Archbishop Lefebvre

  • Thread starter Thread starter stmaria
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stmaria

Guest
I do not belong to the SSPX nor have I ever attended an SSPX Mass. However I have noticed how the SSPX is attacked on a regular basis. I do not wish to defend the actions of Archbishop Lefebvre but I think to be fair to him it is necessary to try to understand why he felt it necessary to risk excommunication by consecrating the four Bishops. I can only imagine how he agonized over this decision and how much he must have prayed.

Read his life story and you will see how much he loved the Church. But he believed with all his heart and soul that the Church was in grave danger. The following is from his Consecration Sermon. It reveals why, in 1988, that he felt he had to act. Two years earlier the event at Assisi had occurred where pagan religions were allowed to pray in a Catholic Church with the blessing of Pope John Paul. He believed this violated the First Commandment. He also believed that Our Lady had prophesized that one day it would be necessary for a priest to oppose apostasy and impiety in the Church and maybe that day had come and he might be that priest. He loved the Church. But he loved the Traditional Church and he felt that the Church founded by Christ was in grave danger.

!988 Consecration Sermon
sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/appendix_v_1988_consecration_sermon.htm

"taking into account the strong will of the present Roman authorities to reduce Tradition to nought, to gather the world to the spirit of Vatican II and the spirit of Assisi, we have preferred to withdraw ourselves and to say that we could not continue… there has never been a greater iniquity in the Church than Assisi, which is contrary to the First Commandment of God and the First Article of the Creed. It is incredible that something like that could have ever taken place in the Church, in the eyes of the whole Church —how humiliating…… the apparition of Our Lady of “Buen Suceso,” —of “Good Fortune,” to whom a large church in Quito, Ecuador, was dedicated… This apparition is thoroughly recognized by Rome and the ecclesiastical authorities…
Our Lady prophesied for the 20th century, saying explicitly that during the 19th century and most of the 20th century, errors would become more and more widespread in Holy Church, placing the Church in a catastrophic situation. Morals would become corrupt and the Faith would disappear. It seems impossible not to see it happening today….she speaks of a prelate who will absolutely oppose this wave of apostasy and impiety —saving the priesthood by forming good priests. I do not say that prophecy refers to me. You may draw your own conclusions. I was stupefied when reading these lines but I cannot deny them, since they are recorded and deposited in the archives of this apparition.
This Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ is disappearing everywhere in the Conciliar Church. They are following roads which are not Catholic roads: they simply lead to apostasy….This is why we do this ceremony. Far be it from me to set myself up as pope! I am simply a bishop of the Catholic Church who is continuing to transmit Catholic doctrine.
Do not abandon the faithful, do not abandon the Church! Continue the Church! Indeed, since the Council, what we condemned in the past the present Roman authorities have embraced and are professing. How is it possible? We have condemned them: Liberalism, Communism, Socialism, Modernism, Sillonism.3 All the errors which we have condemned are now professed, adopted and supported by the authorities of the Church.
Thus, we find ourselves in a case of necessity. We have done all we could, trying to help Rome to understand that they had to come back to the attitudes of the holy Pius XII and of all his predecessors. Bishop de Castro Mayer and myself have gone to Rome, we have spoken, we have sent letters, several times to Rome. We have tried by these talks, by all these means, to succeed in making Rome understand that, since the Council and since aggiornamento, this change which has occurred in the Church is not Catholic, is not in conformity to the doctrine of all times.
This is why we are convinced that, by the act of these consecrations today, we are obeying the call of these popes and as a consequence the call of God, since they represent Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Church.”

Continue–
 
Our Lady of Good Fortune Quito Ecuador 1634

vaticaninexile.com/Prophecy/GoodFortune.html
“…at the end of the 19th century and for a large part of the 20th, various heresies will flourish on this earth which will have become a free republic. The precious light of the Faith will go out in souls because of the almost total moral corruption….How many true vocations will be lost for lack of skillful and prudent direction to form them! … the air will be filled with the spirit of impurity which like a deluge of filth will flood the streets, squares and public places. The licentiousness will be such there will be no more virgin souls in the world…The innocence of childhood will almost disappear. Thus priestly vocations will be lost, it will be a real disaster. Priests will abandon their sacred duties and will depart from the path marked out for them by God. Then the Church will go through a dark night for lack of a Prelate and Father to watch over it with love, gentleness, strength and prudence and numbers of priest will lost the spirit of God, thus placing their souls in great danger… Pray constantly, cry out unwearingly and weep unceasingly with bitter tears in the depths of your heart, asking Our Father in Heaven…that He have pity on His ministers and that He put an end to such fatal times, by sending to His Church the Prelate who will restore the spirit of His priests. … With a wholly divine gentleness he will lead consecrated souls to the service of God in religious houses without making the Lord’s yoke weigh heavily upon them. He will hold in his hand the scales of the sanctuary for everything to be done in an orderly fashion for God to be glorified. This Prelate and Father will act as a counterweight to the lukewarmness of souls consecrated in the priesthood and in religion… And to scatter these black clouds blocking the brilliant dawning of the freedom of the Church, there will be a terrible war in which the blood of priests and of religious will flow … That night will be so horrible that the wickedness will seem triumphant. Then will come My time: in astounding fashion I shall destroy Satan’s pride, casting him beneath My feet, chaining him up in the depths of hell, leaving Church and country freed at last from his cruel tyranny.”
 
