S
Sean_O_L
Guest
Recently I replied to an apologist for the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) who complained in a post to the Liturgy and Sacraments section [Scroll to Message #46 ] of Karl Keating’s Catholic Answers Forum:
Well, let’s see who are the “very very angry” ones:
But first:
b>Extracts from an Interview with Michael Davies
November 1976
Firstly: Archbishop Lefebvre agreed with the propositions that
Nov. 21, 1974
“Lefebvre castigates Vatican II, declaring the reform of Vatican Council II to be entirely corrupt, coming from and resulting in heresy; it is not possible for any faithful Catholic to adopt or submit to it in any way, but that it is to be categorically refused. He says that he held firmly to all that has been believed and practiced in matters of faith, morals, worship, catechetical instruction, priestly formation, Church institutions, and such things codified in the books which appeared before the Modernist influence of the Council. Rome is neo-modernist and neo-protestant. It is impossible for any alert Catholic to adopt or submit to it in any way at all.”
[Declaration of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre “Catholic”, Jan 87, p6., and ECÔNE FULL STOP, Fortes in Fide, by Fr Noél Barbara.]
May 15, 1976
“Bugnini denied the charge that he was a Freemason, both during the summer of 1975 and in the years that followed. He maintained it was a false and calumnious charge until his dying day.” …] “Despite Bugnini’s denials, the charges continued to be repeated. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, by the mid-1970’s already on a collision course with Rome, told his friends and benefectors that ‘until 1975 the principal director of liturgical reforms at the Vatican was a Freemason.’ (Lettre aux amis et bienfaiteurs [d’Econe], no. 10, May 15, 1976” - as reported by Dr. Robert Moynihan The Bitter Struggle
It appears that the only evidence is polemical and circumstantial. No actual verifiable evidence appears to have surfaced to verify the calumny.
July 29, 1976
On this day, under the shock of the suspension a divinis, Mgr. Lefebvre declared: “This conciliar church is a schismatic church because it breaks with the Catholic Church of the centuries …” “This conciliar church is schismatic because it has taken as the basis for its updating principles opposed to those of the Catholic Church.” “The church which affirms errors like these is both schismatic and heretical. This conciliar church is thus not Catholic.”
Aug 4, 1976
Mgr. Lefebvre treats the conciliar church, its hierarchy and particularly its “pope” as schismatic: “All those who cooperate in the application of this upheaval, accept and adhere to this new conciliar church … enter into schism.”
[Le Figaro, Aug. 4, 1976. ECÔNE FULL STOP, Fortes in Fide, by Fr Noél Barbara.]
READ THE FULL FILE
Angry? I am, simply, doing penance for my sins. Schism IS a most serious sin. To see so many good persons become involved in serious sin which, possibly, involves the loss of souls, for the lack of solid information - that is a tragedy compounded. As for the Jews? Because of other events - ought I not attempt to lessen anti-semetism? After all, Jesus, Mary and most of the Apostles were Jews (or Judeans), weren’t they? Ought I to tolerate attacks on THEM because some of the descendents of “the Jews” today do naughty things?
Well, let’s see who are the “very very angry” ones:
But first:
b>Extracts from an Interview with Michael Davies
November 1976
Firstly: Archbishop Lefebvre agreed with the propositions that
WHAT ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE SAID/DID NEGATIVELY:
Nov. 21, 1974
“Lefebvre castigates Vatican II, declaring the reform of Vatican Council II to be entirely corrupt, coming from and resulting in heresy; it is not possible for any faithful Catholic to adopt or submit to it in any way, but that it is to be categorically refused. He says that he held firmly to all that has been believed and practiced in matters of faith, morals, worship, catechetical instruction, priestly formation, Church institutions, and such things codified in the books which appeared before the Modernist influence of the Council. Rome is neo-modernist and neo-protestant. It is impossible for any alert Catholic to adopt or submit to it in any way at all.”
[Declaration of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre “Catholic”, Jan 87, p6., and ECÔNE FULL STOP, Fortes in Fide, by Fr Noél Barbara.]
May 15, 1976
“Bugnini denied the charge that he was a Freemason, both during the summer of 1975 and in the years that followed. He maintained it was a false and calumnious charge until his dying day.” …] “Despite Bugnini’s denials, the charges continued to be repeated. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, by the mid-1970’s already on a collision course with Rome, told his friends and benefectors that ‘until 1975 the principal director of liturgical reforms at the Vatican was a Freemason.’ (Lettre aux amis et bienfaiteurs [d’Econe], no. 10, May 15, 1976” - as reported by Dr. Robert Moynihan The Bitter Struggle
It appears that the only evidence is polemical and circumstantial. No actual verifiable evidence appears to have surfaced to verify the calumny.
July 29, 1976
On this day, under the shock of the suspension a divinis, Mgr. Lefebvre declared: “This conciliar church is a schismatic church because it breaks with the Catholic Church of the centuries …” “This conciliar church is schismatic because it has taken as the basis for its updating principles opposed to those of the Catholic Church.” “The church which affirms errors like these is both schismatic and heretical. This conciliar church is thus not Catholic.”
Aug 4, 1976
Mgr. Lefebvre treats the conciliar church, its hierarchy and particularly its “pope” as schismatic: “All those who cooperate in the application of this upheaval, accept and adhere to this new conciliar church … enter into schism.”
[Le Figaro, Aug. 4, 1976. ECÔNE FULL STOP, Fortes in Fide, by Fr Noél Barbara.]
READ THE FULL FILE