Archbishop Lefebvre gave very powerful addresses on the first Assisi meeting, March 30 and April 18 1986.  The Archbishop taught clear principles that he believed Catholics need to use in relation to the upcoming first Assisi meeting in October of that year.  

Taken from:  http://strobertbellarmine.net/lefebvresede.html

Archbishop Lefebvre - On the “Sede Vacante” Thesis

- An Address to Seminarians, March 30 and April 18, 1986

EVER SINCE the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, society has revolted more and more against God. The apostasy is growing year by year, and slowly, slowly, all society has been coming under the influence of the freemasonic principles of liberty and independence from God - no more law, no more authority, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion. At the beginning of the 20th century, Pius X warned that these errors were penetrating inside the Church, into the clergy. At Vatican II we saw a conspiracy between churchmen and freemasons, and now the Pope, Cardinals and nearly all Bishops accept man's independence of conscience, the principle of religious liberty and its consequence, the ecuмenism whereby all religions are good. This is absolutely against Jesus Christ Who taught us He is the door of heaven, and there is no other way to get into heaven.

For twenty years since the Council, we have waited for the Vatican to realize the error of its ways. The Society has waited for the Pope to realize that the result of these false principles is the self-destruction of the Church. However, we are bound to recognize that the situation is only getting worse, that the false ecuмenism is escalating, that since last year's Synod in particular the crisis is merely advancing faster and faster towards the total destruction of the Church.

Since the Council we have been seeing the situation get graver and graver, year by year, but the Synod was gravest of all because there they said, "We are continuing! Despite all difficulties, the Council was the work of the Holy Ghost, a second Pentecost. We must continue in the spirit of the Council. There will be no restrictions, no reprimands, no return to Tradition." So now we see them saying, "Let's go even faster!" Naturally, since there were no objections at the Synod to the spirit of the Council put into practice over 20 years, and since all agreed with the changes in the Church, then there is no reason not to continue even faster, and we are arriving at the total destruction of the Church!

The escalation of this Church-destroying ecuмenism is taking place in broad daylight. In Morocco last year the Pope told a crowd of Mohammedans that they pray to the same God as Catholics do. But it is not true. Mohammedans teach that to kill a Christian is good because he is an idolater, worshipping the man Jesus Christ as God. Also last year, in Togo, the Pope poured out on the ground a pagan sacrifice to the god of the animists or African spirit-worshippers. Early this year, in India, he let some Hindu "priestess" mark him on the forehead with the sign of her sect!

Incredible! "All gods of the pagans are devils," says Scripture (Ps.95,5). How can the Pope receive the sign of the devil? Whatever god is not Jesus Christ is not the one and only true God. And most recently, the Pope has been into the ѕуηαgσgυє of the Jєωs in Rome. How can the Pope pray with the enemies of Jesus Christ? These Jєωs know and say and believe that they are the successors of the Jєωs that killed Jesus Christ, and they continue to fight against Jesus Christ everywhere in the world. At the end of the Pope's visit, the Jєωs sang a "hymn" that included the line "I believe with all my heart in the coming of the Messiah," meaning they refuse Jesus as the Messiah, and the Pope had given permission for this denial of Christ to be sung in his presence, and he listened, with head bowed! And the Holy See announces that in the near future he will visit Taize to pray with the Protestants, and he himself said in public at St. Paul Outside of the Walls that later this year he will hold a ceremony gathering all religions of the world together to pray for peace at Assisi in Italy, on the occasion of the Feast of Peace proclaimed by the United Nations due to take place on October 24.

Now all these facts are public, you have seen them in the newspapers and the media. What are we to think? What is the reaction of our Catholic Faith? That is what matters. It is not our personal feelings, a sort of impression or admission of some kind. It is a question of knowing what our Faith tells us, faced with these facts. Let me quote a few words - not my words - from Canon Naz's Dictionary of Canon Law, a wholly official and approved commentary on what has been the Catholic Church's body of law for nineteen centuries. On the subject of sharing in the worship of non-Catholics (after all, this is what we now see Pope and bishops doing), the Church says, in Canon 1258-1: "It is absolutely forbidden for Catholics to attend or take any active part in the worship of non-Catholics in any way whatsoever." On this Canon the quasi-official Naz Commentary says, and I quote, "A Catholic takes active part when he joins in heterodox; i.e., non-Catholic worship with the intention of honouring God by this means in the way non-Catholics do. It is forbidden to pray, to sing or to play the organ in a heretical or schismatic temple, in association with the people worshipping there, even if the words of the hymn or the song or the prayer are orthodox." The reason for this prohibition is that any participation in non-Catholic worship implies profession of a false religion and hence denial of the Catholic Faith. By such participation Catholics are presumed to be adhering to the beliefs of the non- Catholics, and that is why Canon 2316 declares them "suspect of heresy, and if they persevere, they are to be treated as being in reality heretics."

