Lefebvre´s "Letter to Confused Catholics" is awesome!

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

santodomingo

Guest
Does anybody else, who is not a member of SSPX, also think that Archbishop Lefebvre´s “Letter to Confused Catholics” is an extraordinary, indeed prophetic piece of writing?

I have read several threads about the SSPX here, but when I went to the source (the founder) I was agreeably surprised to discover that I agreed wholeheartedly with him. There were so many things he says that I hadn´t even managed to formulate coherently in my head, but when I read them they rang true. As George Orwell said, “a great writer tells you things you already knew”.

His explanation for the diminishing religiosity in the West I think is spot on. The spirit of reverence has all but disappeared from the Novus Ordo masses. What differentiates a catholic Mass from a Lutheran service? In too many cases, almost nothing.

I´d be interested to hear what other traditionalists (not necessarily members of SSPX) think about this letter. I know at least half a dozen priests who have preached heresy in my presence, ranging from the denial of Purgatory, Hell, Judgement, sanctifying grace, the infallibility of Scripture, to the Immaculate Conception of Mary. Yet they are respected and promoted. Archbishop Lefebvre spoke the truth as has always been taught by the Church, and he was excommunicated. (I understand he was excommunicated for an act of disobedience.) It just seems incredible that the one man who fought heresy with all his strength is considered a pariah in the Church.
 
santodomingo said:
Does anybody else, who is not a member of SSPX, also think that Archbishop Lefebvre´s “Letter to Confused Catholics” is an extraordinary, indeed prophetic piece of writing?

I have read several threads about the SSPX here, but when I went to the source (the founder) I was agreeably surprised to discover that I agreed wholeheartedly with him. There were so many things he says that I hadn´t even managed to formulate coherently in my head, but when I read them they rang true. As George Orwell said, “a great writer tells you things you already knew”.

His explanation for the diminishing religiosity in the West I think is spot on. The spirit of reverence has all but disappeared from the Novus Ordo masses. What differentiates a catholic Mass from a Lutheran service? In too many cases, almost nothing.

I´d be interested to hear what other traditionalists (not necessarily members of SSPX) think about this letter. I know at least half a dozen priests who have preached heresy in my presence, ranging from the denial of Purgatory, Hell, Judgement, sanctifying grace, the infallibility of Scripture, to the Immaculate Conception of Mary. Yet they are respected and promoted. Archbishop Lefebvre spoke the truth as has always been taught by the Church, and he was excommunicated. (I understand he was excommunicated for an act of disobedience.) It just seems incredible that the one man who fought heresy with all his strength is considered a pariah in the Church.
Click to expand...
Yes, there’s a ring of truth in Lefebvre’s letter. My parish priest has given a few parishioners pause at some of the things he has said. Many have left not that there is any notice because it is a huge church. I haven’t been supportive of all the changes made since Vatican II.

I assume he was excommunicated because he wasn’t obedient to the Pope.

I have problems with him because of Bishop Williamson. I totally disagree with him re. his anti-semitism. Simultanelously, I don’t understand why, after all these years, the Vatican wasn’t aware that Williamson was a loose canon. I don’t believe his excommunication should have been lifted until he renounced his anit-semitic beliefs.
 
I have no desire to get interposed in the SSPX controversy.

Some years ago, I was going somewhere in mid-town Manhattan and stopped in at St. Patrick’s Cathedral. It turned out that Cardinal O’Connor was saying Mass (a regular daily Mass). Turned out to be the feast of St. Athanasius.

The Cardinal had a nasty head cold and kept his homily short. What he said was that if you think the problems facing the Church today are bad, consider that Athanasius spent his whole life fighting the heresy that Christ was not divine. [Now, it has been a number of years and my memory may be faulty. And from time to time, I have looked up St. Athanasius. I even have friends with that name and I remind them of who they are named after.)

Nevertheless, Athanasius had all sorts of “political problems” inside the Church. But he fought on.

I have no idea if Lefebvre falls into this category. Seems that he is sincere and devout. And the Holy Father, Pope Benedict, did recently write a personal explanation of his removal of the excommunication … this episode in the life / history of the Church is not over.