I have no doubt he did it with the best of intentions. That said, I believe he got it wrong. I believe he was warned. I believe that he inserted himself into a prophecy incorrectly. I think using necessity as the SSPX has done is very dangerous and, of course, has been the course of schismatics since the beginning. Can we actually think they all have ill will toward the Church? How many other schismatics are we to excuse because they felt they had necessity?

I have no ill will towards the SSPX. I have friends in the SSPX. That said, I can’t tolerate their actions anymore than I can a liberal contradicting Church teaching. I’m pretty sure this is how most of us who are perceived to “bash” the SSPX feel.

Hopefully, they will be reconciled and this debate can cease!
 
I have no doubt he did it with the best of intentions. That said, I believe he got it wrong. I believe he was warned. I believe that he inserted himself into a prophecy incorrectly. I think using necessity as the SSPX has done is very dangerous and, of course, has been the course of schismatics since the beginning. Can we actually think they all have ill will toward the Church? How many other schismatics are we to excuse because they felt they had necessity?

I have no ill will towards the SSPX. I have friends in the SSPX. That said, I can’t tolerate their actions anymore than I can a liberal contradicting Church teaching. I’m pretty sure this is how most of us who are perceived to “bash” the SSPX feel.

Hopefully, they will be reconciled and this debate can cease!
I’ve had no dealings with sspx of any sort, other then following their disruptiveness and the schismatic action of their leaders through the Catholic press. My hope regarding Lefebvre is that Almighty God found him to be demented by age and infirmity or that Lefebvre made a perfect act of contrition before his death or that he made a good confession. That’s the best I can hope for him. It bothers me in the extreme to hear him called “Archbishop” and his followers “Bishop.” Do we ever think to call Martin Luther “Father Luther?” Yes, I too hope (and pray) they will be reconciled but I see no matter for debate.
 
I’ve had no dealings with sspx of any sort, other then following their disruptiveness and the schismatic action of their leaders through the Catholic press. My hope regarding Lefebvre is that Almighty God found him to be demented by age and infirmity or that Lefebvre made a perfect act of contrition before his death or that he made a good confession. That’s the best I can hope for him. It bothers me in the extreme to hear him called “Archbishop” and his followers “Bishop.” Do we ever think to call Martin Luther “Father Luther?” Yes, I too hope (and pray) they will be reconciled but I see no matter for debate.
I think that’s a pretty ridiculous comparison; Archbishop Lefebvre was consecrated validly, as were his four Bishops. If Archbishop Lefebvre truly felt he was acting in the best interests of the church, I can’t see that these consecrations would have been gravely sinful.
 
I think that’s a pretty ridiculous comparison; Archbishop Lefebvre was consecrated validly, as were his four Bishops. If Archbishop Lefebvre truly felt he was acting in the best interests of the church, I can’t see that these consecrations would have been gravely sinful.
**Excuse me, but “feelings” have no place in Theology or in holy obedience. Feelings are feelings. Nothing will lead you off the road of grace more quickly than feelings.

Ask an average teenager. **
 
I’ve had no dealings with sspx of any sort, other then following their disruptiveness and the schismatic action of their leaders through the Catholic press. My hope regarding Lefebvre is that Almighty God found him to be demented by age and infirmity or that Lefebvre made a perfect act of contrition before his death or that he made a good confession. That’s the best I can hope for him. It bothers me in the extreme to hear him called "Archbishop" and his followers “Bishop.” Do we ever think to call Martin Luther “Father Luther?” Yes, I too hope (and pray) they will be reconciled but I see no matter for debate.

Maybe you should write to the Pope Benedict XVI to chastise him for bothering you to the extreme.

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/b16SummorumPontificum2.htm

Letter of Pope Benedict XVI to the Bishops of the World to Present the “Motu Proprio” on the Use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the Reforms of 1970.
Benedict XVI

“We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level.”
 

Maybe you should write to the Pope Benedict XVI to chastise him for bothering you to the extreme.

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/b16SummorumPontificum2.htm

Letter of Pope Benedict XVI to the Bishops of the World to Present the “Motu Proprio” on the Use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the Reforms of 1970.
Benedict XVI

“We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level.”
Nawww. Statements of the Holy Father never bother me.
(An exception to the rule. There are others.)

