul which is already now in eternity, a soul which will be happy or unhappy, but it is a soul that exists. It will not die.

Every man who is born, who has a soul has entered into eternity. That is why we have need of eternal things, of the true eternity, which is God. We cannot do without it. It is part of our lives. It is what is most essential to us. That is why men seek the truth, seek the eternal, because they have an essential need of eternity.

And what are the means by which Our Lord has given us eternity, communicated it to us, made eternity enter into our lives even here below? Often when I was going through the African countries on my diocesan visits I chose a theme that was dear to me and very simple, too. You have heard it many times but for the simple people I spoke to it summed up the truth. Asking what are the gifts the Good God has given us which make us participants in the divine life, eternal life, I would answer: there are three great gifts which God has made us and they are the Pope, the Blessed Virgin and the Eucharistic Sacrifice.


The Pope

In reality it is an extraordinary gift that God has made us in giving us the Pope, in giving us the Successors of Peter, giving us precisely this perpetuity in truth, communicated to us through the Successors of Peter, that must be communicated to us through them. And it seems inconceivable that a Successor of Peter could fail in any way to transmit the truth that he is obliged to transmit. Indeed, without virtually disappearing from the line of succession he cannot fail to communicate that which the popes have always communicated, the Deposit of Faith which does not belong to him alone.

The Deposit of Faith does not belong to the Pope. It is the treasure of truth which has been taught during twenty centuries. He must transmit it faithfully and exactly to all those under him who are charged in turn to communicate the truth of the Gospel. He is not free.

But should it happen because of mysterious circumstances which we cannot understand, which baffle our imagination, which go beyond our conception, if it should happen that a pope, he who is seated on the throne of Peter, comes to obscure in some way the truth which it is his duty to transmit or if he does not transmit it faithfully or allows error to darken truth or hide it in any way, then we must pray to God with all our hearts, with all our soul, that light continues to be thrown on that which he is charged to transmit.

And we cannot follow error, change truth, just because the one who is charged with transmitting it is weak and allows error to spread around him. We don't want the darkness to encroach on us. We want to live in the light of truth. We remain faithful to that which has been taught for two thousand years. That what has been taught for two thousand years and which is part of eternity could change is inconceivable.

Because it is eternity which has been taught to us. It is the eternal God, Jesus Christ eternal God, and everything which is centered on God is centered on eternity. Never can the Trinity be changed. Never can the redemptive work of Christ through the Cross and the Sacrifice of the Mass be changed. These things are eternal; they belong to God. How can someone here below change those things? Who is the priest who feels he has the right to change those things, to modify them? Impossible!

When we possess the past we possess the present and we possess the future. Because it is impossible, I say, metaphysically impossible, to separate the past from the present and the future. Impossible! Then God would no longer be God! God would no longer be eternal! God would no longer be immutable! And there would be nothing more to believe in. We would be completely in error.

This is why, without worrying about all that is happening around us in these times, we ought to close our eyes to the horror of this drama we are living through, close our eyes and affirm our Creed, our Ten Commandments, meditate on the Sermon on the Mount, which is also our law. We must attach ourselves to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, to the Sacraments awaiting the light that will shine around us again. That is all. We must do this without becoming bitter or violent in a spirit that is unfaithful to Our Lord. Let us stay charitable. Let us pray, suffer, accept all the trials, everything that happens, everything that God sends us. Let us do as Tobias did. Abandoned by everyone as they went to adore the golden calf of the gods of the pagans, he remained faithful. Still, he too could have thought that, since only he remained faithful it might be that he was mistaken. But, no, he knew that whatever God had taught to his forebears could not change. The truth of God existed and could not change. And so it is with us. We too have to rely upon the truth that is God yesterday, today and tomorrow. Jesus Christus heri, hodie, et in saecula.

And that is why I say we must retain our confidence in the papacy. We must retain confidence in the Successor of Peter insofar as he is the successor of Peter. But if it should happen that he were not perfectly faithful in his duties, then we must remain faithful to those who were the successors of Peter and not to him who is not the successor of Peter. That is all. His duty is to transmit the Deposit of Faith.