I am encouraged that some of the declines in the life / history of the Church lasted hundreds of years and that the Church came back more vigorous than before.

So, let us pray for the safety of the souls of the members of the Church in the intervening period … between now and when the current mess(es) get straightened out.

I’ve written before and will continue to exhort and encourage everyone to pray to the Holy Spirit … for the Holy Spirit to get more involved and to get involved differently and more creatively … I’m impatient. Don’t have THAT many more years remaining and don’t want for the Church to have to go another 300 or 500 or 1500 years to get some of the current “controversies” worked out.

I know all about that God’s ways are not our ways … but I’m still impatient. And I worry about all those lost souls who just get “loster” in the long process.

I’m encouraged by books such as “How the Irish Saved Civilization”. But those 800 year periods leave me lacking satisfaction. [How impatient of me.]

:eek:
😛
 
Archbishop Lefebvre saw the destructive changes that resulted from Vatican II. The Church, since Vatican II, has tolerance for everything. It has tolerance for every false and pagan religion, teaching that they all lead to God and are means to salvation. It has tolerance for religious liberty, rejecting the perennial teaching of the Social Reign of Christ the King. It has tolerance for sodomy and baby killers -Joseph Naumann, archbishop of Kansas City, Kansas, performed a Novus Ordo service for the baby killer George Tiller. Writing in his archdiocesan organ, The Leaven, Naumann said **“abortionists are not evil people,” **- The Church now says that the Old Covenant is still in effect for the Jews and that they still are waiting for their Messiah and that they do not need to be converted. The Church, since Vatican II, does not try to convert anyone to the Catholic Faith anymore since they believe that all religions lead to God anyway. As mentioned by the previous posters, all manner of heresies are now taught from the pulpits of the post Vatican II Churches, and this goes on unchecked.

The only thing the new Church does not have tolerance for is the Catholic Faith as has been believed everywhere, always, and by all for over 1960 years.

By the way, the opinion of Bishop Williamson on a matter of secular history - unpopular and offensive as it may be - has, or should have, nothing to do with his standing as a Catholic.
 
Thomas58 said:
Archbishop Lefebvre saw the destructive changes that resulted from Vatican II. The Church, since Vatican II, has tolerance for everything. It has tolerance for every false and pagan religion, teaching that they all lead to God and are means to salvation. It has tolerance for religious liberty, rejecting the perennial teaching of the Social Reign of Christ the King. It has tolerance for sodomy and baby killers -Joseph Naumann, archbishop of Kansas City, Kansas, performed a Novus Ordo service for the baby killer George Tiller. Writing in his archdiocesan organ, The Leaven, Naumann said **“abortionists are not evil people,” **- The Church now says that the Old Covenant is still in effect for the Jews and that they still are waiting for their Messiah and that they do not need to be converted. The Church, since Vatican II, does not try to convert anyone to the Catholic Faith anymore since they believe that all religions lead to God anyway. As mentioned by the previous posters, all manner of heresies are now taught from the pulpits of the post Vatican II Churches, and this goes on unchecked.

The only thing the new Church does not have tolerance for is the Catholic Faith as has been believed everywhere, always, and by all for over 1960 years.

By the way, the opinion of Bishop Williamson on a matter of secular history - unpopular and offensive as it may be - has, or should have, nothing to do with his standing as a Catholic.
Click to expand...
Strongly disagree. Bishop Williamson stirs up the stuff that led to the extermination of 6 million Jews plus millions of others including those Catholics etc. who tried to protect them. And Nauman with his statement that “abortionists aren’t evil” confuses the issue. They most certainly are evil. He was given 66,000 times the chance to repent. It is between him and God now. The NO service…is that a Mass?
 
Strongly disagree. Bishop Williamson stirs up the stuff that led to the extermination of 6 million Jews plus millions of others including those Catholics etc. who tried to protect them
Click to expand...
What heresy contrary to Catholic doctrine does Bishop Williamson teach? The history of the Holocaust of the Jews during WWII is not part of Catholic doctrine, it is a part of secular history, totally unrelated to Catholic doctrine.

