Hay cosas que claman al cielo y que colman la indignación ¿Cómo es posible que Mons. Lefebvre sea censurado por los suyos (o que se dicen tales)? ¿Por qué se torna censurable Mons. Lefebvre para el Superior General? ¿Qué le molesta o le incomoda a Mons. Bernard Fellay? ¿Por qué la Fraternidad San Pio X prohíbe la divulgación de los sermones en general y particularmente de uno difundido por Max Barret, uno de los conductores y confidentes de Mons. Lefebvre?


La Fraternidad San Pio X debería ser la primera en difundir todos y cada uno de los sermones de Mons. Lefebvre y agradecer a quienes colaboran en esta labor, y no hacer lo que los enemigos de la Iglesia hacen, imponiendo la rígida ley del silencio cuando no del desprestigio.


Mons. Fellay muestra la molestia que le produce el sermón de Mons. Lefebvre censurando su publicación y evitando su difusión. En este sermón denuncia la masonería dentro del vaticano y la Iglesia, las ideas y principios masónicos que forjaron e inspiraron el concilio vaticano II, como carta magna de los errores y herejías, de la revolución litúrgico – doctrinal dentro de la misma Iglesia operada por vía de jerarquía y de “santa obediencia”.


Mons. Lefebvre denuncia claramente el contubernio entre la masonería y el vaticano. Llega a señalar como hipótesis valida (aceptable) y verosímil que si un papa antes de su elección es masón, se ilegitima e invalida su elección, pues está excomulgado. O que dejaría de serlo por caer en herejía y en consecuencia quedaría excomulgado.


Es evidente que estas afirmaciones no son “políticamente correctas” y mucho menos oportunas si se está en tratativas claudicantes con los prelados eclesiásticos oficiales, que son logia masónica vaticana (o eclesiástica).


El hecho de impedir que los fieles tengan acceso a las denuncias de Mons. Lefebvre evidencia, muestra y comprueba el compromiso de los responsables de esta censura con la masonería vaticana.


La Fraternidad San Pio X esta no solo financiera sino ideológicamente (teología y doctrina) en manos de los enemigos de la Iglesia que la han infiltrado, la han copado. Si lo anterior no fuera cierto, se promovería y divulgaría todo lo que Mons. Lefebvre afirmó y no le impondrían (como lo están haciendo) el vil y traidor silencio.


Con que derecho de propiedad se arroga Mons. Fellay la exclusividad de los sermones de Mons. Lefebvre, si ni él ni la Fraternidad San Pio X son herederos carnales. Si el Superior General o alguien en la Fraternidad San Pio X tiene un testamento en su favor que lo muestre, y aun así, ese poder seria para propagar y difundir sin tergiversaciones su testimonio y no para censurarlo y reprimirlo, o meterlo en el cajón del olvido.


Los sermones y todo lo que dijo Mons. Lefebvre son patrimonio de la Iglesia y el único dueño es Jesucristo.


Esta prohibición petulante, no es nada más que una muestra de fariseísmo por parte de aquellos que la inflingen.


Es una lástima que ninguno de los miembros de la Fraternidad San Pio X diga nada al respecto, y es mas vergonzoso aun que ninguno de los otros 3 obispos tampoco se pronuncie.


El hecho que 20 años después de fallecido Mons. Lefebvre no se hiciera nada por publicar sus sermones, es una clara evidencia que no le interesa mucho a los superiores de la Fraternidad San Pio X lo que el dijo.


Conviene además recordar que si bien Mons. Lefebvre fue el fundador de La Fraternidad San Pio X, el no era miembro de ella, y como prueba esta el hecho que el siempre uso el cordón de su congregación, como religioso que era de los Padres del Espíritu Santo, luego mal haría la Fraternidad San Pio X en adjudicarse la propiedad sobre su palabra para censurarla y reprimirla.


Que contradicción farisaica que en plena época de libertad tan cacareada se imponga el silencio a Mons. Lefebvre por parte de sus propios discípulos.


