Author Topic: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got? (Read 3677 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #30 on:** January 03, 2024, 09:19:45 AM »

Quote from: Centroamerica on January 01, 2024, 01:03:41 PM

Why does this post seem like a gigantic Ad Hominem.

Why does this post seem so idiotic?

^^^
(THAT is an ad-hominem).

An "ad-hominem" is when you attack not the argument, or the substance thereof, but the man holding the position.
My original post was simply not an ad-hominem. So I can't help you with why it "seems" like one to you.

Matthew · « **Reply #31 on:** January 03, 2024, 09:33:37 AM »

Allow me to rephrase my point:

I
+Archbishop Lefebvre was a holy, saintly man. How God prepared him for his life's work reads like Lives of the Saints.
...and I would know what those sound like, because I've read probably 300 or more such books and biographies.

Let's put it this way: if +ABL's life and work makes you feel uncomfortable, or puts you on the defensive, then maybe JUST MAYBE you hitched your wagon to the wrong horse?

Again, for those who are unaware of crucial tidbits of +ABL's heroic Catholic career, you need to investigate it for the sake of truth. His holy family, his siblings, the number of vocations in the +Lefebvre household, the fact he was a prominent clergyman before Vatican II, the fact he headed up the International Group of Fathers, the ONLY resistance by the assembled bishops to full Modernism during Vatican II. And +ABL was personally trusted by the Pope with authority over French-speaking Africa. Last but not least, this extremely well-trusted Churchman was on the committee to draft the schemata that were SUPPOSED TO BE addressed at Vatican II -- the schemata that were thrown out at the outset of the Council.

And despite having a phone book full of Traditional "groups" in current year, that was not true in 1970. All you had were scattered resistant priests refusing to say the New Mass and saying the Tridentine Mass for scattered groups of Faithful here and there all over the world. But what about would-be seminarians? They can't just go off and start a chapel, and become a priest online. They came to +ABL and begged him to start a seminary. And he did.

In the end, +ABL's PRIESTLY SOCIETY was rubber-stamped by God according to anyone who has the Faith and eyes to see. He died on March 25th, which is literally the MOST PRIESTLY DAY in the whole 365-day calendar. Holy Thursday is a movable Feast. March 25th is when the Eternal High Priest became incarnate, bridging God and man, which is fundamentally Priest. He is Priest by his very being, having both Divine and human natures. I can't emphasize this enough. +ABL didn't start "another Trad group", let alone to compete with other Trad groups. He started a Priestly Society to form priests according to the pre-Vatican II ways. Offering the Tridentine Mass in various existing and to-be-created "Mass centers" came as a logical consequence of the former.

His many experiences as a missionary in Africa prepared him to defend the Tridentine Mass (having seen its power first-hand) and also the danger of priests being alone (as he witnessed in Africa, with priests joining whole villages in binge drinking). That is why he set up the system of "Priories" in the SSPX, where priests would always have a homebase with 3+ priests to recharge their spiritual batteries.

Once we have established that +ABL was an outstanding, peerless example of Divine Providence to see us through the greatest Crisis in Church history, we move on to my second point:

II
If I'm to leave +ABL's path and position on the Crisis, I expect to follow someone AS CLEARLY INDICATED by Providence as +ABL was, or MORE so. Not less than. In my opinion, all the "great sede priests" you listed pale in comparison to the stunning endorsement by Heaven that +ABL had.

Remember, it's not what a man DOES by his own will. That's not how it works. It's what HAPPENS, especially what happens that WASN'T the will of the saint in question. That's what you have to pay attention to.

That is why, regardless of the number of Pope Francis' heresies, regardless of how destructive the Novus Ordo Mass is (and how that Mass, destructive to souls, was promulgated by the Conciliar Church and recent Popes), I will stay the course and continue to follow the path laid out by +ABL, because if God wanted me to change, He would send AT LEAST AS CLEAR a sign as He did when He sent us +ABL. That's my belief and I'm sticking to it. I'm staking my eternal salvation on it.

