Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

SOME ANSWERS

SOME ANSWERS on November 16, 2024

The chaos of today is serving to purge

Mankind. Bad men will undergo the scourge.

60 years ago this writer was given by God a real sense of civilisation disintegrating. From there it was merely a matter of time (and grace) before the pursuit of Truth led him to the Catholic Church. The same pursuit of Truth led him at the end of 1972 to Archbishop Lefebvre and to his Seminary in Econe, Switzerland. At the same time he entered the Society of St Pius X which had been founded as a framework of the Church to surround and support the priests that the Archbishop would soon be ordaining. He foresaw difficulties with the official Church in a few years’ time. He was right.

If he was right, how could he envisage defying the official Church? Because the Faith is greater than obedience. Alas, even the successors of Archbishop Lefebvre at the head of the Society that he founded, failed, like the churchmen of Vatican II, to have his grasp of the necessity to “disobey” when the Faith is at stake. Better to obey God than men, says St Peter (Acts IV, 19). The drama of our poor age is that the mass of men have lost their grip on objective truth. As man is taken to be above God, so the subject is supposedly above the object (Emmanuel Kant). This error “liberates” from any objective truth or faith.

What about the Priestly Union of Marcel Lefebvre? It became defunct and was dissolved soon after its founding in 2013, because of serious dissension among its first members. Since then the so-called “Resistance” has not been structured in any way. It is merely a loose association of priests who all over the world see the crisis of the Church in the same way, namely that neither the Newchurch of Vatican II, nor the “sedevacantists” against Vatican II (at least the dogmatic ones), nor the Newsociety following a different orientation from that of its Founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, have the right answer to the Church’s crisis. However, only the true Church’s proper Authority can impose what is God’s own answer, so the loose association of resistant priests waits for Almighty God to restore His stricken Papacy. Meanwhile, “The Shepherd is struck and the sheep are scattered.” Because this “Resistance” is not structured or even organised, it is difficult to tell just how many priests might claim that they belong to it.

As for the Newchurch, “renewed” by Vatican II in the 1960’s, it is surely much further down the path of total destruction than it was in the 1970’s or 80’s. The downhill slide is inexorable, until the churchmen abandon these disastrous principles of the French Revolution and of the modern world which were designed from the beginning by Judeo-masonry to do away with God, with Jesus Christ and with His Catholic Church. It looks very much as though only a severe Chastisement from God will bring the Conciliar churchmen to their Catholic senses. Alas, numbers of churchmen still refuse to understand that the Faith is greater than obedience, because Catholic obedience is only for the Faith. Authority exists in the Church only to protect the Truth from human beings, who all suffer from original sin. “Obedience is not the servant of obedience” – Spanish proverb. Obedience is the servant of Truth, and not its master.

True Catholic obedience presupposes a truly Catholic Pope at the top of the pyramid of the Church’s hierarchy. For such a Pope, God wants us to wait and to pray. We will have him, in God’s good time. If Catholics do see at last the need to return to Tradition, it is understandable if they wish to go further back than the liturgical reform of 1962, but it is not essential. Patience. The liturgy will be properly restored.

Catholics who in the 2020’s realise that they risk losing the Faith if they obey their Conciliar clergy need to do two things. Firstly, pray every day all 15 Mysteries of the Holy Rosary, and not just five. Secondly, to make sure of saving their souls for eternity, they need to find out all about the Five First Saturdays of Our Lady of Fatima, and do them. She will then look after them and protect them from the world, the flesh and the Devil, as only She can. And they will help towards the Consecration of Russia, essential for the restoration of the Catholic Church.

Kyrie eleison.

VIGILANT BISHOP

VIGILANT BISHOP on November 9, 2024

A bishop guards his flock by truth they learn.

That doctrine into fibs the modernists turn.

Just over one month ago one of the four bishops consecrated in 1988 by Archbishop Lefebvre without the Pope’s permission, died. It was from a fracture of the skull from falling down on a stone staircase in the Seminary of Econe, Switzerland, where he had been living for the past several years. His Excellency Bishop Tissier de Mallerais was 79 years old, and had in a long life rendered considerable service to the Archbishop’s Society of St Pius X. To commemorate his leaving this “vale of tears” let these “Comments” recall here at least three of those occasions, with the gratitude of all of us to him, and with our prayers for the repose of his soul.

