**Before I proceed, I have never attended an SSPX Chapel, I am what was called in pre-Motu Proprio days an “Indulter”**. However, we would be remiss not to acknowledge the dedication of Archbishop Lefevbre towards the Mass of Ages. Without him (and many others like him) they would have buried Catholic Tradition. There would be no 1983 “indult”, no “Ecclesia Dei”, and no “Summorum Pontificium”. Tradition needed a toe-hold, it survived, and will thrive, and this ecumenism business will eventually fade, as it’s not of the Church. It’s a strange double standard when Protestants are called “Seperated Brethren”, and men like these (missioner bishop in Africa for most of his life) are called “Schismatic” for trying to remain Catholic as it was always practiced. Let us Pray for the Soul of this brave man.
Archbishop Lefevbre with the “Conservative Coetus” at the Second Vatican Council
Missionary in Africa
We do not want to break away from the Church; on the contrary, we want the Church to continue. A Church which breaks away from her past is no longer the Catholic Church. We are certain that the truth will come back. It cannot be otherwise. The Good God does not abandon His Church. ( Archbishops Homily, Geneva, May 15, 1978)
As Aquinas pointed out, the spiritual sins like schism are more grave than the carnal mortal sins like fornication….because schism attacks the unity that Christ willed for His followers and that is higher even than chastity. The gravity of a sin is denominated by the height of the value that it attacks. Levebre has attacked through disobedience a very high value.
You are putting yourself in danger by supporting such people.
All I did was give my opinion (which may or may not be nonsense in the eyes of others) , and said prayer for his soul. It’s called Charity.
BTY: What Schism? Cd. Castrillion Hoyos from the Vatican said the SSPX are in not in schism.
**Again I am not an SSPXer, so don’t come out of the word-work JPIIers**.
The SSPX people state what Rome stated….that the excommunications of their leaders was for schism.
The difference is that they say they were acting in necessity and thus are excused by canon 1323-4.
Regardless of the controversy surrounding the SSPX, I think we would not have had the motu proprio today without Abp. Lefebvre’s intervention. You have to admit, for such a polarizing figure, his convictions were absolutely firm. There is also this picture of him telling stories to African children on his lap which I think is just beautiful. I hope he is at peace now.
Amen Archi.
He was truly a saintly prelate…
May he one day be elevated to the glory of the altars…
What about God’s providence? If not Arb Lefebvre, there would be someone else, maybe even better I would dare to say. For example, Michael Davis, RIP, was very much dedicated and contributed to Latin Mass Society, Una Voce etc. First indult was called Agatha Christi indult, for example. Traditionalists have not died away and some were quite influential. God bless
Indeed a good point Anon, I picked him as he was the most well-known. As he was attacked unjustly (til today if you read some of the other comments). There were many who opened their mouth against novelty after the Council.
I often think about St Athanasius who almost single-handedly fought Arianism in his times. The oposition was very strong, St Athanasius was on exile, his life was in danger, he lived hidden in a little under-earth cave, various lies and false accusation has been fabricated against him. The whole catholic world was almost overwhelmed by arian heresy, but St Athanasius never organised his own church and ordained his own bishops for succesors. He trusted totally in God. This is difference.
Bla-Bla-Bla. Bishops did not need the Pope’s permission in those days to ordain their successors. Yes, trust in God, and sit on your Ass, is that how it works? I thought we had to coodinate our intellect, and Free Will with His Grace. Question about the Archbishop: Show me the Heresy.
BTY: St. Athanasius: “He spent his final years in repairing all the damage done during the earlier years of violence, dissent, and exile, and returning to his writing and preaching undisturbed. On the 2nd of May 373, having consecrated Peter II, one of his presbyters as his successor, he died quietly in his own house”.
Exactly, St Athanasius fought heresy, such as Arch L did, but Athanasius did not established separated church etc. That is why he died so peacefully being reestablished in his office. I can see you have hardly any contact with SSPX. your sentiments are theoretical. God bless
How on earth did Archbishop Lefebrve start his “own” church?!
Anon – please show me where he taught his own doctrines (heresies), invented his own sacraments and proclaimed himself Pope. I’m dying to know…
The saintly acrhbishop did nothing than protect Catholic Tradition and teach what the church always taught for thousands of years, when liberals were using the council as a platform to launch their revolution. Now he is being vindicated as of July 7th, which states that the traditional mass and sacraments were never and can’t be abolished. It wouldn’t suprise me in the slightest if his other convictions about the failure of the Second Vatican Council were realised in fifty years time too.
Excellent post. I am of the opinion that SSPX is neither in schism nor has excommunicated leaders. I strongly suggest that everyone read Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre by Michael Davies.
Amen!
Guys, The ends never justify the means. Even if protecting important traditions was his goal, Lefebvre cannot justify an act in such defiance to the Holy see under the cloak of the protection of tradition. Christ the Lord, not Lefebvre is the true protector of the sacred traditions of the Church. A potential schism and illicit consecrations are not morally justifiable!
Bill bannon is correct.