Number CCLVI (256) 9 June 2012
ARCHBISHOP SPEAKS
Until Archbishop Lefebvre finally decided to consecrate bishops for the Society of St Pius X in June of 1988, he was, like all Catholics since Vatican II, torn between the Catholic Truth and Catholic Authority that that Council, following the modern world, had split from one another. However, once he had taken that decision, which proved clearly to have been the saving of Catholic Tradition, it was as though everything in his mind dropped back into place, and he never again wavered until his death some two and a half years later.
As an example of his clear mind, here is a letter that he wrote on August 18, 1988, to Dom Thomas Aquinas, the young Prior of the monastery in Brazil which had been founded from the Traditional Benedictine monastery in the south of France, le Barroux, under Dom Gerard. Alas, within days of the consecrations in Econe, Dom Gerard had broken with the SSPX in order to integrate his monastery into the Conciliar Church. Here is what the Archbishop wrote to Dom Thomas:--
“How I regret that you had to leave before the events of le Barroux (i.e. Dom Gerard’s defection). It would have been easier to consider the situation resulting from Dom Gerard’s disastrous decision.
“In his declaration he lays out what has been granted to him, and he accepts to put himself under obedience to modernist Rome which remains fundamentally anti-Traditional. That is what made me keep my distance. At the same time he wished to retain the friendship and support of Traditionalists, which is inconceivable. He accuses us of resisting for the sake of resisting. I did warn him, but his decision had already long been taken, and he did not want to heed our advice.
“The consequences are now inevitable. But we will have no further relations with le Barroux, and we are advising our faithful to give no more support to an operation which is henceforth in the hands of our enemies, the enemies of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of his Universal Kingship. The Benedictine Sisters (attached to le Barroux) are in great distress. They came to see me. I gave to them the advice that I give to you: remain free, and reject any tie with this modernist Rome.
“Dom Gerard is using every argument to paralyze the resistance. (-) Fr. Tam will tell you what I have not written down here. (-) May God bless you and your monastery. Mons Marcel Lefebvre.”
Subsequently Dom Gerard visited the monastery in Brazil to make it follow him into the Newchurch, but young Dom Thomas bravely stood his ground, and the monastery under his guidance has remained Traditional ever since. What does not appear in the letter above is that the Archbishop actually encouraged Dom Thomas to rally the faithful monks in le Barroux, and eject Dom Gerard !
Such was the Archbishop’s clear mind and will from the Episcopal consecrations onwards. One wonders how some of his sons can now be wanting to put themselves “under obedience to modernist Rome which remains fundamentally anti-Traditional”, or, under a subjectivist Pope who has no possible understanding of objective Catholic Tradition. Such is the power of seduction, increasing all the time, of the subjectivist world around us. The madness of subjectivism has become so normal, so widespread, that few people notice it any longer. “Our help is in the name of the Lord.”
Kyrie eleison.
I find it curious that so much depends on perspective.
For some, when Archbishop Lefebvre made the episcopal consecrations in '88, he committed an act of rebellion to legitimate authority, and that one thing overpowers everything else in their mind, so as to be all-important to them.
That apparently was what happened in the mind of this Dom Gerard. It seems to me that a similar thing was going on in the minds of Catholics who went along with Vatican II and the liturgical changes that came in its wake that gave us the
Novus Ordo everything. And it likewise seems to me that this kind of narrow-mindedness is happening today regarding a sense of loyalty to Bishop Fellay, whatever he does or says, when Catholics say that "too many busy-bodies are jumping to conclusions based on rumor and innuendo, for we really don't know what's in the Doctrinal Preamble, and the leaked letters have not been proven to be authentic." These Catholics apparently can't fathom that perhaps +Fellay is making a mistake -- after all, he's been talking up this idea of making a return to Rome for the past 15 years, or more. It's not a new idea, superficially.
I have to admit, that in 1968 I didn't see the problem. I was old enough to know better, but I followed the authority of older Catholics in my life. I had a certain sense of foreboding, but I did not take action based on that sense. In the long run, the sense I had set aside turns out to have been my
sensus catholicus. The same thing happened in 1988, when I heard of the consecrations, I ignored the whole thing out of a loyalty to the judgment of others I knew and respected, without making a decision based on my own judgment.
If Archbishop Lefebvre had been like me, we would not have Catholic Tradition today, in the SSPX. Therefore ABL's example carries on into the future to show what consequence comes of particular choices one makes in life.
Today, as in the lamentable 1960's, if Catholics would use the collection plate as a means of delivering a message, it would have an enormous impact on the governance of our Church. If people had stopped putting in dollars in 1964 when the first wave of changes came in the form of vernacular language, and instead had put in a note explaining how they want no part of a process of change in the liturgy, it could have put the brakes on the whole thing. If they had stood back and said instead, that we really don't know where it all is heading, so let's just be patient and wait and see, by the time the new liturgy showed up, it would have been too late. They would have been slow-cooked in the new ideas over a period of 5 years, during which time they would have become acclimated to the new ways. And so it was.
And so today, if Catholics would band together and give a strong message to the priests in the form of notes in the collection plate, at the first sign of changes coming down the pike, the message would not be unheard. This is why all the secrecy, to forestall any reaction amongst the Faithful. The problem is, the majority of Catholics as with people at large, are followers. To be able to hold firm to one's convictions and avoid being a rebel or a revolutionary is to tread a fine line.
Our example is ABL, and we can well ask, what would he have done?
Superficial perspective is a problem. A refusal to look deeper into a situation can bee a fatal mistake. In this present situation, we cannot lose sight of the doctrinal question without grave disadvantage. When we see +Fellay speaking words of half-concession toward the errors of the Modernist Vatican of today, it really ought to be alarming. We make a serious error by overlooking what should be the obvious and superficially saying that everything's going to be okay, because it could very well come to pass that everything is in fact NOT okay.
Topic: Eleison Comments Number CCLVI (Read 4410 times)