http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=5&artikel_id=1940&searchkey=guerard%20des%20lauriers
The Testimony of Dr. Heller:
At our first conversation (Doctors Hiller and Heller with Abp. Thuc), Mgr. Pierre Martin Ngo-dinh-Thuc was ready to consecrate bishops because he understood the impending danger to the church. Therefore, to ensure succession, he consecrated Mgr. Guerard des Lauriers, Mgr. Cannona, and Mgr, Zamora. Following this, Mgr. Carmona with the assistance of Mgr. Zamora, this year also consecrated Mexican and American priests who had proven their resistance to the counciliar bishops.
The first consecrations had to be done and kept secret for the time being, for the same reason that Pius XII. Episcopal consecrations in Russia had to be done in secret. One had to be careful, because Mgr. Thuc was continuously monitored. For all parties involved, it existed (and exists still) a clear danger to Mgr. Thuc. Nevertheless, the secrecy was not a result of fear, nobody was afraid! Rather, it was in order to be able to perform consecrations at all. If it had been publicly done, the other side would have done everything possible to prevent the consecrations. Witnesses attended the consecrations. The consecrations were docuмented in detail, including photographically.
SOME COMMENTS ON THE EPISCOPAL CONSECRATIONS OF MGR. NGO DINH-THUC AND MGR. CARMONA by Dr. Eberhard HellerVarious inquiries and objections against the consecrations by Mgr. Pierre Martin Ngo-dinh-Thuc last year, and recently also from Mgr. Moisés Carmona's episcopal consecrations were given - including the opinions expressed in the "Open Letter" by retired Rector, Otto Braun in this issue - prompt me to consider some fundamental points and to comment on this, and give some background information regarding what happened last year (1981) in Toulon, and this year (1982) in Mexico, and the USA.It is in order to understand correctly what happened and why, that it is necessary to evaluate the Ecclesiastical and religious situation as it was back then, i.e. Late 1960s, and early 1970s, that the following points are offered:1. A heretical (or apostate) 'pope' on the Chair of Peter;
2. The vast majority of the clergy also in apostasy or heresy;
3. A new, mandatory, invalid "Mass" rite;
4. Invalid sacramental rites, or at least questionable ones;
5. Invalid or dubious consecration rites;
6. Continued destruction of dogmatically fixed doctrine;
7. Continued destruction or undermining of Catholic moral principles.
If nothing were done to save her with God's help, this would have soon wiped out the Church of Christ through the revolution from above. Because:a) Without true faith there would be no mediation of salvation
b) Without sacraments, there is no immediate, living, concrete access to God
c) Without Holy Mass offerings, no reparation and reconciliation, no immediate, real love connection with God
d) Without hierarchy, the Church would cease to be an institution of sacramental healing and mediation
e) Without valid sacraments of consecration, the apostolic succession would break off.
Under these conditions, the Church founded by Christ would become a 'church' that was neither One, Holy, Catholic, or even Apostolic. What would remain would be possibly a sect of the worst kind. After it became obvious that this was a revolution from above, i.e. by Paul VI. it turned out that the heretical changes in his dogma and rites as were carried out explicitly at the same time, it also prompted the question of his legitimacy as Pope. Two of the first to to point out this problem and to address it objectively and precisely, were Fr. Dr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga / Mexico and Dr. Hugo Maria Waiter / USA. In the INSIGHT, this question was addressed - alongside the detailed examination of the so-called 'NOM' by Mr. Franz Bader - since the publication of the 1st Issue in April 1971, and discussed repeatedly by various authors.Further considerations immediately followed:1. How can the church as an institution be saved?
2. How can the Holy Mass be preserved, as well as the other Sacraments?
3. How can the proclamation of the true doctrine be guaranteed?
4. How can Apostolic succession be secured?
All the questions listed here were not only examined and considered, but they were also addressed with very limited resources, to find a concrete solution, and without publicity. How would the Church who found itself in such a situation, in which the apostasy of their leader triggered such a crisis behave?Normally, a Pope who has fallen into heresy is ruled by a Conventus declared deposed, as is the case in the history of the Church, because a heretical 'pope", as it were, is a contradiction. He has ipso facto lost his office, he has lost himself thereby discontinuing his office. ("Papa haereticus est depositus", according to St. Robert Bellarmine, as well as Suarez.) But since the Church not only is an immediate, spontaneous religious community which excludes those who no longer live the same faith, but even a visible, legally organized institution must publicly declared deposed a 'Father' haereticus.
Topic: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc (Read 59564 times)