Archbishop Lefebvre canonized

[latinmasslover]

Boy, you must really like to open up cans of worms! I imagine that most here would simply ignore such a momentous event.

Hehehehehe…Actually, my sister and I flourish in debate, but this thread was started because a similar issue was brought up elsewhere, about the trads. accepting certain “questionable” canonizations. Thought I’d get the opinion if things were sort of reversed.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

Your question reminds me of one of the final scenes in The Untouchables:

REPORTER: They say the 18th Amendment is going to be repealed, Mr. Ness. What are you going to do then?

ELLIOTT NESS: I guess I’ll have a drink.

If and when he is canonized, I guess I’ll say a prayer to him. Until then, well, things will stay as they are.

This is my way of thinking, although if and when, by that time, I’ll probably lean over the great Heavenly Banquet table, excuse myself for being rude, then ask him how it feels.

 

[LilyM]

This is a comment the shouts “I know nothing of the situation!” Reminds me of a sedevacantist who declares all non Catholics damned because they’re not Catholic. Try reading the actual writings of Archbishop Lefebvre, and you will see that he is not full of himself, he did what he felt necessary to do (whether or not you agree).
One could easily argue that Joan of Arc could never have been canonized because she refused to submit to the Church regarding her Visions and she publicly called down the judgment of God on the Bishop.

Back to my question, (when) if the Church were to declare the excommunication null, and canonize the good Archbishop, what would your response be?

At a risk of continuing to digress, could you provide a quote for that? I’ve got a book “Joan of Arc in her own words”, which I believe is a complete record of everything she’s recorded to have said, and have never come across anything like it.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

This question is for all, but especially those who oppose the SSPX.

What will your reaction be when Archbishop Lefebvre is canonized?

Let me restate: What would your reaction be if he were to be canonized?

​

Are you asking, “when… ?” or - “if…?”

If it happened, I think I would be surprised.

But I have a lot of difficulty seeing how it could:

As for possible precedents:

• Bl. Mary McKillop did not die excommunicate
• Bl. Louis Aleman did not die excommunicate
• St. Elesbaan’s Monophysitism seems to have been overlooked
• Likewise the Arianism of St. Asterius
• As for St. Joan of Arc - OPs have dealt with that
  A counter-precedent to the Abp. might be St. Alphonsus Liguori, who was very shabbily treated by Pius VI - but did not disobey him, let alone perform a materially schismatic act.

The Church did not set about canonising the Jansenist deacon Francois de Paris (1690-1727), despite reports of miracles after his death; so it doesn’t seem likely things will be different in the case of the Abp. If people want to pray to him, I don’t think there is anything to stop them.

The only way round the excommunication - & the previous suspension perhaps ? - might be for the SSPX to wait until the CC regards it as a sister-Church, as it has the Orthodox. But that could take a while yet - say, 900 years. And this is working on the assumption that Orthodox saints are acceptable as saints to the CC.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

I would be just as surprised if MSgr. Lefebvre was canonized as I would be if Fr. Leonard Feeney was canonized (who died reconciled with the Church, at least externally). It could happen…but not likely.

I’m thinking before I die, John Paul II may well be canonized. That’s more likely in my view.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

At a risk of continuing to digress, could you provide a quote for that? I’ve got a book “Joan of Arc in her own words”, which I believe is a complete record of everything she’s recorded to have said, and have never come across anything like it.

Actually, Lily, I’m not certain Saint Joan is the best example to posit against the Archbishop’s situation. I realize that Wikipedia is not ALWAYS the most reliable source, but I can’t locate others right now and there doesn’t seem to be any questionable bias in this article on Saint Joan. Read the section under “Trial.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Arc

The excommunication was questionable from the get-go (St. Joan appealed to the Holy Father and the Council of Basel and her appeal was improperly denied by the bishop-judge) AND it was overturned by a higher competent authority. Given that, I don’t think that the two situations can be compared. Saint Joan’s excommunication was given by corrupt and incompetent authority and overturned by a higer competent authority. The Archbishop’s excommunication was confirmed by the Supreme Pontiff himself.

