Author Topic: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc (Read 59713 times)

Persto · « **Reply #465 on:** June 20, 2026, 08:01:21 AM »

https://ttu-files.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Life-of-Mgr-Guerard-des-Lauriers-OP.pdf
p.13-17
Fr. Guérard and Mgr. Lefebvre
In gratitude for the good he had done to others, he was abandoned by all. We cite, as an example, the letter of Mgr. Lefebvre in which he explained why he did not want Father to return to Écône, not even to visit a group of young men to whom he had given the habit and had directed towards the seminary of Écône for their studies (O blissful confidence and simplicity!), without imagining that everything would be done to separate them from him:

“Esteemed Reverend Father… the only reason which gives me a certain apprehension is the absoluteness of your affirmations about the Pope and, eventually, about the N.O.M. My thinking is less affirmative. I have expressed, and I still have, doubts about Pope Paul VI. I ask myself, indeed, how a Pope could contribute so much to the self-destruction of the Church, but is it permitted for me to say that he is not the Pope? I do not dare to say it in such an absolute and definitive manner. … If you have evidence of the legal forfeiture [of the Papacy] of Pope Paul VI, I understand your subsequent logic, but, personally, I have a serious doubt, and I do not have absolute evidence… … With regard to the practical attitude, it is not the lack of a Pope which my conduct is based on, but rather the defence of my Catholic Faith… But you believe in conscience that one must break with this principle, which unfortunately creates confusion and provokes violent divisions, which I want to avoid… This is, in a few words, my thinking, which is not very far from yours, but which, regarding behaviour, takes more into account the traditionalist realities as much as the progressive ones…”

The response of Fr. Guérard was clear and coherent (7th of February, 1979):

“With respect to Pope Paul VI, I do not have evidence of the legal forfeiture [of the Papacy], but I have, and there is, metaphysical and theological evidence that, if the highest Authority of the Church teaches an already defined traditional doctrine, said Authority enjoys ipso facto the immediate assistance of the Holy Ghost. And if said Authority bases a Declaration expressly on the authority of Scripture, it must thus ipso facto declare, infallibly, the truth. If this is not evident, deign to show me where the defect is And if this is evident, the ‘Authority’ that has affirmed an error was not, in fact, ontologically able to exercise Authority. I have never said either that there was a juridical cessation of ‘Authority’. Paul VI remained pope materialiter, but he was not so (at least from the 7th of December, 1965) formaliter… It is impossible for a sacrilegious profanation of the truth to be introduced into the Church, which is holy. To explicitly declare that Vatican II, as a Council, is not ‘of the Church’, that it does not exist as a true Council, is a condition sine qua non to restore order in the Church. One could have had a traditional interpretation of the truths contained in Vatican II, but there is no traditional interpretation possible of Vatican II as a Council, given that, precisely from this point of view, Vatican II operates as a rupture with Tradition. You specify that ‘your conduct is founded, not on the lack of a Pope, but rather on the Catholic Faith’. But I do not see, in the Roman Catholic Church, how one can testify in favour of the Faith, without situating oneself exactly where the Magisterium as it is (or seems to be) today. The existence of an infallible Magisterium, which affirms of itself that it is infallible, is a condition sine qua non for the exercise of the Faith, as much from the theoretical point of view as from the practical one. You add, Your Excellency, that ‘you take into account, more so than myself, the traditionalist realities as much as the progressive ones’. But, finally, is it advisable to take into account progressivism, even though it is a reality? And to what witnesses do we go, but towards those who do not regard the person of men, and who ‘teach the way of God according to the truth’ (St. Mark 12:14)? It is ‘the truth who will set us free’ (St. John 8:32); and the truth alone. One cannot resolve a question which refers to the truth through ‘passive co-existence’ in a sense of ‘pseudo-charity’, or through that silence which authority imposes. This is the way of the retreating church, the way that gives rise to the ‘Father of Lies’. ‘Blessed is he who comes in the Name of the Lord … if these shall hold their peace, the stones shall cry out’ (St. Luke 19:40). Blessed be the truth. One must not keep it quiet; one must shout it. I do not think that the (relative) lack of a Pope (‘formaliter’) is, as you write, a ‘principle’. It is the unavoidable consequence of the observed facts; and it is an indispensable presupposition, as much to give testimony to the Faith as to administer the Sacraments of the Faith in the Church. In the charity of the truth, I pray you accept it…”

That letter remained without a response.
This search for the truth, which repudiated all false charity, sentimental or opportunistic, this adherence to that which is true and rational, would be the cause of rejection of many, be it of Father’s Thesis, or even his person. Abbé Coache had the… decency to make an invitation to a reunion, scheduled for the 22nd of January, 1979, which arrived for Fr. Guérard on the 29th, that is, seven days after the event! Criticised by all for his position, he never received, from whoever it may be, a logical and precise response to the Thesis that he had expounded. He who rejects grace sinks further into sin: so he who rejects the light of the truth sinks further and further into the darkness of error. And, in fact, it was at this time that Mgr. Lefebvre signed the “Communiqué to the Society of Saint Pius V”, written in Flavigny together with other “leaders” of traditionalism; they affirmed their union with the “Successor of Peter”, aside from the serious reproaches which we have the right to make (sic!), and asked of Catholics that they gather themselves around “faithful priests united to Rome and to the Successor of Peter.”

“It is heretical, against the instinct of the Faith”, commented Fr. Guérard, “aberrant with respect to all of Tradition, to pretend that one can, and a fortiori must, ‘remain united to the so-called Successor of Peter’, who habitually utters heresy, favours in act everything which would destroy the Church, refuses, in fact, to exercise as he must the charism of infallibility… in view of condemning and removing the extremely grave alterations to the Mass and the Magisterium”.

The reactions to this open letter were numerous: the distance between Fr. Guérard and the “traditionalist world” was made bigger; with regard to the doctrinal responses, there were none, as if by custom; there was nothing more than insulting attacks. In the same year Father began, for the first time, the publication of his Thesis about the formally vacant See in the “Cahiers de Cassiciacuм”, which still received no serious response, nor any more people with the courage to embrace the Truth when it came accompanied with sacrifice and humiliation.

TomGubbinsKimmage · « **Reply #466 on:** June 20, 2026, 08:31:23 AM »

So sad to see how Father went off the rails towards the end

LeDeg · « **Reply #467 on:** June 20, 2026, 09:16:42 AM »

Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on June 20, 2026, 08:31:23 AM

So sad to see how Father went off the rails towards the end

Pot meet kettle.

TomGubbinsKimmage · « **Reply #468 on:** June 20, 2026, 09:41:02 AM »

Quote from: LeDeg on June 20, 2026, 09:16:42 AM

Pot meet kettle.

You're the kettle my friend.

LeDeg · « **Reply #469 on:** June 20, 2026, 10:18:42 AM »

Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on June 20, 2026, 09:41:02 AM

You're the kettle my friend.

"I'm the rubber, you're the glue."

I'm not your friend, charlatan.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc (Read 59713 times)

Persto

Re: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc

TomGubbinsKimmage

Re: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc

LeDeg

Re: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc

TomGubbinsKimmage

Re: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc

LeDeg

Re: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc