I see.  We are dumb dummies compared to the Resistance Bishops :farmer:

But please allow one further observation.

Was it not Our Lady of Good Success who advised Mother Mariana that a prelate would arise to fight and save Catholic tradition?
Most of us believe this to be true.



Many even speculated that this prophecy implied the prelate was +ABL ?

But with all the shenanigans that have come to pass and based on the fruits of both the neo-SSPX and SSPX Resistance,
it seems clear, this prelate will not come from the +ABL line.  

Who will fully engage the fight?

We, "watch and pray"... but stay on the look-out, to see the fruits from elsewhere.  

Said prelate has yet to make an appearance. The ABL line will not be the savior of the Church, contrary to the prophecies of the modern visionaries and seers. I sometimes have a feeling that restoration may come from the East. 

JPaul :

Holli,
Your eyes have opened, we have been captured and held in check for decades now, while the Traditional elite have sold away our birthright, a heavy price indeed.

"Your eyes have (finally) opened?"  Is that what you mean. If so, I think my eyes were opened some years ago.  i don't wish to cast aspersions upon the memory of ABL.  Relative to numbers of others, wearing the clerical garb of traditional Catholicism, ABL shines forth and excels above them.  It is just that I don't presently view him as a saint, nor that he was the prelate envisioned by Sr. Mariana.  A certain mythology has sprung up around the Archbishop which I think it may be wise to either ignore, and maybe, even repudiate.

I expect the bish will eventually have something to say about the SSPX leadership once he has analysed all the nuances, real or imaginery. Meanwhile, as a diversion, we can be lectured on the rise of the machine and its place in the species hierarchy.

Like many on here, I thought the role of bishops was principally to serve the Church and the faithful and not act as specific cogs in self-interested organisations. We are told that ABL's bishops were never more than bureaucratic devices and they have certainly lived up to that limited promise. If the traditional church is to break out of her self-imposed confinement, we must have real leaders not opportunists with mitres living well off our labours ......  always a problem in the Church! The laity will only put up with so much in spite of its spasms of mis-placed trust.

I can well understand American impatience because they are generally considered to be more religious than Europeans. Bp. W probably realised this a long time ago in the UK and escaped the ingrained suspicions of Englishmen! We have certainly put so many itinerant clerics through the mincing machine. Fr. Black said we were intolerant! Certainly, we did not possess the right religious mentality for SSPX fudge!

I see.  We are dumb dummies compared to the Resistance Bishops :farmer:

But please allow one further observation.

Was it not Our Lady of Good Success who advised Mother Mariana that a prelate would arise to fight and save Catholic tradition?
Most of us believe this to be true.



Many even speculated that this prophecy implied the prelate was +ABL ?

But with all the shenanigans that have come to pass and based on the fruits of both the neo-SSPX and SSPX Resistance,
it seems clear, this prelate will not come from the +ABL line.  

Who will fully engage the fight?

We, "watch and pray"... but stay on the look-out, to see the fruits from elsewhere.  

 

To Whom It May Concern,

 I have followed with keen interest the stories of Our Lady of Good Success and your books published about Mother Mariana. It is, indeed, a consoling apparition for us Catholics hanging on to tradition. I am sincerely puzzled, however, about your interpretations of the Blessed Mother's message to Mother Mariana. She was asked to suffer so that God would send us a prelate to stand up to the apostasy of our times and form good and holy priests.

 You seem to believe this prelate is yet to come. But how then have we "traditional" Catholics hung on to our lifeboat of the traditional liturgy and Faith without Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre paving the way? Without him standing up to the apostasy and leading, not just the SSPX, but other orthodox, good Catholics through the desert of over 40 years now? What would there be now if it were not for him?

 It would also seem futile for Mother Mariana to suffer and a prelate not show up for the time span in which the apostasy was occurring. The pin-pointing of time by the Blessed Mother also indicates there being an answer within the 20th century. Heresies will flourish from "the end of the 19th century and advancing into a large part of the 20th century" would imply that there is a time within the 20th century that heresies will be abated. Certainly heresies have not been abated through the Vatican, but then by whom, if not Archbishop Lefebvre?

 Also, as pointed out within your books, it was an honor for the religious to die on the feast day of a great saint. This evidenced by Mother Mariana's Superior given to know that she would earn her eternal reward on the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi. Well then, what of January 16th, the day when Mother Mariana was called back to Our Father's Home? It is the feast of St.Pope Marcellus I. He was given the title of martyr because, for his strong conviction of the Faith, he was banished into exile by the fool-hardy king of his day. Marcellus (aka Marcel), meaning "warlike defender", astoundingly depicts the character of this important saint of our Church's history and the one yet unrecognized by the Church in our modern days (Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre).

 Finally, though as I'm sure you know, the Archbishop was a humble man. He had mentioned this apparition of Our Lady of Good Success in his sermon the day he consecrated the bishops to propagate the Faith. He said he had just learned of it. He did not, in fact, mention that this prelate was himself - humble as he was - but what a great consolation it must have been for him to hear the exact troubles of our days foretold by the Blessed Mother and that the very path he had been taking was the remedy the Blessed Mother asked Mother Mariana to suffer so greatly for! And I'm sure it's by no small coincidence the timing the Archbishop was given to know of this deliberately obscured apparition! All for the greater glory of God.

      Sincerely in Christ,

      N.N.

 TIA responds:

 N.N.,

 We respect your interpretation of that part of Mother Mariana’s prophecy mentioning a future prelate who will restore the Church. Regarding private prophecies, we believe any person is entitled to his own opinion until the prophecy is fulfilled or until Holy Mother Church presents her final interpretation of it.

