Skip to main content

The Line of Archbishop Lefebvre - Reboot

Image
By
+
JMJ

I haven't written about the 'Resistance' for sometime as ... well frankly ... I'm 'retired' and sometimes you just need to have a face-to-face discussion in order to make any headway in evaluating the various positions that the 'Resistors' take.

But I have some time ... so ...



One item that is a fall back position for 'Resistors' is the statement that Archbishop Lefevbre said "No canonical regularization without a doctrinal agreement".

I challenge any 'Resistor' to provide a reference where the Archbishop said these exact words.

News flash - he didn't.

For those 'Resistors' who aren't mindlessly repeating something they heard elsewhere, this is usually taken as a reference to an interview given to Fideliter in 1988.
I can’t speak much of the future, mine is behind me, but if I live a little while, supposing that Rome calls for a renewed dialogue, then, I will put conditions. I shall not accept being in the position where I was put during the dialogue. No more. I will place the discussion at the doctrinal level: “Do you agree with the great encyclicals of all the popes who preceded you? Do you agree with Quanta Cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei and Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi Gregis of Pius X, Quas Primas of Pius XI, Humani Generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these Popes and their teachings? Do you still accept the entire Anti-Modernist Oath? Are you in favor of the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors, it is useless to talk! As long as you do not accept the correction of the Council, in consideration of the doctrine of these Popes, your predecessors, no dialogue is possible. It is useless.”Thus, the positions will be clear. (Fideliter interview Nov / Dec 1988)
Before we go through the quote, I think it is valid to recognize that the "no canonical ..." is actually a principle established by the 2000 or 2006 general chapter of the SSPX in their dealings with Rome.  It is also important to note that this interview appeared in the Nov / Dec 1988 issue of the Fideliter and that the whole context of the Archbishop's thoughts need to include the statements made by the Archbishop before and after this interview (for example see this article and these two interviews).

Now back to the principle and the actual words of Archbishop Lefebvre.


  1. We can factually establish that Archbishop Lefebvre did not make the statement the "Resistors" love so much.
  2. The Archbishop was speaking if he was alive and Rome called for a renewed 'dialogue', he was clear that he couldn't "speak much of the future".  The Archbishop went to his reward 25 years ago in 1991.
  3. We have the summary statement "If you do not accept the doctrine of your ... as long as you do not accept the correction of the Council ...".

Now this is interesting, as the SSPX discussions were all about expressing and discusssing the core issues with the Council.  The endpoint was that the Roman theologians accused the SSPX of being protestants and the SSPX rebuted that they were Modernists.

What 'Resistors' seem to miss is that if the SSPX were regularized while maintaining their position on the Council (read Four Points), this in itself is a doctrinal agreement that the Council can be corrected as Rome will have accepted that one can be Catholic and not accept the Second Vatican Council in the manner of the SSPX.

But, the likes of the Resistors have a fundamental assumption that the ONLY way for this crisis to be resolved is for the immediate abrogation of the Novus Ordo Missae and condemnation of the Second Vatican Council.

That would be a first. It took almost 200 years for Arianism to be purged from the Church.

Seems to be a lack patience and perhaps even more a lack of gratitude.

Be careful, if you find yourself becoming bitter and self-righteous, you may be on the wrong path.  Can one really be called "Traditional Catholic" if they disregard Church Teaching???

The fall of Bishop Williamson et al is something to keep before our eyes in order to remain humble and grateful for the gifts that God has granted us with no merit of our own.

P^3


Further Reading
Tradicat: Satis Cognitum and the SSPX - part 1
Tradicat: Satis Cognitum and the SSPX - part 2
Tradicat: One and two years after the consecrations
Tradicat: A theologians questions

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Church Militant TV and the SSPX - Again

By
+ JMJ The old narrative used to be that the SSPX was 'schismatic' and 'excommunicated'. Now the excommunication has been lifted for a number of years and the only ones who think it still has effect are the 'resistors'. That leaves the other opponents of the SSPX with the label 'schismatic'. Make it clear, the conservative Catholics have issues with the SSPX probably because they violate some of their assumptions about the Faith and this crisis of the Church. Church Militant TV is one of these the exists along the Catholic thought spectrum. They like the Traditional Mass but must ensure that they don't get tarred with the same 'schismatic' brush that the liberals use against the SSPX.  So what do they do, they use the same brush against the SSPX. The funny thing is that even when the Church does speak, they don't want to listen and persist in calling the SSPX 'schismatic'. Here's a transcript of the latest s...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

By
 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too th...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Position of the SSPX on Canonizations by the Saint Factory

By
+ JMJ I have sometimes been criticized for including 'St' as a title for Pope John Paul II et al. I've given my reasons here  in a discussion with Alex Long. The question is one of prudence in discussions with ntCatholics and in some cases with tCatholics. In discussions with:  ntCatholics, I will use the title in order to continue the discussion and help them arrive at a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. tCatholics, I will use the title in order to broaden their perspective on the doctrine of dogmatic facts. This broader perspective is, in my opinion, essential maintaining a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. So from a doctrinal position, I have written the article Dogmatic Fact of Fancy  and includes a reference on canonizations. Now, I know the position of the SSPX is that the canonizations are doubtful (see references below) and I also know of at least one non-SSPX theologian who agrees with the level of doubt du...
Post a Comment
Read more