Now these recent acts of the Pope and bishops, with Protestants, animists and Jєωs, are they not an active participation in non-Catholic worship as explained by Canon Naz on Canon 1258-1? In which case, I cannot see how it is possible to say that the Pope is not suspect of heresy, and if he continues, he is a heretic, a public heretic. That is the teaching of the Church.

Now I don't know if the time has come to say that the Pope is a heretic; I don't know if it is the time to say that. You know, for some time many people, the sedevacantists, have been saying "there is no more Pope," but I think that for me it was not yet the time to say that, because it was not sure, it was not evident, it was very difficult to say that the Pope is a heretic, the Pope is apostate. But I recognize that slowly, very slowly, by the deeds and acts of the Pope himself we begin to be very anxious.
I am not inventing this situation; I do not want it. I would gladly give my life to bring it to an end, but this is the situation we face, unfolding before our eyes like a film in the cinema. I don't think it has ever happened in the history of the Church, the man seated in the chair of Peter partaking in the worship of false gods.

What conclusion must we draw in a few months if we are confronted by these repeated acts of partaking in false worship? I don't know. I wonder. But I think the Pope can do nothing worse than call together a meeting of all religions, when we know there is only one true religion and all other religions belong to the devil. So perhaps after this famous meeting of Assisi, perhaps we must say that the Pope is a heretic, is apostate. Now I don't wish yet to say it formally and solemnly, but it seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his faith, to keep him in the Faith - how can he at the same time be a public heretic and virtually apostatise? So it is possible we may be obliged to believe this pope is not pope.

For twenty years, Msgr. de Castro-Mayer and I preferred to wait; we said it was more prudent and more in conformity with Providence to wait because it is so important, so tragic, when it is not just a bishop, archbishop or cardinal, but the man in the chair of Peter. It is so important, so grave, so sad, that we prefer to wait until Providence gives us such evidence, that it is no longer possible to refuse to say that the Pope is a heretic. So, to say that I think we are waiting for the famous meeting in Assisi, if God allows it! Maybe war will break out, and here I take the opportunity to congratulate America and its President on their resolute action in Libya against an enemy of all civilization. In Europe they are all afraid, afraid, afraid of the Communists. Why? Until the Communists occupy all Europe. But President Reagan's action may have delayed war by making the Communists afraid; we don't know, because they are fanatics and could start war any time just to take power.

Now some priests (even some priests in the Society) say that we Catholics need not worry about what is happening in the Vatican; we have the true sacraments, the true Mass, the true doctrine, so why worry about whether the Pope is a heretic or an impostor or whatever; it is of no importance to us. But I think that is not true. If any man is important in the Church, it is the Pope. He is the centre of the Church and has a great influence on all Catholics by his attitudes, his words and his acts. All men read in the newspapers the Pope's words and on television they see his travels. And so, slowly, slowly, many Catholics are losing the Catholic Faith by the scandal of the Pope's partaking in false religions. This ecuмenism is a scandal in the true sense of the word, an encouragement to sin. Catholics are losing faith in the Catholic Church. They think all religions are good because the Pope in this way befriends men of all religions. When the scandal comes from so high in the Church, from the man in the chair of Peter and from almost all the bishops, then poor Catholics who are thrown back on their own resources and who do not know their Faith well enough to keep it despite all, or who do not have priests by their side to help them to keep the Faith, these Catholics are completely at a loss what to do. They are no longer practicing their Faith, or they give up praying, or they are losing the Faith altogether and are joining some sect or other. I ask, what people are keeping the Faith? Where are they? Where are they? And I ask even the Traditionalists!

