For those open to reading this book and others by the great Bishop click here
The difference is that Archbishop Lefebvre only believed in all things Traditional Catholic. The other groups in tradition only came to be after the SSPX. I would say he had a huge part in keeping tradition from dying. It was going down fast. Look how many years it took to get a Pope to say that the TLM is really OK.
As I understand it, Archbishop Lefebvre did not subject himself to the authority of the Pope. This in itself would place him outside Mother Church. SSPX has not yet agreed with tenents ( I don’t know exactly which ones these were.) of Vatican II, therefore the group remains outside the Church.
The great bishop? Not.
What you see as “astray,” others see as “back”. I, for one, have Archbishop Lefebvre and his adherence to the Traditional Mass to thank for my return from near-apostasy. Deo Gratias that the Traditional Mass has survived. I think we will see a change in sentiment towards the good Archbishop as time progresses. Vehement dislike like yours is, thankfully, dying out.
Amen. And I have the SSPX to thank for helping my return from actual apostasy. Archbishop Lefebvre disobeyed the Holy Father* only* in consecrating four bishops without the pope’s permission. That is all. In all other aspects, especially in terms of the traditional expression of the Catholic faith, the Archbishop was absolutely loyal and had no intentions of forming a schismatic sect.
Directly quoting califman831 and my own response to califman831 today (another thread):
[forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=475999&page=5](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=475999&page=5)
Post # 70:
*Originally Posted by Califman831
Using Trent, the Bible, and the teachings of saints and popes prior to mid-twentieth century as the standard. How can you not conclude that these changes of Vatican II are not heretical. Modernists are the ones who are disobedient to the faith.*
**
As I already said, you have no authority that would allow you to call a teaching "false." The authority you pretend to have is reserved to the Pope and the Bishops.
I can conclude that the teachings of Vatican II are NOT heretical because I studied them. I was born in 1945, Nothing is hearsay to me. Rather all is prayer and study.
The outcome for me (and for all who cherish the Church) is obedience - not rebellion. **Oh. So disobedience of the Holy Father is a “little nothing?”Amen. And I have the SSPX to thank for helping my return from actual apostasy. Archbishop Lefebvre disobeyed the Holy Father* only* in consecrating four bishops without the pope’s permission. That is all. In all other aspects, especially in terms of the traditional expression of the Catholic faith, the Archbishop was absolutely loyal and had no intentions of forming a schismatic sect.
Deo gratias indeed that his work is bearing fruit and the hatred for him is slowly dying out
Likewise, I am sad that you view adherence to tradition as gravely disobedient. When I see the utter destruction that was wrought in the Catholic Church, I thank God every day that someone finally put a foot down and said “no.”
Don’t you find it terribly odd that a man who was excommunicated for his obstinate
The Catholic Church. In it’s entirety. I am faithful to the “error” of believing that Catholic tradition is worth preserving at any cost, even the scorn and ridicule of the current hierarchy. Time will vindicate and your angry tone only serves to spread the misconception that we are part of a separate Church when nothing could be further from the truth.
No point in addressing you.
"Canon lawyer hopes SSPX discussions will lead to full communion"
(sspx), the traditionalist society, which was founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in opposition to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. Then, in 1988, the archbishop ordained four bishops without the requisite permission of the Holy Father.
Following the ordinations, the bishops were excommunicated by then-Pope John Paul II. However, in January 2009, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication of the SSPX bishops in a decision he hoped would lead to “real and final unity.” “As you know,” noted Fr. Murray, “the Pope remitted the penalty of excommunication which the four ordained bishops had received by automatic censure penalty...which had been declared by the Holy See at the time they were ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988.”
“Pope Benedict XVI, in his goodness, decided to remit those penalties,” the canon lawyer observed, “but the bishops were not restored to full communion with the Holy See.” This is because, “to receive ordination without the requisite permission is a canonical offense, and the penalty is suspension,” said Fr. Murray. **Thus, the bishops, who are no longer excommunicated, are still under the penalty of suspension**PS - I view grave disobedience as grave disobedience.
You know, this is exactly how the Lutherans talk about Martin Luther. “He never intended to split from the Church.” So, therefore, he didn’t, actually - all appearances to the contrary?Amen. And I have the SSPX to thank for helping my return from actual apostasy. Archbishop Lefebvre disobeyed the Holy Father* only* in consecrating four bishops without the pope’s permission. That is all. In all other aspects, especially in terms of the traditional expression of the Catholic faith, the Archbishop was absolutely loyal and had no intentions of forming a schismatic sect.
Deo gratias indeed that his work is bearing fruit and the hatred for him is slowly dying out
Precisely.You know, this is exactly how the Lutherans talk about Martin Luther. “He never intended to split from the Church.” So, therefore, he didn’t, actually - all appearances to the contrary?
Except for the teensy, tiny fact that you forgot to mention Luther was a heretic who denied various Catholic doctrines.You know, this is exactly how the Lutherans talk about Martin Luther. “He never intended to split from the Church.” So, therefore, he didn’t, actually - all appearances to the contrary?
Both men were excommunicated.