Claro está que si la Iglesia esta eclipsada, nada de raro tiene que uno de sus más fieles servidores este también eclipsado. Lo que si asombra es que lo eclipsen quienes se dicen sus fieles continuadores.


P. Basilio Méramo


Bogotá, 8 de Abril de 2011

There are things that cry out to heaven and fill the indignation How is it possible that Archbishop Lefebvre is censored by their own (or claim to such)? Why Archbishop Lefebvre becomes objectionable to the Superior General? What bothers you or you are uncomfortable with Bishop Bernard Fellay? Why the Society of Saint Pius X prohibits the disclosure of the sermons in general and particularly of one released by Max Barrett, one of the drivers and confidants of Archbishop Lefebvre?


The Society of Saint Pius X should be the first to spread each and every one of the sermons of Archbishop Lefebvre and thank all partners in this work, and do what the enemies of the Church do, imposing a rigid code of silence when no loss of prestige.


Bishop Fellay shows the trouble that produces the sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre publication censoring and avoiding its spread. In this sermon denounces the Freemasons in the Vatican and the Church, the Masonic ideas and principles that shaped and inspired the Second Vatican Council, as the Magna Carta of the errors and heresies, liturgical revolution - doctrine within the Church operated via hierarchy and "holy obedience."


Archbishop Lefebvre clearly denounces the complicity between the Freemasons and the Vatican. Even stated as a hypothesis valid (acceptable) and probable that if a pope before his election is a Mason, is illegitimate and void your choice, as are excommunicated. Or it would no longer be about to fall into heresy and therefore would be excommunicated.


Clearly these statements are not "politically correct" and much less necessary if claudication is in talks with official church prelates, who are Masonic lodge Vatican (or church).


The fact prevent the faithful have access to reports of Archbishop Lefebvre evidence shows and see the commitment of those responsible for this censorship with the Vatican Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ.


The Society of Saint Pius X is not only financially but ideologically (theology and doctrine) in the hands of the enemies of the Church who have infiltrated, they have cornered. If this were not true, it would promote and disseminate all that Archbishop Lefebvre said and not imposed (as they are doing) the vile and treacherous silence.


Property right that Bishop Fellay assumes the exclusivity of the sermons of Archbishop Lefebvre, if neither he nor the Society of Saint Pius X are heirs flesh. If the Superior General or anyone in the Society of Saint Pius X has a will in his favor that you show, and yet, that power would be to propagate and spread without prevarication his testimony and not to censor and repress it, or put it in the drawer oblivion.


Sermons and all he said Archbishop Lefebvre are the patrimony of the Church and Jesus Christ is the sole owner.


This prohibition petulant, is nothing more than a sign of righteousness by those who inflict.


It is a pity that none of the members of the Society of Saint Pius X say anything about it, and even more shameful that none of the other 3 bishops are silent.


The fact that 20 years after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre did not do anything for publishing his sermons, is clear evidence that does not care much superior to the Society of Saint Pius X what he said.


It should also be noted that while Archbishop Lefebvre was the founder of The Society of Saint Pius X, was not a member of it, as proof is the fact that I always use the cord of his congregation, as a religious who was of the Fathers Holy Spirit, then evil would the Society of Saint Pius X to be awarded the property on his word to censor and punish them.


That hypocritical contradiction that at the height of vaunted freedom imposed silence on Archbishop Lefebvre by his own disciples.


Of course, if the Church is in eclipse, it is not surprising that one of his most faithful servants this also eclipsed. What is astonishing is that if those who claim to overshadow his faithful followers.