The Blessed Virgin

The second gift is that of the Blessed Virgin Mary .She has never changed. Is it possible to imagine that the Blessed Virgin Mary could change in her attitude to the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, her divine Son, toward the Sacrifice of the Cross, toward the work of our redemption? Is it possible to imagine that the Blessed Virgin Mary could change one iota of her faith, that she could have had doubts at some period of her life, that she could have thought herself mistaken? That she could have doubted the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, doubted the Blessed Trinity, she who was filled with the Holy Ghost? Impossible! Inconceivable!

Here below she was already in eternity. The Blessed Virgin Mary, through her faith, an unchangeable, profound faith, could not be disturbed in any way. That is evident. Do not let us be disturbed by the noises around us but keep faithful, faithful like the Blessed Virgin Mary. And I want to add to this subject of the Blessed Virgin Mary something which seems to me to be important for us at this time in which we live. Continuously we are told the Virgin says this or says that. The Virgin has appeared here, the Virgin has communicated this message to that person. Of course, we do not rule out the possibility that a word of the Blessed Virgin could be addressed to persons of her choice. That is evident. But considering the kind of period we are living through, we must be suspicious. We must mistrust.

The place of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the theology of the Church is, in my estimation, infinitely sufficient to make us love her above everyone after Our Lord Jesus Christ, and that we should have toward her a devotion which is profound and continuous day after day. It is not necessary that we have constant recourse to messages about which we cannot be absolutely certain whether they come from the Blessed Virgin or not: I am not speaking of the apparitions which have been recognized by the Church. But we must be very careful when it comes to rumors that circulate everywhere today. All the time I am receiving people or communications which are said to be addressed to me from the Blessed Virgin or from Our Lord - a message received here, another there. Whereas in fact we should hope the Blessed Virgin is with us every day.

And she is. We know that. She is with us. She is present at every Sacrifice of the Mass. She cannot separate herself from the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Our devotion to the Blessed Virgin ought to be profound, perfect. But it should not have to depend on private messages.


The Eucharistic Sacrifice

God, Jesus Christ, has given us Himself in the Eucharist. What more beautiful thing could He do? I often say to the seminarians: if the Priestly Society of St. Pius X has a particular spirituality - and I do not really want it to have one, although I do not criticize the founders of Orders like St. Ignatius, Sts. Dominic and Vincent de Paul, who I know wanted to give particular characters to their societies, characters without doubt willed by Providence at the moment they were founded – I think that if there is a particular mark to our Society, it is devotion to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

How our spirits, our hearts, our bodies are as if captivated by the great mystery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass! And it is in proportion to how we deepen our understanding of the great mystery of the Sacrifice of the Mass that we understand the priesthood, the grandeur of the priesthood. Because it is intimately, I say metaphysically, bound up with the Sacrifice of the Mass. And this is of the greatest importance in these times.

We have need of this, my dear friends. You have need of being captured by this spirituality of the Mass. Not only the priests, but also our religious, our brothers, our nuns, and all of the laity, all of you faithful here present. We must have for the Sacrifice of the Mass a devotion greater than ever before because it is the very foundation stone of our faith.

I hardly dare cite for you an example, something that happened in Chile during the three days I spent there. Still, because the idea occurs to me, I will indeed tell you, if only to show the point of degradation the concept of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass has reached in the minds of some of the highest members of the hierarchy. During my stay in Chile a concelebration was televised. It was presided over by the Auxiliary Bishop of Santiago. I myself did not see the screening but it was described to me by many people who saw it. There were some fifteen to twenty priests concelebrating with him. During the ceremony the Auxiliary Bishop explained to the faithful, that is, everyone who was looking at the television, that it was a meal and he saw no reason why one should not smoke during a meal. And he himself smoked during that concelebration!

That is how far things have reached. This is the sad state of degradation, of sacrilege a bishop can attain. It is unheard of, inconceivable! Penance must be done for years in reparation for such offenses, for such unimaginable scandal! It serves to show how far one can go when one no longer believes.