If I turn out (after God intervenes and ends the Crisis, in Eternity, etc.) to have been objectively wrong, A) I will have nothing to apologize for and B) I'm positive that God will understand. Because He gave SUCH CLEAR MARKERS that +ABL was the safest, most Catholic place to park one's soul during the Crisis, and that is what I did.

Again, I'll bet my eternal destiny on it. An eternity of unimaginable torture and pain vs. an eternity of indescribable bliss.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #32 on:** January 03, 2024, 09:57:03 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2024, 09:33:37 AM

Allow me to rephrase my point:

I
+Archbishop Lefebvre was a holy, saintly man. How God prepared him for his life's work reads like Lives of the Saints.
...and I would know what those sound like, because I've read probably 300 or more such books and biographies.

Well, I invite you to read the Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc. It reads like St. Therese's "Story of a Soul". There are a lot of caricatures of Archbishop Thuc out there due largely to the work of Bishop Kelly and the SSPV, but the reality was quite different.

http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=2&ausgabe_id=180&artikel_id=1920

Matthew · « **Reply #33 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:00:45 AM »

Well, I'm not going to condemn persons or things which I don't know or understand.

I am personally neutral on Abp. Thuc.

What did he do during his years in the Crisis to help souls? Besides consecrating "a bishop in every garage"? I believe there was a book by that title; I'm not making up that phrase.

All he did, that I know of, was consecrate a ton of bishops.

As for the oft-repeated canard that he went crazy, I'm prudently reserving judgment on that, but personally I lean more towards "he wasn't crazy".

Here's another thing though: it's difficult to judge individuals -- for good or for ill. All we CAN and SHOULD judge (cf. the advice of Our Lord) is the VISIBLE FRUITS in the exterior forum. The SSPX was blessed with abundant fruits the likes of which no other group could compare. Sure, there were many fine and holy priests and bishops who did fine things for their local groups of 50 or 75 Catholics. But let's keep it in perspective -- the SSPX did great good for the whole world, not just this or that small town. Ignatian retreats, Angelus Press, the formation of hundreds of new priests, support for Traditional religious orders, a half-dozen seminaries throughout the world, a network of hundreds of chapels, etc.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #34 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:04:00 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2024, 09:33:37 AM

Again, for those who are unaware of crucial tidbits of +ABL's heroic Catholic career, you need to investigate it for the sake of truth. His holy family, his siblings, the number of vocations in the +Lefebvre household, the fact he was a prominent clergyman before Vatican II, the fact he headed up the International Group of Fathers, the ONLY resistance by the assembled bishops to full Modernism during Vatican II. And +ABL was personally trusted by the Pope with authority over French-speaking Africa. Last but not least, this extremely well-trusted Churchman was on the committee to draft the schemata that were SUPPOSED TO BE addressed at Vatican II -- the schemata that were thrown out at the outset of the Council.

Archbishop Thuc also came from a holy family, his brothers having been brutally murdered by the Communists (one was buried alive) after having left Holy Mass, and arguably were martyred. Archbishop Thuc himself then suffered a dry martyrdom. He couldn't return to Vietnam due to the Communist takeover, so he took up the humble work of an assistant priest at a small Italian parish and then small French parish. Not only was he not insulted by this, but he never uttered a single complaint about his deplorable treatment by the Montinian hierarchy. In fact, he speaks gratefully of the opportunity to received to "earn his keep" in a tiny, dirty little apartment (more like a room) that he was disgracefully committed to by the Novus Ordo hierarchy.

Archbishop Thuc was also a prominent clergyman before Vatican II. He held 3 Doctorates and started a seminary in Vietnam. +Lefebvre actually invited him to be the rector at Econe, due to his experience in starting/running seminaries, but he declined due to age and health reasons. Not only that, but Pius XI gave him a "mandate" mandatum to consecrate bishops without seeking approval from Rome due to Communism, a mandate that was never rescinded. So he too was "highly trusted" by Pius XI and Pius XII.