For I think that many Traditional Catholics enjoy the traditions; they like the old Mass, they like the old sacraments, they like the old teaching of the Church, but they do not really believe in Jesus Christ as the one and only Saviour, God and Creator. That is the bad influence of all the modern errors coming through television and the media - they are so bad, so pagan, so opposed to Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith that few people remain true Catholics wholly faithful to Jesus Christ. That is why we can't be indifferent to these scandalous events in Rome, we must judge them in the light of our Faith and help Catholics, traditional Catholics, to see that this bad example of the Pope is a great scandal, very dangerous for their souls.

It is very sad. Never in my life did I think I could be saying, the scandal of the Pope, but it is true. What can I do about it? I think we must pray, and pray, morning, noon and night and study our Catholic doctrine very deeply to stay true Catholics and keep the Faith.

Someone may say, I am on the way to saying the Pope is not Pope, in order to consecrate a bishop. That is not true. They are two different problems. Ever since the Council, year after year, I have been praying to God that Providence by the facts and the unfolding of events should show us what we must do. I pray for it to be clear beyond doubt, wholly evident. And I think that now we are in this time, I think that it is the answer of God. I would much prefer Providence to be showing us the Vatican returning to Tradition, but instead we see the Vatican plunging into darkness and error. And so it is sure that now it is not as difficult to see as it was one or two years ago, it is more clear and evident that they are no longer truly Catholic. No persecution or revolution in all history has so destroyed the Church as these years since the Council, because today the Faith is being destroyed by men of the Church, by the Pope himself, by Cardinals, by bishops, priests and nuns. It is the wholesale, worldwide and radical destruction of the Faith.

Yet it is a great grace for us to live in this time. From before the destruction, we were chosen by God to continue the Catholic Church. Even if we are condemned by Rome, even if we are persecuted by the bishops, that is not important. What is important is to stay Catholic, to keep the grace we received at baptism, to save our souls. Nobody can say we are heretics or schismatics for believing as the Popes, Saints and Church of old believed for twenty centuries. It is a great grace of God to have been chosen to continue the Faith and the Church, but it is a great responsibility ,and we must pray and remain very humble in order to be faithful to the grace that we receive.

You seminarians especially, future priests, must study the true Faith to become true missionaries of Our Lord, even if you have to shed your blood, as the martyrs did in olden times. Then young girls would suffer heroic deaths rather than make one sacrifice or breathe one prayer to the pagan gods of ancient Rome, but now, no problem! You want me to say a prayer to your god? Sure! And so they are abandoning Jesus Christ and the true Faith in order to be friends with the enemies of the Church!

We refuse. Instead we resolve to follow the non-ecuмenical martyrs, the Saints. Tomorrow at Ridgefield the Church will have three more priests. That is very important. It is not a question of numbers, it is a question of quality, it is a question of true priests. Jesus Christ began with twelve apostles so we need not feel bad that we are so few. Our work is really nothing compared with the world's needs. But that is not our problem, it is God's problem. He asked us to work and to believe in Him and to have confidence in Jesus Christ and in the grace of Jesus Christ. Success lies in God's hands. You know we have much to suffer, many, many sufferings, even in the Society. But we must carry the Cross of Jesus Christ and with the courage and resolution He gives us, we must have a great hope that one day the kingdom of Jesus Christ will return to this world.

Excellent, and inspirational posts.

CAN OBEDIENCE OBLIGE US
TO DISOBEY?
Statement of Archbishop Lefebvre
Originally published in the July 1988 issue of The Angelus magazine
March 29, 1988

The rector of the Seminary of the Society of St. Pius X in Switzerland, Fr. Lorans, having asked me to help in drawing up this issue of the Letter from Econe, it seemed to me, in these circuмstances, that it would not be without benefit to put before you again what I wrote on January 20, 1978, concerning certain objections which could be made as to our attitude with regard to the problems created by the present situation of the Church.


One of these questions was: ''How do you see obedience to the pope?" Here is the reply I gave ten years ago:


The principles governing obedience are known and are so in conformity with sane reason and common sense that one is driven to wonder how intelligent persons can make a statement like, "They prefer to be mistaken with the pope, than to be with the truth against the pope."