I am not condoning what he said, all I am saying is that it has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. Bishop Williamson’s mistake was in making public statements regarding his unpopular opinions. He should have kept these opinions to himself.

Thomas
 
Thomas58 said:
What heresy contrary to Catholic doctrine does Bishop Williamson teach? The history of the Holocaust of the Jews during WWII is not part of Catholic doctrine, it is a part of secular history, totally unrelated to Catholic doctrine.

I am not condoning what he said, all I am saying is that it has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. Bishop Williamson’s mistake was in making public statements regarding his unpopular opinions. He should have kept these opinions to himself.

Thomas
Click to expand...
Edith Stein was made a saint by the Catholic Church. The woman was a Jew who converted and became a nun. She and her sister were arrested and killed in Auschwitz because they were Jews. A short time after canonization, we have an excommunicated Bishop taken back into the church who’s first words out of his mouth announce to the world that he is an anti-Semite. Williamson actually denies that the Nazis used gas, the very method by which Stein died. He promotes “The Protocals of Zion”. This man is wrong. He’s the proof that there were priests who believed Hitler. It may not be heresy but it is still wrong. He apologized to the Pope but he never changed his views.

Anyone who holds the views of either of these two men, shouldn’t be priests.
 
I like ‘Open Letter To Confused Catholics’🙂

And I am a prime example of a “confused Catholic”😃
 
Thomas58 said:
What heresy contrary to Catholic doctrine does Bishop Williamson teach? The history of the Holocaust of the Jews during WWII is not part of Catholic doctrine, it is a part of secular history, totally unrelated to Catholic doctrine.

I am not condoning what he said, all I am saying is that it has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. Bishop Williamson’s mistake was in making public statements regarding his unpopular opinions. He should have kept these opinions to himself.

Thomas
Click to expand...
Did Jesus not say “love your enemy?” [Not insinuating that the Jews are the enemy] Did Jesus not say “Blessed are the merciful?” Neither of those statements can be said true of Bishop Williamson. The man is a monster and a horrible example for Catholics.

Back to the topic however, “Letter” was quite an enjoyable read. He [Lefebvre] does make many good points.
 
Thomas:

You need to do what one friend of mine has done, & what I believed Archbishop Lefebvre did in his writings - You need to differentiate between the WORDS OF VATICAN II and the SPIRIT OF VATICAN II. Although the WORDS of Vatican II are part of the Teaching of the Church, the SPIRIT of Vatican II often runs counter to the Teaching of the Church. According to the WORDS of Vatican II, NONE of the things you claimed the Catholic Church has tolerated should have been tolerated…
Thomas58 said:
Archbishop Lefebvre saw the destructive changes that resulted from Vatican II. The Church, since Vatican II, has tolerance for everything. It has tolerance for every false and pagan religion, teaching that they all lead to God and are means to salvation. It has tolerance for religious liberty, rejecting the perennial teaching of the Social Reign of Christ the King. It has tolerance for sodomy and baby killers - Joseph Naumann, archbishop of Kansas City, Kansas, performed a Novus Ordo service for the baby killer George Tiller. Writing in his archdiocesan organ, The Leaven, Naumann said **“abortionists are not evil people,” **
Click to expand...
In spite of the objections of some hypersensitive “Liberals” within the Church, the Teaching of the Church on Salvation is still proclaimed by Dominus Iusus, and not even the Hyperliberals at USF could keep the SI Institute from sponsoring a symposium on the Ordinary Magisterium of the church in 1978 (I handed out flyers on this one). I can’t believe you’ve using a misunderstanding of the Church’s Teaching on “Religious Freedom” in your post! Here’s the ONE article on the subject of the Mass offered for the repose of the soul of George Tiller - FYI, We’re obligated to pray for the souls even of the UNJUST & of the EVIL.
CNA - Tiller’s death brings pro-Life reaction and permanent clinic closing
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=16236

What the good Archbishop should have said is that Dr. Tiller’s actions were truly EVIL, but that we as Catholics have an obligation to pray for his soul and left it at that. but, Like many others (including yours truly) who felt the need to clarify when NO clarification was need needed, he only stuck his size 11’s in his mouth & CHEWED THOROUGHLY! He’s not an apostate - It’s just like many influenced by the “Spirit of the Age” (It was happening BEFORE Vatican II too), he forgot that EVIL ACTS ARE EVIL, and THEY ARE EVIL IN THEIR EFFECTS. He also forgot that our job is to judge the ACTS and to PRAY for the PERSON, and that GOD will judge the PERSON and the HE will judge the HEART, not us.