Archbishop Thuc was also part of the same "International Group of Fathers" that were "the ONLY resistance to the assembled bishops to full modernism".

So I submit that the same comments apply equally to Archbishop Thuc.

Matthew · « **Reply #35 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:06:58 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on January 03, 2024, 10:04:00 AM

Archbishop Thuc was also part of the same "International Group of Fathers" that were "the ONLY resistance to the assembled bishops to full modernism".

So I submit that the same comments apply equally to Archbishop Thuc.

But +ABL led the group. Why?

Also, where is +Thuc's group?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #36 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:19:07 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2024, 10:00:45 AM

Well, I'm not going to condemn persons or things which I don't know or understand.

I am personally neutral on Abp. Thuc.

What did he do during his years in the Crisis to help souls? Besides consecrating "a bishop in every garage"? I believe there was a book by that title; I'm not making up that phrase.

All he did, that I know of, was consecrate a ton of bishops.

As for the oft-repeated canard that he went crazy, I'm prudently reserving judgment on that, but personally I lean more towards "he wasn't crazy".

Here's another thing though: it's difficult to judge individuals -- for good or for ill. All we CAN and SHOULD judge (cf. the advice of Our Lord) is the VISIBLE FRUITS in the exterior forum. The SSPX was blessed with abundant fruits the likes of which no other group could compare. Sure, there were many fine and holy priests and bishops who did fine things for their local groups of 50 or 75 Catholics. But let's keep it in perspective -- the SSPX did great good for the whole world, not just this or that small town. Ignatian retreats, Angelus Press, the formation of hundreds of new priests, support for Traditional religious orders, a half-dozen seminaries throughout the world, a network of hundreds of chapels, etc.

Yes, because most people don't know the real story of the Archbishop, they operate on the caricature that was confabulated by Bishop Kelly and the SSPV. He was most certainly not crazy, though he made some mistakes, the worst having been the consecrations for the Palmar group. But even that he did on what he felt was the encouragement of +Lefebvre. It was a priest at Econe who initially requested that he come, after +Lefebvre referred his request to +Thuc, so the implication was that +Lefebvre asked +Thuc to go. +Lefebvre didn't go himself because he was busy with the ceremony but recommended that they approach +Thuc.

As for the "many" consecrations, outside of the 3 at Palmar, there's no evidence to back up many claims of consecration by +Thuc, and +Thuc denied them. We know of (and +Thuc confirmed) the consecrations of +Guerard des Lauriers, +Carmona, and +Zamora. Bishop de Castro Mayer actually referred The Nine to +des Lauriers, and those 3 men were highly qualified to be consecrated as bishops.

There's a myth / slander that +Thuc laid hands on anyone with a warm body, but that's completely false, partly due to +Kelly's campaign and partly because of various spurious claims of consecration by +Thuc from a number of scoundrels out there.

Really the worst mistakes +Thuc made were simply due to bad judgment, but then +Lefebvre consecrated +Fellay, promoted Schmidberger as Superior of SSPX, as well as several of the current leading quasi-Modernists in the upper ranks of SSPX. +Williamson made some poor decisions about whom to ordain as well ... Urrutigoity comes to mind (along with a number of others).

Ladislaus · « **Reply #37 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:27:30 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2024, 10:06:58 AM

But +ABL led the group. Why?

Also, where is +Thuc's group?

OK, so? +Guerard des Laurier wrote the Ottaviani Intervention and at one point had to call out +Lefebvre publicly for continuing to offer the "interim" 1965 half-Novus Ordo liturgy. +Lefebvre didn't start the seminary on his own initiative, but due to seminarians that came to him, asking for him to start it.

So because +Lefebvre led the group that +Thuc was also a part of, that diminishes Archbishop Thuc?

This is bordering on silly. "My leader is better than your leader." Would you also attempt to diminish what Bishop de Castro Mayer did also? God asked different individuals to play different roles. There were also innumerable heroic independent priests out there. Were they also chopped liver?