That is not what the natural law teaches, nor the Magisterium of the Church. Obedience presupposes an authority which gives an order or issues a law. Human authorities, even those instituted by God, have no authority other than to attain the end apportioned them by God and not to turn away from it. When an authority uses power in opposition to the law for which this power was given it, such an authority has no right to be obeyed and one must disobey it.


This need to disobey is accepted with regard to a family father who would encourage his daughter to prostitute herself, with regard to the civil authority which would oblige doctors to perform abortions and kill innocent souls, yet people accept in every case the authority of the Pope, who is supposedly infallible in his government and in all words. Such an attitude betrays a sad ignorance of history and of the true nature of papal infallibility.


A long time ago St. Paul said to St. Peter that he was "Not walking according to the truth of the Gospel" (Gal. 2:14). St. Paul encouraged the faithful not to obey him, St. Paul, if he happened to preach any other gospel than the Gospel that he had already taught them (Gal. 1:8).


St. Thomas, when he speaks of fraternal correction, alludes to St. Paul's resistance to St. Peter and he makes the following comment: "To resist openly and in public goes beyond the measure of fraternal correction. St. Paul would not have done it towards St. Peter if he had not in some way been his equal.... We must realize, however, that if there was question of a danger for the faith, the superiors would have to be rebuked by their inferiors, even in public." This is clear from the manner and reason for St. Paul's acting as he did with regard to St. Peter, whose subject he was, in such a way, says the gloss of St. Augustine, "that the very head of the Church showed to superiors that if they ever chanced to leave the straight and narrow path, they should accept to be corrected by their inferiors" (St. Thomas [in the Summa Theologica] IIa, IIae, q.33, art. 4, ad 2).


The case evoked by St. Thomas is not merely imaginary because it took place with regard to John XXII during his life. This pope thought he could state as a personal opinion that the souls of the elect do not enjoy the Beatific Vision until after the Last Judgment. He wrote this opinion down in 1331 and in 1332 he preached a similar opinion with regard to the pains of the damned. He had the intention of putting forward this opinion in a solemn decree.


But the very lively action on the part of the Dominicans, above all in Paris, and of the Franciscans, made him renounce this opinion in favor of the traditional opinion defined by his successor, Benedict XII, in 1336.


And here is what Pope Leo XIII said in his Encyclical Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20,1888: "If, then, by any one in authority, something be sanctioned out of conformity with the principles of right reason, and consequently hurtful to the commonwealth, such an enactment can have no binding force of law." And a little further on, he says: "But where the power to command is wanting, or where a law is enacted contrary to reason, or to the eternal law, or to some ordinance of God, obedience is unlawful, lest while obeying man, we become disobedient to God."


Now our disobedience is motivated by the need to keep the Catholic Faith. The orders being given us clearly express that they are being given us in order to oblige us to submit without reserve to the Second Vatican Council, to the post-conciliar reforms, and to the prescriptions of the Holy See, that is to say, to the orientations and acts which are undermining our Faith and destroying the Church. It is impossible for us to do this. To collaborate in the destruction of the Church is to betray the Church and to betray Our Lord Jesus Christ.


Now all the theologians worthy of this name teach that if the pope, by his acts, destroys the Church, we cannot obey him (Vitoria: Obras, pp.486-487; Suarez: De fide, disp.X, sec.VI, no.16; St. Robert Bellarmine: de Rom. Pont., Book 2, Ch.29; Cornelius a Lapide: ad Gal. 2,11, etc.) and he must be respectfully, but publicly, rebuked.


The principles governing obedience to the pope's authority are the same as those governing relations between a delegated authority and its subjects. They do not apply to the Divine Authority which is always infallible and indefectible and hence incapable of failing. To the extent that God has communicated His infallibility to the pope and to the extent that the pope intends to use this infallibility, which involves four very precise conditions in its exercise, there can be no failure.


Outside of these precisely fixed conditions, the authority of the pope is fallible and so the criteria which bind us to obedience apply to his acts. Hence it is not inconceivable that there could be a duty of disobedience with regard to the pope.


The authority which was granted him was granted him for precise purposes and in the last resort for the glory of the Holy Trinity, for Our Lord Jesus Christ, and for the salvation of souls.


Whatever would be carried out by the pope in opposition to this purpose would have no legal value and no right to be obeyed, nay, rather, it would oblige us to disobey in order for us to remain obedient to God and faithful to the Church.