 In the realm of facts, we have some observations on the presuppositions of your letter:

 1. We are glad to acknowledge that, by founding the Society of St. Pius X, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre greatly contributed to keep the Tridentine Mass alive among Catholics in the long period when this Mass was effectively banned by the Liturgical Reform of Paul VI. However, we do not believe he was the only one doing this meritorious work.

 Indeed, Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngo Dình Thuc preceded Archbishop Lefebvre in that fidelity to the Traditional Latin Mass, as well as in the excommunication he received from the Vatican when he consecrated Bishops in 1976 to continue his work. Regarding the Mass the two Prelates took similar positions. The main difference between them is that Archbishop Thuc founded an underground movement quite difficult to control or even to track and, hence, open to all kinds of speculations, while Archbishop Lefebvre founded one that is visible and public.

 Besides these two Prelates - along with the Bishops consecrated by them - others also assisted in the same effort of maintaining the Tridentine Mass, although without founding priestly organizations. For example, Archbishop Geraldo Proença Sigaud and Bishop Antonio Castro Mayer in Brazil also maintained the Tridentine Mass alive in that country of the largest Catholic population in the world, where SSPX has little influence.

 We should not disregard that the true Sacrifice of Calvary continued to be indisputably renewed also by the Masses of other Catholic Rites, which only very slowly are being forced by the Vatican to adapt their liturgies to the progressivist reforms of the Latin Rite. These Rites count more than 15 million faithful, including large Catholic communities such as 5,5 million Catholics of the Ukrainian Catholic Rite, 3 million of the Maronite Rite, 3 million of the Syro-Malabar Rite and one million of the Melkite Rite.

 Therefore, Archbishop Lefebvre was neither the only Prelate to maintain the Tridentine Mass, as implied in your letter, nor was the true Sacrifice of the Mass upheld only by means of the Latin Rite Mass.

 2. For a long period Archbishop Lefebvre presented himself within SSPX as not having signed the docuмents of Vatican II. His faithful followers would take offense if anyone supported the opposite, even when presenting solid arguments. However, after an interview of Card. Hoyos in 2008 where he affirmed Msgr. Lefebvre had signed all the docuмents, this internal “dogma” became less secure. Later, the Vatican released photocopies of the conciliar docuмents signed by the French Archbishop, putting to rest that false statement.

 Today even the four Bishops of SSPX admit that Msgr. Lefebvre had signed all the docuмents, as Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais stated in his recently published biography on Archbishop Lefebvre.

 Although in broad lines Msgr. Lefebvre took a line of action that opposed the Council after that signature, today a growing number of his followers - including the Bishops he consecrated - act as if his opposition to the Council was quite nuanced. They imply he would have accepted Vatican II if it were interpreted in the light of Tradition. If this is true, we have Msgr. Lefebvre as a man who saw the Council not as a great catastrophe that should be completely wiped away from the Church, but as a man who wanted to save the Council.

 Now, how is it possible to consider a Prelate who signed the docuмents of Vatican II and wanted to save it as a restorer of the Church from the present day apostasy? Especially since those docuмents are the official expression of that same apostasy.

 We know from History that the cause of the persecution against St. Athanasius and St. Hilary of Poitiers was their refusal to agree with the various Arian or Semi-Arian councils of their time. It does not appear that Archbishop Lefebvre followed those glorious examples, since he signed all the Vatican II docuмents and would accept it if it were interpreted correctly.

 This is why, in our opinion, he is not the Prelate foreseen in Mother Mariana’s revelations. As you correctly noted, we believe that the mentioned Prelate is still to come.

      Cordially,

      TIA correspondence desk

Interesting.  Perhaps +ABL is like John the Baptist: something of a precursor although he never actually pointed to any one person.

As it has worked out he pointed to Fr Schmidberger who pointed to Bp. Fellay who pointed to Fr Pagliarani who has now pointed out to both Schmidberger and Fellay

Said prelate has yet to make an appearance. The ABL line will not be the savior of the Church, contrary to the prophecies of the modern visionaries and seers. I sometimes have a feeling that restoration may come from the East.

We only have one savior. We already know that +ABL is not our "savior;" (that's an exaggeration) and you often have an accusatory tone toward others who believe that +ABL was raised to help restore the Church and fight heresy. You aren't required to believe that +ABL has helped to save the Church. But we do have reason to believe that God had raised him up to help restore the Church. 

You have a feeling that restoration may come from the east. Well, maybe it will. But what we believe about +ABL is more than just feelings. He was a real person who existed in reality, and we know that he tried to do what he could to maintain Tradition and fight heresy. I'm pretty sure that he did more than any of us have.

Perhaps what you perceive a an accusatory tone is simply to balance out the cultic fervor of some of his followers which has been in evidence at times, and seems to rise up whenever questions are raised about why he never adapted his thinking to the changing realities around him and the worsening destruction of religion.

I don't see how it can be a "cultic fervor" as you say, when +ABL isn't even discussed all that much on the forum anymore. The General Chapter of the SSPX has of course brought +ABL back to the forefront for awhile. I know that's distressing for you, but just be patient. You might want to spend time on a another forum that isn't Resistance for awhile, until the discussions about +ABL go back to being minimal.

_{https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/F045_Lefevbre.html}
Is Msgr. Lefebvre the Prelate
 Predicted to Restore the Church?

 

Posted November 2,

Great find!  Thanks for posting this  AJNC.