SSPX vs. Resistance: "We're the true faithful heirs of Archbishop Lefebvre. No you're not, we are. No, we are."

This notion of having some individual "hero" to back up the claims of R&R vs. sedevacantism is nonsense. It was God who put everyone into the positions they ended up in. God inspired the initial seminarians to ask +Lefebvre to set up a seminary. +des Lauriers wrote the Ottaviani Intervention and influenced Lefebvre to completely jettison.

Bottom line is that Archbishop passed way over 30 years ago. What he left behind is starting to fail, with the neo-SSPX slouching inexorably toward Modernism. Bishop Williamson himself gave a talk about how the personality and gravitas of the Archbishop served as a glue to provide some semblance of unity, but that the only true unity can be around a pope, and it's why he did not set about to create a formal group called the Resistance.

PAT317 · « **Reply #38 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:27:41 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on January 03, 2024, 10:04:00 AM

Archbishop Thuc was also part of the same "International Group of Fathers"

Just curious, what is the source for this info.?

Persto · « **Reply #39 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:31:07 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on January 03, 2024, 09:57:03 AM

Well, I invite you to read the Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc. It reads like St. Therese's "Story of a Soul". There are a lot of caricatures of Archbishop Thuc out there due largely to the work of Bishop Kelly and the SSPV, but the reality was quite different.

http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=2&ausgabe_id=180&artikel_id=1920

Ladislaus, thank for this link to the Autobiography! And also all the other details you supply on Abp. Thuc.

Matthew · « **Reply #40 on:** January 03, 2024, 10:59:12 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on January 03, 2024, 10:27:30 AM

This notion of having some individual "hero" to back up the claims of R&R vs. sedevacantism is nonsense. It was God who put everyone into the positions they ended up in.

Says you. I disagree.

Where are we to look for answers, where to go in the Crisis? Catholic doctrine? Ha! Doctrine only gets you so far: you need to be a Traditional Catholic. Now what? Which group?

In the greatest Crisis to ever hit the Catholic Church (bar none), you better believe God is not going to abandon those who are faithful to Him. He AT LEAST will give wisdom to "little ones", those humble of heart, those searching for the Truth, those docile to the inspirations of grace and detached from earthly things. Given the gravity and length of the Crisis, I would go a step further and say that God must have given a sign as to where it's safest/best to park one's soul during this Crisis. The fruits are there, the signs are there.

Nothing so definitive that it leaves everyone either "with us/God" or "reprobate" -- as I've said a million times, God hasn't stepped in and ended the Crisis, or given such a clear-cut endorsement of any single group that Catholics in all other groups are either mentally retarded or malicious. That day will come -- but it's not here yet.

Right now God is more subtle, he's leaving wisdom "for those with eyes to see and ears to hear". Those who have read lots of Lives of the Saints will recognize the same things in the life of +ABL, but it doesn't exclude good Catholics from adhering to some random independent priest ordained by +Thuc or one of his successors.

Just because God put up a neon sign "THIS IS A GREAT LIFEBOAT FOR THE CRISIS" doesn't mean that one couldn't save his life in many other smaller, slightly inferior lifeboats as well. See the difference?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #41 on:** January 03, 2024, 11:49:54 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2024, 10:59:12 AM

Says you. I disagree.

Where are we to look for answers, where to go in the Crisis? Catholic doctrine? Ha! Doctrine only gets you so far: you need to be a Traditional Catholic. Now what? Which group?

Well, the biggest "group" out there is the SSPX, and the SSPX are in a state of decay. Bishop Williamson decided not to start a "group" for reasons that very much align to what I said. I was sitting there when he gave a talk right after the Archbishop died where he stated (foreshadowing the attitude he'd take with the Resistance) that the SSPX would either come apart altogether or falter since the "glue" of Archbishop Lefebvre's personality would no longer be there, a source of unity that he characterized as artificial (which it was for anyone who understands that the only real Catholic unity is in the Pope). In any case, he likened Traditional Catholics in general as little "pilot lights" that are out there waiting to reignite the Church and viewed it as more of a distributed action than a centralized one ... which, again, is what his mindset was with the Resistance. He could have easily started a "group", spun up a seminary, etc. ... and many have criticized him for not having done so, but I was not the least bit surprised after having listed to that talk he gave.