Thomas, you threw a lot of stuff on the wall on that one post. Could you please LINK your accusations next time and limit them to 2 to 4 per post so others answer them? and, Could you also remember that you’re talking about Bishops to whom deference and some benefit of the doubt is due? and, NO Matter how frustrated you are, could you remember that the Bishops really need our prayers and our charity?

We’re not trying to start a new Church here - we’re trying to make the one we’re in better and more Holy.

Your Brother and Servant in Christ, Michael
 
JustaServant said:
I’m not a supporter of Williamson, but do you have evidence to back that? Just curious.
Click to expand...
Just a Servant:

Here’s your evidence:

THE CATHOLIC HERALD - Lefebvrists face crises as bishop is exposed as “dangerous” anti-Semite" & Leading Article (editorial)
catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000226.shtml
catholicherald.co.uk/articles/editorial/e0000252.shtml
Bishop Williamson’s Letters - Using Wayback Machine - Link from Here
romancatholicism.org/bp-williamson.htm
Telegraph.co.uk - The internet may make cynics of us yet
tinyurl.com/pxeuk7
You Tube Interview on Swedish TV
youtube.com/watch?v=FobkmF21f2w

According to the Torah, I only need 2 or 3 Witnesses, I’ve produced 4 + a Video. The Prosecution Rests.

Yours in Christ, Michael
 
Lisa44 said:
Hi Michael,

I’m confused, your label says “Anglican”?
Click to expand...
Lisa:

Don’t be. I’m the only “Anglican” you know who knows Fr. Joseph Fessio (Is he ever going to clobber me when he sees me - With my own Lectionary no less!), has Lectored at St. Ignatius Catholic Church in San Francisco (and taught others to do it - HUGE CHURCH) and another Catholic Parish down here, has taught what used to be called CCD (Confirmation Class) in a Catholic Parish - I’ve posted on that here before…

If you read my posts on the forum, you’ll find I often answer the questions & objections of those who have difficulties with the Catholic Faith, including many who are Catholic but who have problems with the Teachings of the Catholic Church.

Some of your confusion probably arises from the fact that most people are familiar with the antics of the Anglican Communion in general and The Episcopal Church (formerly PECUSA) in particular, and know LITTLE or NOTHING about the ANGLICAN CONTINUUM or the Traditional Anglican Communion which has spent the last 15 years (the Union of Brest which brought in a few of the Eastern Catholic Churches required 30 years) negotiating first with Pope john Paul II & Cadinal Ratzinger & now with Pope Benedict XVI & Cardinal Levada (There’s nothing like “Continuity of Care” when it comes to things like this!).

I actually threw a BIG Monkey Wrench in the negotiations about 4 years ago - RIGHT HERE AT CATHOLIC ANSWERS! I can talk about that later, if you want.

I was gone from the Church (I mean REALLY GONE) for 20+ years. I was so far gone that when I was suffering from SPINAL HEADACHES (I KNOW you can scream from pain while in coma) for almost 5 days & couldn’t lift up my head (forget sitting up or standing) - I didn’t ask for a priest or minister or even pray ONCE!

I’ve posted elsewhere on this forum what it took God to get me back, and the type of shape I was in. I can tell you I wouldn’t have made it in your standard Roman Catholic “Mega-Parish”. I probably would have been gone within a month. As it was, I probably contributed to the “burn-out” of the priest who fell away from the Church I went to. and, A few of the people there still think of me as “Walking Wounded”.