Thanks for you concern though and the free advice too.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home​

Maybe you should write to the Pope Benedict XVI to chastise him for bothering you to the extreme.

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc…ontificum2.htm

Letter of Pope Benedict XVI to the Bishops of the World to Present the “Motu Proprio” on the Use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the Reforms of 1970.
Benedict XVI

“We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level.”

Nawww. Statements of the Holy Father never bother me.
(An exception to the rule. There are others.)

Thanks for you concern though and the free advice too.

Your are very welcome. I just thought since you are so extremely bothered by hearing him called “Archbishop” —why not start at the top-- with the Pope. After all-- the Pope still gives to the Arch. the dignity and acknowledgment that the Arch. is validly ordained and retained Apostolic Succession.
 
My hope regarding Lefebvre is that Almighty God found him to be demented by age and infirmity …That’s the best I can hope for him.
:eek: :confused: .
It bothers me in the extreme to hear him called “Archbishop” and his followers “Bishop.” Do we ever think to call Martin Luther “Father Luther?” Yes, I too hope (and pray) they will be reconciled but I see no matter for debate.
Again Ridiculous. Are you saying he was not a valid Archbishop?:eek:
 
:eek: :confused: .

Again Ridiculous. Are you saying he was not a valid Archbishop?:eek:
I can’t see the big deal about this one. If the Church agrees that he is a validly ordained priest and elevated him to Archbishop, I don’t have a problem with it. He was never laicized. He did, indeed, retain his title until death.🤷
 
I think that’s a pretty ridiculous comparison; Archbishop Lefebvre was consecrated validly, as were his four Bishops. If Archbishop Lefebvre truly felt he was acting in the best interests of the church, I can’t see that these consecrations would have been gravely sinful.
How were the 4 bishops concecrated validly if the act of this concecration is what got them excommunicated?
 
How were the 4 bishops concecrated validly if the act of this concecration is what got them excommunicated?
The bishops have apostolic succession. If they had the proper matter, form and intent (that is intent to ordain a bishop), the consecrations are valid. It doesn’t matter that they are illicit. In otherwords, the ordinations were valid meaning that they had proper form, matter and intent. They were illicit because they were done without a papal mandate.
 
How were the 4 bishops concecrated validly if the act of this concecration is what got them excommunicated?

Because Arch. Lefebvre & Bishop Castro Mayer --who together consecrated the 4 bishops --where themselves validly consecrated and had Apostolic Succession.
 
I have a question…

Did Archbishop Lefebvre change the faith? He accepted Vatican II did he change the faith as Martin Luther did? Was he faithful to the faith, but illicitly ordained some Bishops to protect the faith?

Can I have some “progressive” opinion on this?

God Bless
Scylla
 
I can’t see the big deal about this one. If the Church agrees that he is a validly ordained priest and elevated him to Archbishop, I don’t have a problem with it. He was never laicized. He did, indeed, retain his title until death.🤷
bear06, you make it SO easy for me to reconsider and change my mind. I’m guessing it has to do with your patience and your respectful approach. Again, thank you for “enlightening” me!

Bless you!
 
Did ArchBishop Lefebvre ever have an audience with the pope in the time leading up to the concecrations? Or did he always have to go through “middlemen”?

If the latter is the case - I can see right now how the excommunication(s) could possibly be lifted in the future…that being that the pope might not have had all the information of the situation, or might have had some inaccurate information. There could have been some breakdown in the communication between the pope and the archbishop that could nullify the disciplinary decision.

Not that this did happen or is going to happen, I just think it’s a possibility - and I wouldn’t fall off of my chair in surprise if it comes to pass this way.

There were alot of “middlemen” out to “get” the Archbishop, no?

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad
 
The bishops have apostolic succession. If they had the proper matter, form and intent (that is intent to ordain a bishop), the consecrations are valid. It doesn’t matter that they are illicit. In otherwords, the ordinations were valid meaning that they had proper form, matter and intent. They were illicit because they were done without a papal mandate.
Oh. I get it. It is just like a bank robber. He validly has money in his possession but he got it illicitly.
 
Did ArchBishop Lefebvre ever have an audience with the pope in the time leading up to the concecrations? Or did he always have to go through “middlemen”?

If the latter is the case - I can see right now how the excommunication(s) could possibly be lifted in the future…that being that the pope might not have had all the information of the situation, or might have had some inaccurate information. There could have been some breakdown in the communication between the pope and the archbishop that could nullify the disciplinary decision.

Not that this did happen or is going to happen, I just think it’s a possibility - and I wouldn’t fall off of my chair in surprise if it comes to pass this way.

There were alot of “middlemen” out to “get” the Archbishop, no?

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad
The current Holy Father was the “middleman”. Here’s the history.
sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id8.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top