There's no single "hero" of Traditional Catholicism. We had many independent priests, we had Bishop Castro de Mayer, all doing God's will where he put them. As I mentioned, it wasn't some inspiration that caused Archbishop Lefebvre to proactively start a seminary, but he was responding to the seminarians that God sent in his direction.

Matthew · « **Reply #42 on:** January 03, 2024, 12:09:25 PM »

From the Mailbag --

" +Guerard des Laurier wrote the Ottaviani Intervention"

Many sede's make statements that seem to give Guérard des Lauriers full credit for the Ottaviani Intervention.
If I decide to build my house, and I choose a design, hire various contractors to frame the walls, do the electricity, etc., who built the house? e.g. Is "Trump Tower" named for the contractor(s) who actually constructed the building? No, it is called Trump Tower, even if DT never pounded a nail. The so-called "Ottaviani Intervention" could almost be called "The Lefebvre Intervention", because it was +ABL who saw the need for it, organized it, led it, invited des Lauriers to participate in it, got it translated into other languages & worked to distribute it to other bishops, & sent it to the Cardinals like Ottaviani & Bacci for signature. Guérard des Lauriers was only one of the authors, a member of the committee. Would Guérard des Lauriers have done anything to try to prevent the Novus Ordo Missae (as +ABL did with the Ottaviani Intervention) if he had not been invited to participate by +ABL? Did +Thuc do anything to try to stop it? [Did Bp. de Castro Mayer? Perhaps he did, but I am not aware of it off the top of my head.]

I've seen Trads - (I even saw Sean Johnson do it once, which surprised me) - who speak as if +ABL didn't "do anything" until the seminarians came to him to help them become priests. How is fighting the Modernism & Liberalism throughout the Council, including helping to organize the Int'l Group of Fathers, fighting it within the Holy Ghost Fathers as best he could, fighting against the coming Novus Ordo Missae before it even came out by creating the Ottaviani Intervention, how is all that "doing nothing"?

"Archbishop Thuc was also part of the same 'International Group of Fathers'"

He was? I've never heard this before, nor seen him in the photo of the main members. Perhaps he was one of the other members not shown in the photo. Why was he not more famous as an anti-liberal at Vatican II? And anyway, where are all of +Thuc's writings, sermons, speeches that demonstrate him to be this great anti-liberal in the post-VII era? If he had written more, or had given great sermons that were transcribed, there would be no doubt. We would know whether he really was slightly liberal at VII & vacillated, or he was firmly, solidly anti-liberal the entire time. I believe one time on the forum, someone posted 1 docuмent - count them: ONE - not a very long one, and not very comprehensive, that was supposed to have been written by +Thuc, which sort of seemed to be a statement against the liberalism of VII & its aftermath. (In fairness, I've not read his autobiography.)

As for seminarians going to +ABL for formation, how did they know to go to him? It was because he had achieved a reputation as a great anti-liberal in the 1960s.

And none of this, of course, is to say the others are chopped liver. If indeed des Lauriers was the primary writer of the OI, if indeed +Thuc was part of the Cœtus Internationalis Patrum & helped fight (however quietly) the liberalism of VII, God bless them & all who fought. God bless them all for whatever good things they did do in the fight against the VII Revolution. But I agree with you, Matthew, that history has shown & will show that +ABL was the man chosen by God to do the most good in that era - the "hero" of that time in the Church.

Matthew · « **Reply #43 on:** January 03, 2024, 12:15:18 PM »

So in my opinion +Thuc is a lesser hero.