This holds true for everything that the recent popes have commanded in the name of Religious Liberty or ecuмenism since the Council: all the reforms carried out under this heading are deprived of any legal standing or force of law. In these cases the popes use their authority contrary to the end for which this authority was given them. They have a right to be disobeyed by us.


The Society and its history show publicly this need to remain faithful to God and to the Church. The years 1974, 1975 and 1976 leave us with the memory of this incredible clash between Ecône and the Vatican, between the Pope and myself.


The result was the condemnation, the suspension a divinis, wholly null and void because the pope was tyrannically abusing his authority in order to defend laws contrary to the good of the Church and to the good of souls.


These events are an historical application of the principles concerning the duty to disobey.


That clash was the occasion for a departure of a certain number of priests who were friends or members of the Society, who were scared by the condemnation, and did not understand the duty to disobey under certain circuмstances. Since then, twelve years have passed. Officially, the condemnation still stands, relations with the pope are still tense, especially as the consequences of this ecuмenism are drawing us into an apostasy which forced us to react vigorously. However, the announcement of consecration of bishops in June stirred Rome into action: it at last made up its mind to fulfill our request for an Apostolic Visitation by sending on November 11, 1987, Cardinal Gagnon and Msgr. Perl. As far as we were able to judge by the speeches and reflections of our Visitors, their judgment was very favorable indeed, and the Cardinal did not hesitate to attend the Pontifical Mass on December 8th, at Econe, celebrated by the prelate suspended a divinis.


What can we conclude from all this except that our disobedience is bearing good fruit, recognized by the envoys of the authority which we disobey? And here we are now confronted with new decisions to be taken. We are more than ever encouraged to give the Society the means it needs to continue its essential work, the formation of true priests of the holy, and Catholic, and Roman Church. That is to say, to give me successors in the episcopate.


Rome understands this need, but will the pope accept these bishops from the ranks of Tradition? For ourselves it cannot be otherwise. Any other solution would be the sign that they want to align us with the conciliar revolution, and there our duty to disobey immediately revives. The negotiations are now under way and we shall soon know the true intentions of Rome. They will decide the future. We must continue to pray and to watch. May the Holy Ghost guide us through the intercession of Our Lady of Fatima!


† Marcel Lefebvre
 

 
 
 
 
The interdenominational day of prayer in Assisi in 1986
 
 Pope John Paul II is inviting all the major religions of the world, the Muslims in particular, to a great prayer meeting in Assisi, in the same spirit of the first meeting for peace that took place there in 1986. We are deeply distressed by this event and condemn it totally.

Because it offends God in His first commandment.

Because it denies the unity of the Church and Her mission of saving souls.

Because it can only lead the faithful into confusion and indifferentism.

Because it deceives the unfortunate unfaithful and members of other religions.
 
 
The problem does not lie in the object of the prayers -peace. To pray for peace and to seek to establish and strengthen peace between peoples and nations is a good thing in itself. The Catholic liturgy is full of beautiful prayers for peace. We pray these prayers with all our hearts. Moreover, given the fact that the angels announced, on the birth of Our Lord Jesus Christ, peace on earth to men of good will, it is totally fitting to ask the faithful to implore the One True God to grant us a gift of such great value at this stage in the year.

The reason for our indignation lies in the confusion, scandal and blasphemy that result from an invitation from the Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ, sole mediator between God and man, to other religions to come to Assisi to pray for peace.

It has been stated that to avoid any syncretism, those attending will not be praying "together", but that each religion will pray in separate rooms in the Franciscan convent at Assisi.. Cardinal Kasper went so far —and rightly so —to affirm that "Christians cannot pray with members of other religions." (L'Osservatore Romano, January 5, 2002). However, this affirmation is not enough to dissipate the dreadful uneasiness and confusion caused by the event; it cannot be denied that all kinds of religions will be praying "each in their own camp" to obtain from these prayers said at the same time, but in different locations, the same result: peace. The fact that all have been invited to pray, at the same time and in the same town, for the same intention is clear proof of the desire for unity. On the other hand, the fact that the prayers will be offered in separate locations betrays the contradictory and impossible nature of the project. In reality, the distinction is false, even though, thanks be to God, it avoids a direct communicatio in sacris. However, the syncretic nature of the operation is obvious to all. Recourse to deceitful words has made it possible to deny the painfully obvious reality. But words do not mean anything any more: we will be going to Assisi, not to pray together, we are going there together to pray … no syncretism, etc.