It’s important to remember that the Archbishop was not excommunicated by a judicial act of the Supreme Pontiff, but rather he excommunicated HIMSELF (I think the term is *latae sententia, *but I don’t have my canon law book in front of me) and that penalty was merely confirmed by the Supreme Pontiff. There are those who would argue that the canons themselves admit that an excommunication is invalid if the offender has a fear of NOT acting in the offending way in some grave need (like a dying bishop in a Soviet gulag consecrating a priest as bishop without reference to the Holy See, etc.), but the same canons affirm that the Pope is the Supreme Legislator and interpreter of canon law (ie, it means what he says it means, for juridicial and legal purposes) and the same Supreme Pontiff/Legislator clearly stated that no emergency or need existed.

I very much doubt that the Archbishop will be canonized. If he is, that simply means that there is another soul in Heaven. All souls in heaven ARE saints, even if we do not know who they are.

 

[knightbvm]

That’s not really an answer to his question.

Well the question is ridiculous and wont happen–I mean please!!! The Archbishop was a fool—I mean he was going to get his Bishops conscecrated with Papal approval, but he went ahead and consecrated(to this day people s till wonder why he did what he did) the Bishops anyway prior to when the POpe said he could—now how gross is that----AND HE IS GONNA BE CANONIZED----TO COMPARE HIM TO JOAN OF ARC IS A JOKE!!! JOAN OF ARC WAS EXCOMMUNICATED BY HER LOCAL BISHOP----AND THE REASONS WERE DEEMED TO BE BOGUS SHORTLY AFTER THAT—THE WONDERFUL ARCHBISHOPS CIRCUMSTANCES ARE QUITE DIFFERENT—if you all really want to debate the Archbishop id be happy to do the research (which i had done a few years back–id have to dig up the facts) he was totally wrong----

 

[knightbvm]

This is a comment the shouts “I know nothing of the situation!” Reminds me of a sedevacantist who declares all non Catholics damned because they’re not Catholic. Try reading the actual writings of Archbishop Lefebvre, and you will see that he is not full of himself, he did what he felt necessary to do (whether or not you agree).
One could easily argue that Joan of Arc could never have been canonized because she refused to submit to the Church regarding her Visions and she publicly called down the judgment of God on the Bishop.

Back to my question, (when) if the Church were to declare the excommunication null, and canonize the good Archbishop, what would your response be?

your question is STUPID—HE WAS CLEARLY WRONG AND HAS NO CHANCE NONE ZERO!!!

 

[mdgspencer]

Pious thoughts are not enough to take the measure of someone. A more telling way of knowing is by their fruits. And in fact as I recall somewhere in the Bible is the saying, by their fruits you will know them. He and his followers are involved in a total rejection of the leadership of the Church, and do not even consider the Pope the Pope. Ironically, while traditional Catholicism is profoundly obedient to the Pope, they have found a way to call themselves traditional without being obedient, finding no one, in their view, to obey.

 

[Walking_Home]

Well the question is ridiculous and wont happen–I mean please!!! The Archbishop was a fool—I mean he was going to get his Bishops conscecrated with Papal approval, but he went ahead and consecrated(to this day people s till wonder why he did what he did) the Bishops anyway prior to when the POpe said he could—now how gross is that----AND HE IS GONNA BE CANONIZED----TO COMPARE HIM TO JOAN OF ARC IS A JOKE!!! JOAN OF ARC WAS EXCOMMUNICATED BY HER LOCAL BISHOP----AND THE REASONS WERE DEEMED TO BE BOGUS SHORTLY AFTER THAT—THE WONDERFUL ARCHBISHOPS CIRCUMSTANCES ARE QUITE DIFFERENT—if you all really want to debate the Archbishop id be happy to do the research (which i had done a few years back–id have to dig up the facts) he was totally wrong----

---

May I suggest investing in a new keyboard —your caps key seems to be sticking.

