ROME AND THE ARRANGEMENTS. MONS. MARCEL LEFEBVRE.

 

Juan xxiii y Mons. Marcel Lefebvre

I - The work of Archbishop Lefebvre

I.1. Archbishop Lefebvre's work until 1988: maintaining the

Tradition

Note. As in previous writings, this article contains comments made by a server and they are enclosed in parentheses in order to make Mgr Lefebvre's words more understandable through them and to clarify the current situation of the traditionalist congregations belonging to the ECCLESIA DEI dicastery founded by the current Church in order to gather in it all these congrations that signed an agreement with present-day Rome.

We adhere to the true Catholic Church, guardian of the Catholic faith and the traditions necessary to maintain this faith, to eternal Rome, owner of wisdom and truth.

On the other hand, we refuse and have always refused to follow the neo-modernist and neo-Protestant Rome that was clearly manifested at the Second Vatican Council and after the Council in all the reforms that resulted from it. (…)

No authority, not even the highest in the hierarchy, can compel us to abandon or diminish our Catholic faith clearly expressed and professed by the Church's magisterium for nineteen centuries.

"If it happened", says Saint Paul, "that we or an angel who came from heaven taught you something different from what I have taught you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1, 8) (Declaration of November 21, 1974)

“Because we want to remain Catholic. That is really the reason they sue us, it is because we want to remain Catholic. They sue us because we want to keep the Catholic Mass, because we want to maintain the Catholic faith, because we want to maintain the Catholic priesthood. We are being sued for that. " (Archbishop Lefebvre, Ecône, September 4, 1987, Salt of the Earth  n ° 31, p. 201)

“There is a struggle that is being waged in the Church to end the past, the tradition of the Church. This persecution continues against those who want to remain Catholic, as the popes were before Vatican II. This is our position. We continue with what the popes taught and did before Vatican II.

We oppose what Popes John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II, (Benedict XVI and Francis) have done today because they have broken with their predecessors. We prefer the tradition of the Church to the work of a few popes who oppose their predecessors.

However, we wanted to keep in touch with Rome, during these years, since 1976, when we received the  suspension a divinis,  because we continue to do priestly ordinations. We wanted to keep in touch with Rome, hoping that Tradition would one day regain its rights.  But it was a waste of time. (Today more than ever due to the Motu proprio "Traditionis custodes")

Faced with the refusal of Rome to take into consideration our protests and our requests for a return to Tradition, and in view of my age because now I am 82 years old, I am in my 83 years, it is obvious that I feel that the end is approaching, I need a successor. " (Archbishop Lefebvre Conference of June 15, 1988, Fideliter , June 29-30, 1988, p. 8-9)

 “It was not for joy that we had difficulties with Rome. It wasn't for fun that we had to fight. We did it out of principle, to maintain the Catholic faith. Speaking of the Barroux monks, Bishop Lefebvre adds: “They have practically abandoned the fight for faith. They can no longer attack modernist Rome. (As the current Fraternity cannot do it by virtue of the agreements reached, nor can they point out its errors as Archbishop Lefebvre did in the past. It is true that they speak of the Holy Mass of tradition etc. But they say nothing or little about the modernists, for they should not be disturbed.) This is what Blignières' father also did. It has completely changed. The one who had written a whole volume to condemn religious freedom, now writes in favor of religious freedom. This is not serious. We can no longer count on men like these, who have not understood anything about the doctrinal question. " (Archbishop Lefebvre, Fideliter , n ° 79, January-February 1991, p. 6.)

The essential thing is not the Mass, but the doctrine

“It is not a small thing that opposes us. It is not enough for them to tell us: the Traditional Mass can be said, but we must accept them. No, it is not only that that opposes us, it is the doctrine. It is clear. This is what is serious about Dom Gérard and this is what lost him. (It refers to the agreement of this Benedictine abbot who signed an agreement with Rome on the question of the Mass and I do not repair the doctrinal question that was and will be the heart of the matter with Modernist and heretical Rome)

Dom Gérard has always seen only the liturgy and monastic life. He does not see clearly the theological problems of the Council, of religious freedom. You don't see the malice in these bugs. He never cared about it. " (Archbishop Lefebvre, Fideliter , n ° 66, November-December 1988, p. 14; cf.  Fideliter , n ° 87, September 1990, p. 1)

Some have written that at the Second Vatican Council the only Mass celebrated was the traditional Mass. This did not prevent said council from promulgating the disastrous decrees on religious freedom and ecumenism ... (L'Hermine, year 2005, n ° 6)

 Only Agreement on the Mass deadlocked

Liberal “traditionalists” say, “Oh, as long as we have the proper Mass, we can give Rome a hand, no problems. Archbishop Lefebvre replies: "This is how it works! They are at a dead end because we cannot at the same time give a hand to the modernists and, on the other hand, want to maintain the Tradition." ( ¿A very interesting point is that of Archbishop Lefebvre, cannot we serve two masters at the same time, as the Gospel says, because it will please one and the other will displease? Or do we maintain the tradition of always keeping fidelity to the Church, or agreements are signed with them and only, apparently the Mass is kept in Latin and ... other things as in fact does the Fraternity of Saint Peter and Saint Pius X) (Archbishop Lefebvre, Fideliter, n ° 87, September 1990, p. 3)

 “We must place the events that are happening today and that will happen tomorrow - particularly the episcopal consecration of four young bishops on June 30 - in the context of our difficulties with Rome, not only since 1970, since the founding of Ecône, but since the beginning.