P. Meram Basilio


Bogotá, April 8, 2011

Censuré et passé sous silence par les siensIl y a des choses qui appellent la justice divine et qui remplissent d’indignation. Comment est-il possible que Mgr Lefebvre soit censuré par les siens ? (ou ceux qui se proclament tels). Pourquoi Mgr Lefebvre devient objet de censure de la part du Supérieur Général ? Qu’est-ce qui peut bien gêner ou incommoder Mgr Fellay ? Pourquoi la Fraternité interdit-elle la divulgation des sermons en général et plus particulièrement de l’un d’entre eux, diffusé par Max Barret, l’un des chauffeurs et confidents de Mgr Lefebvre ?La Fraternité Saint Pie X devrait être la première à diffuser tous et chacun des sermons de Mgr Lefebvre et être reconnaissants à tous ceux qui collaborent à cette tâche, et à ne pas faire ce que font les ennemis de l’Eglise, en imposant la loi implacable du silence lorsque ce n’est pas celle du déshonneur.Mgr Fellay manifeste l’embarras que suscite chez lui le sermon de Mgr Lefebvre en censurant sa publication et en évitant sa diffusion. Dans ce sermon Mgr Lefebvre dénonce lamaçonnerie au sein du Vatican et de l’Eglise, les idées et les principes maçonniques qui ont forgé et inspiré le Concile Vatican II, en tant que grande charte des erreurs et des hérésies, de la révolution liturgico-doctrinal à l’intérieur même de l’Eglise opérée par voie hiérarchique sous couvert de « sainte obéissance ».Mgr Lefebvre dénonce clairement l’alliance adultère entre la maçonnerie et le vatican. Il en vient à signaler comme hypothèse valable (acceptable) et vraisemblable le fait que dès lors qu’un pape serait franc-maçon avant son élection, celle-ci deviendrait illégitime et invalide, car il serait excommunié. Autre chose serait que le Pape cesserait d’être tel pour être tombé dans l’hérésie et se trouverait être en conséquence excommunié. Il est évident que toutes ces affirmations ne sont pas “politiquement correctes” et encore moins opportunes dans le cadre de tractations rallieuses avec les prélats ecclésiastiques officiels, qui représentent la loge maçonnique vaticane (ou ecclésiastique).Le fait d’empêcher aux fidèles d’avoir accès aux dénonciations de Mgr Lefebvre prouve, illustre et atteste les compromissions des responsables de cette censure avec la maçonnerie du Vatican. La Fraternité Saint Pie X se trouve non seulement financièrement mais aussi idéologiquement (du point de vue de la théologie et de la doctrine) aux mains des ennemis de l’Eglise qui l’ont infiltrée et accaparée. Si tout ce qui a été dit précédemment n’était pas avéré, on promouvrait et diffuserait tout ce qu’a affirmé Mgr Lefebvre et on ne lui imposerait pas (comme ils sont en train de le faire) un silence vil et traître. De quel droit de propriété Mgr Fellay s’arroge-t-il l’exclusivité des sermons de Mgr Lefebvre, si ni lui ni la Fraternité Saint-Pie X ne sont ses héritiers biologiques ? Si le Supérieur Général ou quelqu’un d’autre dans la Fraternité Saint Pie-X détient un testament en sa faveur, qu’il le montre et même s’il en était ainsi, ces prérogatives n’existeraient qu’en vue de la propagation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
et de la diffusion sans hésitations de son témoignage et non de sa censure et de sa rétention, voire de sa mise aux tiroirs de l’oubli.
Les sermons et tout ce qu’a dit Mgr Lefebvre sont le patrimoine de l’Eglise et l’unique propriétaire en est Jésus-Christ.Cette interdiction éhontée, n’est rien d’autre que la manifestation d’un pharisaïsme de la part de ceux qui l’imposent.Il est regrettable qu’aucun des membres de la Fraternité Saint-Pie X ne dise rien à ce sujet, et il est plus honteux encore qu’aucun des trois autres évêques ne se prononce pas non plus.Le fait que 20 ans après la mort de Mgr Lefebvre rien n’ait été fait pour publier ses sermons est une preuve éclatante que ses propos n’intéressent pas beaucoup les supérieurs de la Fraternité Saint Pie X.Il faut également se souvenir que si Mgr Lefebvre était bel et bien le fondateur de la Fraternité Saint Pie X, il n’en était pas membre pour autant, et j’en veux pour preuve le fait qu’il a toujours utilisé le cordon de sa congrégation, en tant que religieux des Pères du Saint Esprit, aussi la Fraternité Saint Pie X serait mal inspirée de s’arroger les droits de propriété sur ses propos pour les censurer et les réprimer. Quelle contradiction pharisaïque que l’imposition du silence envers Mgr Lefebvre de la part de ses disciples à une époque où la liberté est tant vantée. Il ne fait pas de doute que si l’Eglise est éclipsée, il n’y a rien d’étonnant à ce que l’un de ses plus fidèles serviteurs se trouve également éclipsé. Ce qui étonne en revanche est que ceux qui l’éclipsent sont ceux qui se disent ses successeurs les plus fidèles.Abbé Basilio MéramoBogota, 8 Avril 2011