 

[laudamus_te]

Well the question is ridiculous and wont happen–I mean please!!! The Archbishop was a fool—I mean he was going to get his Bishops conscecrated with Papal approval, but he went ahead and consecrated(to this day people s till wonder why he did what he did) the Bishops anyway prior to when the POpe said he could—now how gross is that----AND HE IS GONNA BE CANONIZED----TO COMPARE HIM TO JOAN OF ARC IS A JOKE!!! JOAN OF ARC WAS EXCOMMUNICATED BY HER LOCAL BISHOP----AND THE REASONS WERE DEEMED TO BE BOGUS SHORTLY AFTER THAT—THE WONDERFUL ARCHBISHOPS CIRCUMSTANCES ARE QUITE DIFFERENT—if you all really want to debate the Archbishop id be happy to do the research (which i had done a few years back–id have to dig up the facts) he was totally wrong----

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[stmaria]

knightbvm;3306832]Well the question is ridiculous and wont happen–I mean please!!! The Archbishop was a fool—I mean he was going to get his Bishops conscecrated with Papal approval, but he went ahead and consecrated(to this day people s till wonder why he did what he did)

No one of knowledge wonders why he went ahead with the consecrations. He has fully expalined his reasons

the Bishops anyway prior to when the POpe said he could—now how gross is that----AND HE IS GONNA BE CANONIZED----TO COMPARE HIM TO JOAN OF ARC IS A JOKE!!! JOAN OF ARC WAS EXCOMMUNICATED BY HER LOCAL BISHOP----AND THE REASONS WERE DEEMED TO BE BOGUS SHORTLY AFTER THAT—THE WONDERFUL ARCHBISHOPS CIRCUMSTANCES ARE QUITE DIFFERENT—if you all really want to debate the Archbishop id be happy to do the research (which i had done a few years back–id have to dig up the facts) he was totally wrong----

Your caps make you out to be a madman. Very annoying

 

[laudamus_te]

Pious thoughts are not enough to take the measure of someone. A more telling way of knowing is by their fruits. And in fact as I recall somewhere in the Bible is the saying, by their fruits you will know them. He and his followers are involved in a total rejection of the leadership of the Church, and do not even consider the Pope the Pope. Ironically, while traditional Catholicism is profoundly obedient to the Pope, they have found a way to call themselves traditional without being obedient, finding no one, in their view, to obey.

You don’t know what you’re talking about, either.

 

[knightbvm]

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

I know what I am laking about and I am giving you the facts—his reasons for conscerating the Bishops are UTTTER BS!!! (SORRY TO BE SO BLUNT)–He mentions Assis and other things that he deems horrible. The Archbishop also claimed that this was bringing the Church to the brink of Apostacy–WELL YOU KNOW WHAT ARCHBISHOP THAT DOESNT GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO DISOBEY THE POPE------SORRY!!! Just read Pope John Paul II letter Ecclessia Dei—hello??? Please post some of the Archbishops comments about why he did what he did—PLEASE I WELCOME THAT—LET’S TAKE THEM ONE BY ONE-----THAT WILL BE FUN stop praising a disobedient Archbishop like Marcel Lefebvre—PLEASE-------

 

[tradcathconvert]

Pious thoughts are not enough to take the measure of someone. A more telling way of knowing is by their fruits. And in fact as I recall somewhere in the Bible is the saying, by their fruits you will know them. He and his followers are involved in a total rejection of the leadership of the Church, and do not even consider the Pope the Pope. Ironically, while traditional Catholicism is profoundly obedient to the Pope, they have found a way to call themselves traditional without being obedient, finding no one, in their view, to obey.

Sorry, but they do recognize Benedict XVI as the Pope. Just check their website :www.sspx.org
We can discuss to the cows come home rather or not they truly obey the Pope, but we can’t deny they recognize that he is indeed the Pope. If memory serves me correctly, the motu proprio freeing the Mass, besides anything else it did, meets one of the SSPX’s conditions for further talks about reconciliation. Why would they want talks with John Paul II or Benedict XVI if they didn’t recognize their papacy?

 

[knightbvm]

Sorry, but they do recognize Benedict XVI as the Pope. Just check their website :www.sspx.org
We can discuss to the cows come hope rather or not they obey the Pope, but we can’t deny they recognize that he is indeed the Pope.

The Society of St. Pius X definitley does you are correct–I know there is also alot of dispute about whether the Society is formally in schism–but my whole point in this is that Marcel Lefebvre is no hero at all. He had no justification for a public disobedience and yet some people want to talk about this man’s sainthood—PLEASE~!!! PLEASE!!! I WELCOME A VALID EXPLANATION FOR WHY HE DIRECTLY DISOBEYED THE POPE AND CONSCECRATED BISHOPS—PLEASE IM DIEING FOR AN EXPLANATION-----PLEASE!!!

 

[piouswoman]

The Society of St. Pius X definitley does you are correct–I know there is also alot of dispute about whether the Society is formally in schism–but my whole point in this is that Marcel Lefebvre is no hero at all. He had no justification for a public disobedience and yet some people want to talk about this man’s sainthood—PLEASE~!!! PLEASE!!! I WELCOME A VALID EXPLANATION FOR WHY HE DIRECTLY DISOBEYED THE POPE AND CONSCECRATED BISHOPS—PLEASE IM DIEING FOR AN EXPLANATION-----PLEASE!!!

You would do well not to speak ill of the dead. Especially when you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[laudamus_te]

The Society of St. Pius X definitley does you are correct–I know there is also alot of dispute about whether the Society is formally in schism–but my whole point in this is that Marcel Lefebvre is no hero at all. He had no justification for a public disobedience and yet some people want to talk about this man’s sainthood—PLEASE~!!! PLEASE!!! I WELCOME A VALID EXPLANATION FOR WHY HE DIRECTLY DISOBEYED THE POPE AND CONSCECRATED BISHOPS—PLEASE IM DIEING FOR AN EXPLANATION-----PLEASE!!!

No one wants to talk to an ignorant bully. Tone down your anger a bit, and please stop with the CAPS and !!!
Then maybe you can participate in an intelligent debate.

 

[knightbvm]

You would do well not to speak ill of the dead. Especially when you have no idea what you are talking about.

You keep saying that but offer no facts-----please state some!!!-I am not attacking anyone personally (I may attack their arguments). JUST READ JOHN PAUL’S LETTER-----PLEASE READ IT!!! It even states, in the letter, that Archbishop Lefebvre was sent a warning, prior to the conscecrations, NOT TO DO WHAT HE DID------YET YOUR WONDER SAINTLY (AS YOU SAY) ARCHBISHOP DECIDED TO DO IT ANYWAY!!! ---------HMMMMMM!!! If you read The Pope’s letter you will be set straight --TRUST ME READ IT!!!

Here is an excerpt-----
3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)

1. The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.(5)

But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.(6)

A SAINT??? HARDLY!!! SAINTS DON’T ACT THAT WAY!!! WILL YOU JUST STOP WITH THIS LEFEBVRE STUFF PLEASE—

 

[ASimpleSinner]

This question is for all, but especially those who oppose the SSPX.

What will your reaction be when Archbishop Lefebvre is canonized?

Let me restate: What would your reaction be if he were to be canonized?

My reaction would be “well huh, there ya go then!”

But the bigger question that this post raises for me is this:

What are you imagining a hypothetical canonization would have to do with the SSPX today?

Are you imagining that a a hypothetical canonization would vindicate the SSPX? The four living bishops excommunicated by name? The irregularity of the chapels set up in the canonical territories of local ordinaries who were not asked and did not give permission for them?

Do you think canonization would vindicate any of their current irregularities or outright breaking of canon law?