But back to my question -- if we're looking for a sign from God where I should go to keep the Faith during this Crisis, where do I go if I'm convinced +Thuc is "providential enough" to follow? He is deceased after all. We're not talking mostly about history here, we're talking about practical application a.k.a. "WHERE SHOULD I GO TO MASS?"

Some random +Thuc-line priest or bishop isn't good enough to "count as +Thuc", unless they followed some organization, training regimen, blueprint, or leadership given to them by +Thuc. Merely getting Holy Orders from +Thuc doesn't give them a unified "brand" of some sort. When it comes to Independent priests, it's completely luck of the draw, pot luck, your mileage may vary.

+ABL designed the curriculum (including Ignatian Retreats) to form priests a certain way, using his providential and vast experience. He also wrote numerous sermons, books, etc. which were transcribed and distributed to his students. So much so, that even years later you could say that this organization he founded, these priests he formed, still had "his position", "his spirit" and there was solid continuity with +ABL himself.

The success and growth of the SSPX suggests, to me, that God wanted to ensure that there was AT LEAST ONE solid, highly visible, option for Catholics of good will to take refuge in during the time of unprecedented confusion. Yes, He allowed for others here or there, as "bonus options", "misc", or "icing on the cake" of Tradition -- but the one He took care to guide personally was +ABL and his SSPX.

No two +Thuc-line bishops or priests are the same. There is nothing in common among them, except where they got their Orders. +ABL had numerous writings, an organization, a whole philosophy and curriculum which formed a new generation of Traditional priests. +Thuc doesn't have that.

Even if you want to say +Thuc was as big of a saint or hero as +ABL, it still leaves us empty handed regarding how to ACT on that. We can't buy books or sermons by +Thuc, nor can we go to any network of chapels he set up. He only did the ordaining, period.

St Giles · « **Reply #44 on:** January 03, 2024, 01:47:55 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 03, 2024, 12:15:18 PM

So in my opinion +Thuc is a lesser hero.

But back to my question -- if we're looking for a sign from God where I should go to keep the Faith during this Crisis, where do I go if I'm convinced +Thuc is "providential enough" to follow? He is deceased after all. We're not talking mostly about history here, we're talking about practical application a.k.a. "WHERE SHOULD I GO TO MASS?"

Some random +Thuc-line priest or bishop isn't good enough to "count as +Thuc", unless they followed some organization, training regimen, blueprint, or leadership given to them by +Thuc. Merely getting Holy Orders from +Thuc doesn't give them a unified "brand" of some sort. When it comes to Independent priests, it's completely luck of the draw, pot luck, your mileage may vary.

+ABL designed the curriculum (including Ignatian Retreats) to form priests a certain way, using his providential and vast experience. He also wrote numerous sermons, books, etc. which were transcribed and distributed to his students. So much so, that even years later you could say that this organization he founded, these priests he formed, still had "his position", "his spirit" and there was solid continuity with +ABL himself.

The success and growth of the SSPX suggests, to me, that God wanted to ensure that there was AT LEAST ONE solid, highly visible, option for Catholics of good will to take refuge in during the time of unprecedented confusion. Yes, He allowed for others here or there, as "bonus options", "misc", or "icing on the cake" of Tradition -- but the one He took care to guide personally was +ABL and his SSPX.

No two +Thuc-line bishops or priests are the same. There is nothing in common among them, except where they got their Orders. +ABL had numerous writings, an organization, a whole philosophy and curriculum which formed a new generation of Traditional priests. +Thuc doesn't have that.

Even if you want to say +Thuc was as big of a saint or hero as +ABL, it still leaves us empty handed regarding how to ACT on that. We can't buy books or sermons by +Thuc, nor can we go to any network of chapels he set up. He only did the ordaining, period.

You've been making a lot of sense lately.

Author Topic: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got? (Read 3677 times)

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Ladislaus

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Ladislaus

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Ladislaus

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Ladislaus

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

PAT317

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Persto

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Ladislaus

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

Matthew

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?

St Giles

Re: SSPX had saintly ABL. Who do the sedes got?