We must be attached to the Sacrifice of the Mass as to the apple of our eye; as we are attached to that which is dearest to us, that which is the most respected, the most holy, the most sacred, the most divine. That is the meaning of this seminary.

They may criticize the seminary in any way they like; and they do! The seminary is this way, that way. They have decided this about it, that about it. But, in fact, they decide nothing, change nothing. The seminary stays as it is. It continues to be what it is because that was why it was founded. The seminary remains a Catholic seminary. And if God gives me life, the seminary will not change. I would rather die than change any part of the Catholic doctrine which must be taught in the seminary. With the grace of God, come what may, we will not change. So let them say what they will. Let them say that the seminary has a new direction, the seminary is this way or that. It is the devil who says such things in order to destroy the seminary. Obviously he cannot tolerate Catholic priests who have the Faith.

And then, one cannot avoid speaking about it, all around us here and there in every country, but particularly in France, there are divisions among those who are trying to hold to the faith, a mixture of calumny, slander, exaggerated words, foolish expressions, unjustified suppositions. Let us ignore it all. Let us instead work well, doing the will of God, according to the teachings of the Catholic Church, continuing like our predecessors and our ancestors, doing what the Council of Trent asked of us, bishops, who must continue the formation which has always been given to priests. If we do this we will be certain that we are remaining faithful.


Let us Remain Faithful

That is enough. Let us remain calm. Let us remain faithful. And if it should ever come to be that the faith is not taught here, then leave me. If, my dear seminarians, I do not teach you Catholic truth, then leave! Do not stay here. That is your duty. But, if I teach the Catholic Faith-and you have the whole library at your disposal to find out whether or not what was handed to us is being handed down to you-then, be confident. And we will do everything so that the Catholic Faith continues to be taught here, taught in its entirety so that you too can carry on that truth that is so full of grace and life. Truth is the source of life. We have need of that life. The faithful are hungry for it. Why is it we have request for priests from all sides? Because the faithful are thirsty for truth, thirsty for the grace of God, for the supernatural life, thirsty for that eternity toward which we are heading.

Therefore, have confidence in what the Church has always done – not confidence in Mgr. Lefebvre. I am a poor man like the others. I have no pretension to be better than others. On the contrary, I do not know why .God has permitted me to have thirty years in the episcopate. I think that if I were to judge things on a human plane, I would have preferred to remain a missionary in the jungles of Gabon; in isolation. I would not have had all the problems I have had in my thirty years in the episcopate. But God has wanted it this way. He continues to try us. Very well, if that is His will it must be and we must continue to carry the Cross. It is not because He imposes crosses that we may abandon Him. On the contrary, we may not abandon Our Lord. We must follow Him.

And so, my dear friends, be faithful - faithful to the Pope, successor of Peter, when he shows himself to be truly the successor of Peter. Because that is what a pope is and it is in this sense we have need of him. We are not the people who want to break with the authority of the church, with the successor of Peter. But neither are we people who want to break with twenty centuries of tradition in the Church, with twenty centuries of successors of Peter!

We have made our choice. We have chosen to be obedient in the real sense, obedient to what all the Popes have taught for twenty centuries and we cannot imagine that he who sits on Peter's throne does not want to teach these things. Well, if that is the case, then God will judge him. But we cannot go into error because there is a kind of rupture in the chain of the successors of Peter. We want to remain faithful to the successors of Peter who transmitted to us the Deposit of the Faith. It is in this sense that we are faithful to the Catholic Church, that we remain within it and can never go into schism. Since we are attached to twenty centuries of Faith we cannot make a schism. That is what guarantees for us the past, the present and the future. It is impossible to separate the past from the present and the future. Sustaining ourselves with the past, we are sure of the present and the future.

So have confidence ! Ask the Blessed Virgin Mary to help us under all circumstances. She is as strong as an army arrayed for battle. She who suffered as Queen of Martyrs at the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ. And will we not follow Our Blessed Mother and with her be ready to suffer martyrdom so that the work of redemption can continue?