At the Council, several bishops and I fought against modernism and against errors that we considered inadmissible and incompatible with the Catholic faith.  The basic problem is that. It is a formal, deep and radical opposition to the modern and modernist ideas that have passed through the Council. " (All those groups or congregations that made agreements resigned have abandoned this radical and deep struggle against modernist Rome, here is the question.) (Archbishop Lefebvre Conference of June 15, 1988, Fideliter , June 29-30, 1988, p. 8-9)

In 1987, during negotiations with Rome, there was talk of a visiting cardinal who would have had more or less authority over the works of Tradition. Speaking of him, Bishop Lefebvre said: "And then, I see him from here, I see him among us, and in small groups, he goes for a walk with the seminarians. Then he said:" But you are exaggerating the difficulties. Let us see, the Council: you take what you want, and you should not understand the Council literally ... but this, but that ... “we must minimize, minimize, minimize our difficulties, ¿right? No, that minimizes our resistance. I have insisted on saying:" But the liturgy, the liturgy ...: since you are granted the Mass of St. Pius V, you can still say the New Mass from time to time. She is not heretical. She is not schismatic. You must not exaggerate. ”Minimize, minimize ; and then, on the contrary,magnify what the Holy See is going to give us: "We must reach an understanding ... What to wait?" You don't have to be like that with categories and a difficult mind.»» (Archbishop Lefebvre, Ecône, September 4, 1987, Salt of the Earth  n ° 31, p. 198)

 “We must not be afraid to affirm that the current Roman authorities since John XXIII and Paul VI have become active collaborators of international Jewish Freemasonry and world socialism. John Paul II is above all a pro-communist politician at the service of a world communism with religious overtones.

He openly attacks all anti-communist governments and does not bring any Catholic revival through his travels. Therefore, these Roman conciliar authorities can only fiercely and violently oppose any reaffirmation of the traditional Magisterium.  The errors of the Council and its reforms continue to be the official norm enshrined in Cardinal Ratzinger's profession of faith of March 1989 ".

It would not be enough to have a certain piety or an apparent holiness rather than real: "I hear people say:" You are exaggerating! there are more and more good bishops who pray, who have faith, who build ... ”Would they be holy, as long as they admitted a false religious freedom, therefore the secular state, false ecumenism, therefore the admission of various paths of salvation, liturgical reform, therefore the practical denial of the sacrifice of the Mass, the new catechisms with all their errors and heresies, do they officially contribute to the revolution in the Church and to its destruction? (Archbishop Lefebvre, spiritual itinerary , p. 10-11)

 Contend for the faith to the example of the martyrs

In a conference to the seminarians of Ecône, Archbishop Lefebvre said (we summarize it): “We must not allow ourselves to be carried away by a harshness, a sentimental tension against this situation, rejecting any hierarchy. It is quite a natural tendency because we feel pain. We should not reject everything because how would we later return to a normal situation? It is a schismatic mind.

On the other hand, one should not get carried away by discouragement: some cannot always remain like this, giving the impression that they are outside the Church, that they are disobedient .  This discouragement, this weariness of the struggle is not the spirit of the Church, of those who fought for the faith, who shed their blood to keep the faith: the martyrs refused to offer incense to the idol of the moment. Liberals, on the other hand, want to get along with the enemies of the Church, they want to be on good terms with the world, they prefer to abandon the faith to be right with the world rather than be martyrs. We must maintain the spirit of the martyrs: suffer with the Church and for the Church. "(This discouragement fruit of seeing themselves outside the Church or seeing themselves as rebels was what really shook all the traditionalist congregations to give up in the real struggle and they ended up giving in “to have a place within the modernist Church without caring about the opinion of those who believed. the opposite of what they did and even persecuted them until they saw them outside their congregations for being intransigent with modernist Rome) (Conference in Ecône, December 3, 1982)

¨ It is necessary to protect the Tradition from modernist and liberal influences

 “I would have signed a definitive agreement after having signed the protocol, if we had had the possibility of effectively protecting ourselves from the modernism of Rome and the bishops. It was essential that this protection existed. Otherwise, they would have brought us Rome on the one hand and by the bishops on the other, who would have tried to influence us, make us accept the Council, of course, in fact, make Tradition disappear. " (Archbishop Lefebvre, "After the rallies the moment of truth will sound”, Fideliter  n ° 68, March-April 1989, p. 15)

This protection seemed so necessary to him that he wanted it for everyone: “It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest who wants to remain Catholic to separate himself from this conciliar Church, as long as he does not find again the tradition of the Magisterium of the Church, the Church and the Catholic Faith. » (IT IS NECESSARY to separate ourselves from that conciliar Church, it is not said by the person who writes this but Mgr Lefebvre himself) (Archbishop Lefebvre, Spiritual Itinerary , p. 31)

CONTINUARA...