And, Yes, I also have a vested interest in a healthy vibrant Roman Catholic Church. I also want just as much as anyone here to see reverent Liturgies at my local Roman Parishes, to see the Lord worshiped in “the Beauty of Holiness” “with Holy Fear”. I know that we will treat each other no better than we treat our Lord.

I hope this makes things clear.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael
 
Traditional_Ang said:
Just a Servant:

Here’s your evidence:

THE CATHOLIC HERALD - Lefebvrists face crises as bishop is exposed as “dangerous” anti-Semite" & Leading Article (editorial)
catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000226.shtml
catholicherald.co.uk/articles/editorial/e0000252.shtml
Bishop Williamson’s Letters - Using Wayback Machine - Link from Here
romancatholicism.org/bp-williamson.htm
Telegraph.co.uk - The internet may make cynics of us yet
tinyurl.com/pxeuk7
You Tube Interview on Swedish TV
youtube.com/watch?v=FobkmF21f2w

According to the Torah, I only need 2 or 3 Witnesses, I’ve produced 4 + a Video. The Prosecution Rests.

Yours in Christ, Michael
Click to expand...
Wow, Thanks.
 
santodomingo said:
Archbishop Lefebvre spoke the truth as has always been taught by the Church, and he was excommunicated. (I understand he was excommunicated for an act of disobedience.) It just seems incredible that the one man who fought heresy with all his strength is considered a pariah in the Church.
Click to expand...
Luther and many who followed him also thought he spoke the truth. Speaking truth and disobedience to authority are poor bedfellows.👍
 
I highly recommend it to all Catholics, it is an eye opener, to say the least.

I literally fell out of my chair at times (really!) as I read the statements that he made and made me wonder if many of the faithful are just blind to the realities of the situations in the Church, or if they are simply ignorant or they do not care anymore.
 
em3boone said:
sspxasia.com/Documents/Society_of_Saint_Pius_X/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/

There you go
Click to expand...
I understand Abp. Lefebvre’s objections to Dignitatis Humanae, but I disagree with his logic because of his premises - Abp. Lefebvre is treating the document as a product of French Leftist thought. He just can’t help it.

I ask you to read the Preface to the Open Letter - esp. this part:

We must remember that His Grace is writing against the background of France, where ideas are generally more clear‑cut than they are in Great Britain, or at any rate, in England. Take the word “socialism,” for example; that means to some of us, first and foremost, a social ideal of brotherhood and justice. We have had our Christian socialists. On the Continent, however, Socialism is uncompromisingly anti‑religious, or almost a substitute for religion, and Communism is seen as the natural development from it. This is the Socialism the Archbishop is writing about. And when he rejects Liberalism, he is not thinking of the Liberal Party, or of the virtue of liberality, but of that religious liberalism that exalts human liberty above the claims of God or of His Church, and which Newman said that it had been his life’s work to combat. It is because Vatican II’s *Declaration on Religious Liberty *contains phrases that encourage this liberalism that the Archbishop asks for its revision. Modernism, too, has a special meaning: not a simple urge to be up‑to‑date, but the particular system of ideas which was condemned by Pope St. Pius X on the grounds that, on the pretext of making Revelation acceptable to the modern mentality, it destroyed the very foundations of belief in revealed Truth.

Remember, the majority of the Bishops who attended Vatican II weren’t European - many lived in countries where they were persecuted for being Christians, while some lived in countries where all religions are illegal. and, Dignitatis Humanae was written in LATIN not FRENCH.

I had hoped that Abp. Lefebvre would have been able to differentiate between the WORDS of Vatican II, what the Council actually said, which cannot be in error, and the SPIRIT of Vatican II which has been used to do more harm than anyone can imagine. but, Sadly, I was wrong.

2 examples - Vatican II actually said to give Latin and Gregorian Chant PRIDE OF PLACE; the SPIRIT of Vatican II said to CHANGE & CHUCK Latin & Gregorian Chant. Vatican II said the “People of God” should be catechized so they can more fully participate in the liturgy; the SPIRIT of Vatican II caused catechesis to be thrown out the window & the worst possible translation (personal opinion) used (into English) so no one would be “left behind”.

I hope this makes sense.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top