The establishment of civil (political) peace between nations by congresses, discussions, diplomacy, with the intervention of influential persons of different nations and religions, is one thing. It is another to claim to obtain the gift of peace from God by the prayer of all (false) religions. Such an initiative is completely inconsistent with the Catholic faith and goes against the first commandment.

This is not a question of individual prayer, that of one man, in his own particular relationship with God, whether as creator or sanctifier, but the prayer of different religions, as such, with their own particular rite addressed to their own particular divinity. Holy Scripture, (both the Old and the New Testaments) teach us that the only prayer pleasing to God is that of He, Whom He established as sole mediator between Himself and men, and that this prayer can only be found in the one true religion. God considers an abomination all other religions, especially idolatry, the summum of all superstitions.

Moreover, how can one hope to claim that religions that fail to recognize the one true God can possibly obtain anything from Him? Saint Paul assures us that these false gods are fallen angels and demons. "But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils. You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils." (I Cor. 10: 20-21)

Inviting these religions to pray is inviting them to make an act that God reproves, that he condemns in the first commandment, one God alone shall you adore. It is leading the members of such religions into error and condoning their ignorance and misfortune.

Worse still: this invitation implies that their prayers might be useful, or even necessary, in order to obtain peace. Almighty God made it perfectly clear what He thinks of this, via the words of his apostle Saint Paul: "Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God; as God saith: ‘I will dwell in them, and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people." (II Cor. 6: 14-16)

"We will never fully understand the struggle between the good and the wicked throughout history, as long as we do not see it as the personal and unyielding battle for all time between Satan and Jesus Christ." wrote Archbishop Lefebvre in all his wisdom. (Spiritual Journey, p. 37; [available from Angelus Press]) This fundamental truth, as far as war and peace are concerned, would appear to have been totally forgotten in the thinking behind the initiative in Assisi.

At one point during the day, everyone will be gathered together. When, then, will the participants hear the cry of the first Pope, Saint Peter "Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12) The same Jesus Christ, sole Savior, is also the sole author of peace. But will anyone dare point out these elementary truths to guests who are strangers to Christianity? Fear of hurting their feelings will mean that this absolutely essential condition for true peace will be overlooked or reduced to a purely subjective belief ("for us Christians, Jesus Christ is God" etc.)

As we have just pointed out: Not only is there only one true God and "So that they are inexcusable." (Romans 1:20) but there is also only one mediator (I Tim 2, 5), one sole ambassador authorised by God, who intercedes ceaselessly on our behalf (Heb 7, 25). Religions which refuse to recognise His divinity explicitly, such as Judaism and Islam, have no chance of having their prayers answered, because of so fundamental an error. "Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also." (I John 2:22-23)

Despite monotheistic appearances, we do not have the same God, we do not have the same mediator. Only the mystical bride of Christ (Eph 5, 32) has the prerogative of obtaining from God, in the name of, and through, Our Lord Jesus Christ, any favours, in particular that of peace. Such is the faith that the Church has taught and believed constantly, throughout the ages and from time immemorial. This is, by no means, a question of intolerance or of disdain for one’s neighbor, it is a question of an unchangeable truth. "No one comes to the Father but through me." (John 14, 6)

To make gestures, or to get others to make them, that no longer express this, is to deceive oneself. It offends God, Our Lord Jesus Christ in whom He is well pleased and His Holy Church (Mt 16, 18). How can those who refuse this mediation —as do the Jєωs and Muslims explicitly, in refusing to recognize His divinity –possibly hope to have their prayers answered? The same goes for those who refuse to accept the Church’s role as mediator.

John Paul II has attempted to justify the prayer meetings in Assisi on several occasions. In fact, one of his arguments is founded on the definition of prayer. "All authentic prayer comes from the Holy Ghost who dwells mysteriously in every soul". Inasmuch as one attributes the correct meaning to the word "authentic", one could accept the first part of the sentence. But it is obvious that one cannot say that the prayer of a Buddhist, before an idol of Buddha, of that of a witchdoctor smoking the peace pipe, or that of an animist, is authentic.