Firstly, at the end of the 1960’s when the Archbishop had launched the first year of a projected Seminary, at the end of that year so many of the first seminarians left him that he was on the point of giving up his project as though it had no future. It was two of those young seminarians who persuaded him not to give up, but to try again for the next school-year. One was Paul Aulagnier, virtual founder of the Society’s anchor District in France. The other was Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, future bishop of the Society. Where would the Catholic Church – and the world – be today, had the two of them not persuaded the Archbishop to persevere in what would become the spearhead of upholding Catholic Tradition in a Church and world going mad?

Secondly, in the 1980’s the Archbishop was locked in a deadly struggle to the death with the Freemasonic enemies of the Church, who were firmly holding onto the levers of power in the Church handed over to them by Vatican II as a just punishment from God for mankind’s worldwide apostasy. The main problem was doctrinal – the joint errors of religious liberty and false ecumenism, both of them profoundly undermining all Catholic dogma. It was Fr. Tissier on whom the Archbishop largely relied to spell out the true doctrine of the Church in order to make clear why Catholic Tradition, being betrayed by the modernists, had to be defended at all costs. The inspiration came from the Archbishop, but Fr Tissier was his executive instrument.

And thirdly, in 2006, Bishop Tissier gave a serious interview to Stephen Heiner, then writing for The Remnant, American Catholic magazine which surely has the full text available in its archives. When Heiner thought that he had finished the interview, the Bishop objected – no, Heiner had left out the essential – once again doctrine, the horrific doctrinal errors of Pope Benedict XVI. It is clear from the last part of the interview that the Bishop had taken the trouble to read himself what Fr Ratzinger actually wrote earlier in his career as a “theologian.” How many of us have actually taken that trouble? In justice the Bishop tells Heiner that he does not know if Pope Ratzinger has renounced his sentimental foolishness, but Tissier does also say that by 2006 Ratzinger had not yet retracted his errors. Here is a quote from pages 232 to 233, translated from the German of Ratzinger’s book, Introduction to Christianity, appearing in 1968 –

“. . . some texts of devotion seem to suggest that the Christian faith in the Cross understands God as a God whose inexorable justice required a human sacrifice, the sacrifice of his own Son. And we flee with horror from a justice, the dark anger of which removes any credibility from the message of love.”

In other words the Cross was too horrible to be true, because God the Father cannot have required such a cruel sacrifice from His beloved Son, because such cruelty contradicts the new Conciliar religion of “luv.” Here is modernism, pure and simple. Contrast how St Ignatius devotes the whole First Week of the Catholic Exercises to making retreatants grasp just how serious their sins have been. Fr. Ratzinger was turning the Faith to mush. Bishop Tissier was guarding the Faith. See the whole Tissier-Heiner interview.

Thank you, Your Excellency. May you be resting in peace.

Kyrie eleison.

VATICAN II SHORT – SIGHTED

VATICAN II SHORT – SIGHTED on October 19, 2024

Poor modern man, so drastically short-sighted,

His whole life being, by that short sight, blighted!

If we want to save our souls for eternity, as God wants all of us to do (I Tim. II,4), then the world now surrounding us is a dangerous environment for that purpose because, broadly speaking, for seven centuries mankind has been slowly but surely demoting God in order to take His place. It is a foolish attempt, doomed to fail, but in the meantime it has brought mankind to the brink of nuclear suicide. Now, on that road to ruin, from the Incarnation onwards, the greatest obstacle to the folly of man was God’s own Church instituted by God’s own Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, to be the continuation of His Incarnation amongst men, as the Light of the World to dispel men’s confusion, and the Salt of the Earth to prevent men’s corruption. Alas, Vatican II in the 1960’s was the summit of men’s attempts to serve the Devil by crippling that Church, so as to send all men’s souls to Hell instead of Heaven. From here came the confusion and corruption all around us.

