Many have seen this picture of the SSPX German District homepage (below), and it appears to be no mere empty symbolism that BXVI should grace that page, while +Lefebvre is missing in action.

Yet, as Traditional Catholic Musings points out:

Nothing to see here. Just move along..


http://tradcatresist.blogspot.com/2020/02/nothing-to-see-here-just-move-along_23.html?m=1

All photographs of ABL were taken down years ago  from the SSPX chapel near me. 

Are there any miracles that have been attributed to the intercession of Mgr Lefebvre?

Would be nice if the following could be verified:

https://www.cathinfo.com/anonymous-posts-allowed/any-miracles-attributed-to-archbishop-lefebvre/

“In a talk given by Bishop Fellay a long time ago (2000 AD?):

At the funeral of Archbishop Lefebvre, a little child born with a cleft got away from his parents.  The child ran up to the coffin of Archbishop Lefebvre and kissed it.  When he returned to his parents, his cleft lip was gone!

Bishop Fellay told more miracles, but his accent was very strong and hard to understand.  It has also been a long time since he told these stories.

I do remember his asking the faithful to please send him docuмents backing up miracles by ABL's intercession.”

I have made an inquiry regarding verifiable miracles attributed to +Lefebvre on the French Resistance forum, in the hopes that there is more information on this subject available in the French-speaking world.

But an interesting thought occurs to me:

If it is true that Bishop Fellay and the SSPX have been collecting and investigating claims  of miracles attributed to the intercession of -+Lefebvre, would it be conducive, or detrimental, to procuring a practical accord for the SSPX to suppress those claims?

It seems to me the SSPX would need to suppress any credible claims, because:

1) Despite the rehabilitation process of transforming Lefebvre from the great anti-modernist leader, to the misunderstood and unjustly sanctioned “man of the Church,” he remains “excommunicated” by the conciliar church, who obviously still perceived him as the great enemy of their revolution;

2) There is simply too much in the collected works of Lefebvre opposing both the conciliar revolution and the ralliement of the SSPX to hold him out as an example to follow.  If the SSPX was willing to sue the Archbishop’s family in order to suppress his sermons (with a view to rehabilitating him for the ralliement?), it knows all of his works would be dissected and somewhat publicized by an interested church and faithful, and that what they would find there would cause many to question the fidelity of the present trajectory of the SSPX, and highlight Lefebvre’s opposition to the conciliar revolution.

The SSPX needs to control what it allows the world to know about its founder, if it hopes to complete its treacherous integration process, and releasing evidence or promoting the canonization of it’s founder opens up a can of worms better left closed for now, until such time as it has rehabilitated the collective consciousness regarding the “history” of Lefebvre’s Resistance.

If the nullification of the “excommunication” of Lefebvre was not granted alongside the mere “lifting” of that “penalty” for the four bishops, it clearly evinces Rome’s disposition, and the SSPX might think it best not to fight that battle today.

On the other hand, perhaps the rehabilitation of Lefebvre has already been so successful that the danger of championing the cause of the great anti-modernist General no longer arises in the minds of Rome and the faithful, such that to start to speak of Lefebvre’s sanctity and miracles (if any) is no longer synonymous with rejecting the Council and conciliar church, and all I have said above is imaginary concern made inapplicable by the skillful branding campaign?

Continue grasping at straws friends.