The only authentic prayer is true prayer addressed to the true God. It is totally wrong to qualify a prayer addressed to the devil as authentic. Can the prayer of a fanatical terrorist, before crashing into the Manhattan tower: "Allah is great" be called authentic?

Wasn’t he convinced that he was doing the right thing, doesn’t that make him sincere? It is clear that a purely subjective way of looking at things is not sufficient to make a prayer authentic.

The second part of the sentence: "the Holy Ghost dwells mysteriously in every soul", or in every man, is certainly false. The word "mysteriously" can be misleading: in Catholic theology, as in Holy Scripture, the dwelling of the Holy Ghost is directly linked to the presence of sanctifying grace. One of the first formulae used in baptism consists of commanding the devil to leave the soul in order to let the Holy Ghost enter it. This demonstrates quite clearly that the Holy Ghost did not dwell in the soul before baptism. And so, the justification for the interdenominational day of prayer at Assisi is based on a false premise.

Those wishing to promote dialogue, which requires considering the other party in a highly positive light, argue that there is much good in other religions, and, given that God is the sole source of good, God is at work in other religions. This is pure sophistry, based on the lack of distinction between natural order and supernatural order. It goes without saying that, when one speaks of the action of God in a religion, one implies a work of salvation. This means God who saves by His grace. His supernatural grace. On the other hand, the good referred to in other religions, (non-Christian ones at any rate) is merely natural; in such cases, God is acting as creator, Who gives being to all things, and not as savior. The determination of the Vatican II Council to dispense with the distinction between the order of grace and natural order bears, in this respect, its most poisonous fruits. The result is the worst sort of confusion, that which leads people to think that any religion can finally obtain the greatest favors from God. This is a huge fraud, a ridiculous error.

It is in keeping with the Masonic plot to establish a grand temple of universal brotherhood above all religions and beliefs, "Unity in diversity" a concept so dear to the New Age and to globalization.  "We were excommunicated by Clement XI in 1738 because of our interdenominational principles. But the Church was definitely in error, if it is true that, on 27th October 1986, the present Pope gathered together men of all religious confessions in Assisi to pray for peace. What else are our brothers looking for when they gather together in temples, than love between men, tolerance, solidarity, defense of the dignity of the human-being, considering themselves equal, above political and religious beliefs and the color of their skin?" (Grand Master Armando Corona, of the Grand Lodge of the Spring Equinox, Hiram —voice of the Grand Orient of Italy —April 1987)

One thing is certain: there is no better way to provoke the anger of God.

This is why, despite our strong desire for the peace of God, we will have absolutely nothing to do with this day of prayer on 24th January, in Assisi. Nullam partem.

+Bernard Fellay
January 21, 2002
 
 
 
 

Quote from: RomanCatholic1953

Excellent, and inspirational posts.

The Archbishop's words are very inspirational, I agree.  He captured Assisi perfectly, and saw what needed to be done.  I believe this was a grace given to him for his loyalty and love for the the unpolluted Catholic Faith that he preserved and defended.  

Well Said, Ambrose.

more of the same **^&  of "everyone has there own path to God and are moving toward God" we see in naturalism, indifferentism and Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ-and V2 docuмents!

Well, depending on which version of BOD you hold, those who are in thier "path to God" can still have the desire that pleases God enough.  

As Father Denis Fahey explains..., The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jєωιѕн Nation (1953), p. 52: “The Jєωs, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants.  It is possible that a member of the Jєωιѕн Nation, who rejects Our Lord, may have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul, and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not good. If a Jєω who rejects our Lord is good in the way God demands, it is in spite of the movement in which he and his nation are engaged.”

The problem I have with Fr. Fahey, is that he seems to limit God's mercy here to only "a member".  I would think that if God can break His own rules for one, certainly he could do it for many. And if He can do it for many, then, why not the Assissi idea of Divine Mercy for All???

I think it's very pertinant.  All the fury that is directed at the Assissi debacle is over the idea that these people are being directed to remain in their false religions and that all is well for them by doing so.  

If, as the theory goes, the Catholic faith can still save these various groups in spite of their adherance to false faiths, then what is the problem with Assissi meetings?