But Vatican II had to be subtle, because by the 20th century Mother Church had already analysed and refuted the great errors leading up to Vatican II, especially Protestantism (1517) and its progeny, Liberalism (1717) and Communism (1917). Among the host of errors accompanying these three, surely the most dangerous was Modernism (1907), because it was led by priests from inside the Church, wishing to update God’s Church by adapting it to godless modern man. Therefore subtlety was needed to deceive Catholics alerted to Protestantism in all its forms (and for the same reason, even more subtlety will be needed by the Antichrist to fool a mankind alerted by the divine Chastisement occurring between now and then).

When Archbishop Lefebvre died in 1991, one of his hopes was that the Society of priests which he had founded in 1970 would work on the subtle errors of Vatican II to analyse and denounce them. This is precious work for the salvation of souls, and one book is outstanding in this respect, Prometheus, the Religion of Man, by Fr Alvaro Calderon, translated into French and published last May by the Society’s printing-house in France, accessible at www.clovis-diffusion.com The book is not an easy read, but it is highly to be recommended for its masterly thomistic breakdown of Vatican II. Here for instance is, in very brief form, the first major error of Vatican II, denounced by Fr Calderon:

Man must be the centre of religion, because he is, amongst all other material creatures, the only creature that is also spiritual. Therefore he is superior to all of them, he is the main purpose of all of them, and he is the main purpose of all material creation, being the only creature created for himself, all other material creatures having been created only for him. Therefore he must be at the centre of any true religion of that creation.

But all of this argument leaves out the Creator. If we start out from God and not from man, then we know that the one and only ultimate cause of the creation of man must be the essence of God Himself, because the one and only object possible of God’s willing anything at all is His own goodness, because that infinite goodness alone can fulfil His infinite willing. Any creature and everything that He chooses freely to create, He can only will in and through His willing of His own uncreated Self.

Therefore it can only be Himself, and not man, who is the ultimate purpose of creation, and He alone who can be at the centre of any true religion of that creation. All of the arguments in the documents of Vatican II which attempt to put man instead of God at the centre of creation around us, fail, for ignorance, witting or unwitting, wilful or unwilful, of Catholic Tradition’s supreme treasures of philosophy and theology. Thus one of the last and worst of all the Vatican II documents, Gaudium et Spes, is, says Fr Calderon, shot through with the very inadequate modern philosophy of Personalism, by which the human person is at the centre of everything. No, he is not. It is God who is at the centre of everything.

Kyrie eleison

LEFEBVRE post 1988 – II

<b>LEFEBVRE post 1988 – II</b> on October 5, 2024

It takes a Saint to see how evil is bad.

And most of us? Evil can make us glad!

Three weeks ago these “Comments” concluded with a few lines of verse, but a few more lines than usual, in order to draw the lesson from words of wisdom spoken by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1989 concerning that controversial consecration of four bishops which he had performed in the summer of 1988 without the official permission of Rome, normally necessary. However, not all readers may have understood how the lines of verse were connected to the Archbishop’s line of thinking. And even for those who did understand, the crucial question of those consecrations deserves always to be developed, so we return to the subject. Here are those lines of verse, in heavy black, with explanation following –

A liberal is a wolf dressed like a sheep

Here is the central problem. A “liberal” is somebody whose real religion is not Catholicism, as he may deceive himself, but liberty. Thus he can come to think that Catholicism, the one true religion of the one true God, is a matter of choice, of his own choice, and he personally chooses it, but if anybody else wants to choose any other of the numberless false religions, he is at liberty to do so. He is not. True, God gives to every one of us human beings at the age of reason the faculty of free-will enabling us to choose between truth and error, between right and wrong, but He gives us no moral right to choose error or moral wrong. If He gives me the faculty of reason with its free-will, it is only so that I will make good use of it by choosing whatever is true and right, so that by rewarding me with Heaven He can share His infinite bliss. If I have the free-will to choose error or wrong, I have no “liberty” to escape the consequences of my choice, which will ultimately be, if I do not repent, the fires of eternal Hell. I will have freely chosen Hell. Only in this sense are human beings “free” to choose for themselves (what they know to be) any false religion.