Censored and ignored by siensIl are things that need divine justice and filled with indignation. How is it possible that Archbishop Lefebvre was censured by his own people? (Or those who call themselves such).

Why Archbishop Lefebvre becomes an object of censure from the Superior General? What may well impede or inconvenience Bishop Fellay? Why Fraternity prohibits disclosure of her sermons in general and particularly one of them, released by Max Barrett, one of the drivers and confidant of Archbishop Lefebvre?

The Society of Saint Pius X should be the first to each and every broadcast sermons of Archbishop Lefebvre and be grateful to all those who collaborate in this task, and not do what the enemies of the Church, by imposing the implacable law of silence when it is not the déshonneur.

Mgr Fellay of the obvious embarrassment that it arouses in the sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre by censoring its publication and avoiding its spread. In this sermon denounces Archbishop Lefebvre lamaçonnerie within the Vatican and the Church, the Masonic ideas and principles that have shaped and inspired the Second Vatican Council, as a great charter of errors and heresies, liturgical-doctrinal revolution even within the Church made through official channels in the guise of "holy obedience." Lefebvre clearly denounces adultery alliance between the masonry and the Vatican. It has to be noted as valid assumption (acceptable) and likely the fact that when a pope is a freemason before his election, it would become illegal and invalid, because it would be excommunicated.

Another thing that the Pope would cease to be such to have fallen into heresy and would be therefore be excommunicated. It is obvious that all these assertions are not "politically correct" and even less appropriate in the context of dealings with the prelates rallieuses ecclesiastical official, representing the Masonic Lodge Vatican (or ecclesiastical). The act of preventing the faithful from access to reports of Archbishop Lefebvre proves, illustrates and demonstrates the compromises responsible for this censorship with the masonry of the Vatican. The SSPX is not only financially but also ideologically (in terms of theology and doctrine) in the hands of enemies of the Church who have infiltrated and captured. If all that was said previously was not proven, it would promote and disseminate what was claimed by Archbishop Lefebvre and we do not impose it (as they are doing it) a vile and treacherous silence.

 What ownership Bishop Fellay assumes he exclusivity sermons of Archbishop Lefebvre, though neither he nor the Society of Saint Pius X are his biological heirs? If the Superior General or anyone else in the Society of Saint Pius X has a will in his favor, he shows, even if this were so, that these powers exist for the spread
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Page 2
and dissemination without hesitation for his testimony and not its censure and its retention, and even put on his drawers from oblivion. 
 Sermons and everything said by Archbishop Lefebvre are the heritage of the Church and sole owner is Jesus Christ.Cette ban shameless, is nothing but a manifestation of righteousness by those who impose it. It is regrettable that no member of the Society of St. Pius X does not say anything about it, and it is shameful even none of the three other bishops did not comment more.

The fact that 20 years after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre nothing has been done to publish his sermons is a striking proof that his comments do not concern much the superiors of the Society of Saint Pius X. It should also be remembered that if Archbishop Lefebvre was indeed the founder of the Society of Saint Pius X, it was not a member so far, and I want to show that he has always used the cord from his congregation as a religious Fathers of the Holy Spirit, as the SSPX would be misguided to assume the rights property on his remarks to the censor and repress them.

What a contradiction that self-righteous imposition of silence to Archbishop Lefebvre on the part of his disciples at a time when freedom is vaunted. There is no doubt that if the Church is eclipsed, it is not surprising that one of his most faithful servants is also eclipsed. What is surprising however is that those who are trumping those who call themselves his successors more fidèles.

Abbé MéramoBogota Basilio, April 8, 2011