It follows that if anybody wants to persuade me that my worth or dignity as a human being depends on my mere faculty of free-will, and not on the right use I make of it, then he is wanting to persuade me of a terrible error (he is a wolf), even while he is pretending to encourage my dignity (he is in sheep’s clothing). Every soul in Hell has the “dignity” of having itself chosen its torment, but what real dignity is that? The “dignity” to blaspheme, for ever and ever!? Yet such is the doctrine of Vatican II, with its Decree on “Human Dignity”: the State must protect the right, not just faculty, of every citizen to choose his own religion. This Decree is absolutely not Catholic. No wonder the Archbishop never signed it!

Judge by his fruits – sheep corpses in a heap

Are not the fruits of Vatican II millions upon millions of Catholics losing the Faith? Of course! The Council has told them that their dignity consists in choosing whatever religion they like! There are so many religions much easier to practise than Catholicism!

For what use is it to him to be “free”

If by God’s tenfold Law still bound he be?

Here is why the worshippers of “liberty” must have religious liberty, because whoever or whatever else they are free from, if they are not free from God Himself with His Ten Commandments, what are they really free from? Here is why religious liberty is the key to “liberty,” and why every liberal inclines to join in that war on God, war against God, which rages all around us. Here is why the Decree of Vatican II on “Human Dignity” is an unbelievable crime against all mankind. And in the half century since Vatican II, do the high Church officials in Rome show any sign of abandoning their wretched Council? In real terms, none at all!

To Hell with Heaven! I will do as I like,

And let God with His Hell for ever strike!

Among liberals, at least the ring-leaders know exactly what they are doing. Theirs is a diabolical pride. They know they are destroying the Catholic Church, and they are defying God to do His worst. God, have mercy! Archbishop Lefebvre understood what they were up to, but not all his followers understand.

Kyrie eleison

VIGANO-CARLSON II

VIGANO-CARLSON II on September 28, 2024

By Christendom Christ is absolutely needed.

Archbishop Vigano’s teaching must be heeded.

Last week these “Comments” presented in summary form the first part of a most interesting article of Archbishop Vigano from last year, inspired by a broadcast of the American journalist, Tucker Carlson. Carlson argued that secular humanism may claim to repudiate all religion, but it does that only by itself acting as a full-blown substitute religion. In this idea the Archbishop supported Carlson as only an eminent Catholic churchman can do, because only such a churchman can have the sufficient truth, height and breadth of view to grasp fully what is at stake. With this or that solution proposed by Archb. Vigano one may beg to differ, for instance sedevacantism (if that is still tempting him), or the driving out of mankind’s treacherous authorities in Church and State (how could that be done, when they hold all the levers of power, as never before?). But the Archbishop is at least grappling with the full depths of the problem. If only Mother Church had today a dozen bishops with his clarity and courage, she would not be in the same trouble. For a summary of the rest of the Archbishop’s article, read on –

It is disconcerting that among the number of converts to the universal religion we can also count Jorge Mario Bergoglio, with all the cowardliness of the churchmen who remain faithful to him. The apostasy of the Catholic hierarchy has reached the point of worshipping the idol of the Pachamama, who is the demonic personification of ecumenical, inclusive, and sustainable “Amazonian” globalism. What we are witnessing is nothing more than the reverse application of the process that led to the spread of Christianity in the Roman Empire and throughout the world, a sort of revenge of barbarism and paganism on the Faith of Christ. What Julian the Apostate tried to do in the 4th century, that is, to restore the cult of pagan gods, today is pursued zealously by new apostates, all united by a “sacred fury” that makes them as dangerous as they are convinced of being able to succeed in their intentions, because of the endless means at their disposal.

This religion is nothing more than a modern realisation of the cult of Lucifer. It is no mystery that the ideologues of globalist thought are all anti-Christian and anti-clerical, significantly hostile to Christian morality, opposed to the civilization and culture that the Gospel has shaped in two thousand years of history. All the precepts of the globalist religion are a counterfeit version of the Ten Commandments, their grotesque inversion, an obscene reversal. In practice, they use the same means that the Church has used for evangelization, but with the aim of damning souls and subjecting them not to the Law of God, but to the tyranny of the devil, under the inquisitorial control of the anti-church of Satan. At the bottom of all this, there is the hatred of God and envy for the supernatural bliss that He has reserved for men by redeeming them from sin through the Sacrifice of the Cross of His Son.

The enmity between the seed of the Woman and that of the serpent (Gen 3:15) is a theological reality in which the enemies of God believe above all. One of the signs of the end times is the abolition of the Holy Sacrifice and the presence of the abomination of desolation in the temple (Dan 9: 27). The attempts to suppress or limit the traditional Mass unite Deep church and Deep State, revealing the essentially Luciferian matrix of both. They know very well what are the infinite graces that pour out on the Church and on the world through that Mass, and they want to prevent those graces from being given so that they do not hinder their plans.

For too long citizens and faithful have passively suffered the decisions of their political and religious leaders in the face of the evidence of their betrayal. If those in authority in the State and Church act against the citizens and the faithful, their power is usurped and their authority null and void. If they do not want to be like fathers to us; if they do not want our good and if indeed they do everything to corrupt us in body and spirit, it is time to drive them out of their positions and call them to account for their betrayal, their crimes, and their scandalous lies.

Kyrie eleison

LEFEBVRE post 1988 – I

LEFEBVRE post 1988 – I on September 14, 2024

A liberal is a wolf, dressed like a sheep.

Judge by the fruits – sheep corpses in a heap.

For what use is it to him to be “free,”

If by God’s tenfold Law still bound he be?

“To Hell with Heaven! I will do as I like!

And let God with His Hell for ever strike!”

After consecrating four bishops in June of 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre saw more clearly than ever that the Conciliar Romans are no servants of the Catholic Faith. In 1989 he gave a long interview in France, cruelly shortened below. For the complete original, see https://sspx.org/en/one-year-after-consecrations-30335

Why the consecrations?

For several years I had been trying to get Rome to understand that as I was advancing in age, I had to ensure my succession. They were afraid that I would consecrate bishops, so they alluded to the possibility of our having a bishop who would be my successor.

I went to Rome for conversations, but without any confidence in their success. I wished to go as far as possible to show what good will we had. Very soon, however, we realized that we were dealing with people who are not honest. Rome brought up the question of the Council, which we did not want to hear of. A formula for an agreement was found which was at the very limits of what we could accept. I obtained only one bishop, whereas I was asking for three. That was already virtually unacceptable. And, when, even before signing the protocol, we asked when we could have this bishop, the answer was evasive or null.

The accumulation of distrust and reticence impelled me to demand the nomination of a bishop for the 30th June. Either that, or I would go ahead and consecrate. Faced with such a choice, Cardinal Ratzinger said, “If that’s how it is, the protocol is over. It’s finished, and there is no more protocol. You are breaking off relations.” It’s he who said it, not I.

Lefebvre should have stayed in the Church

What Church are we talking about? If you mean the Conciliar Church, then we who have struggled against the Council for twenty years, because we want the Catholic Church, would have to re-enter this Conciliar Church in order, supposedly, to make it Catholic. That is a complete illusion.

Danger of schism?

To say that we are not the “visible Church”, that we are quitting the “visible Church”, which is infallible, all that is just words which do not correspond to reality. It is incredible that anyone can talk of the “visible Church”, meaning the Conciliar Church, as opposed to the Catholic Church which we are trying to represent and continue. We are against the Conciliar Church which is virtually schismatic, even if they deny it. In practice, it is a Church virtually excommunicated because it is a Modernist Church. We are not making a parallel Church. We are what we have always been – Catholics carrying on. That is all.

Each of these recent popes is truly two popes in one. It was John XXIII who launched the opening of the Church to the world. From that point on, we were framed within ambiguity and duplicity, i.e. the two-faced way of acting proper to the liberal.

We are not against the pope insofar as he represents the values of the Apostolic See which are unchanging. But we are against the pope insofar as he is a modernist who does not believe in his own infallibility, who practises ecumenism. So long as in Rome they stay attached to the ideas of the Council: religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, they are going the wrong way.

Reconciliation?

I do not think it is opportune to try contacting Rome. I think we must still wait. Wait, alas, for the situation to get still worse on their side. But up till now, they do not want to recognize that fact.

Kyrie eleison