Author Topic: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte" (Read 1665 times)

SeanJohnson · « **on:** October 06, 2020, 01:30:05 PM »

Excerpt of a June 19 conference transcribed on the French Resistance forum by "Joseph:"

"He (Bishop Vigano) takes note of what is in the Church, but for us it is not new.

I would not want to be disrespectful, but for us, priests of the Fraternity, it is touching and it is naive; because we have been in there for 50 years.

So we are happy about it, of course! But it's like the youngest member of the family who finally realizes that the world is bad.

He's an overzealous neophyte.

He says what he says, it's very good; it goes very far!

They (Msgr. Schneider and Msgr. Vigano) speak loud and clear, they lament, they are sometimes harder than we are. But what do they do?

What has disturbed Rome? When did Rome launch anathemas on Archbishop Lefebvre?

It was not when he criticized religious freedom, or during the Lille Mass. It was when he made priests and consecrated bishops.

Archbishop Lefebvre left something behind. Not words, not wind.

I am very happy to hear Mgr Schneider and Mgr Vigano, but I say to myself "what are they going to do?".

Because they will die one day, but what will they leave behind? Words that will be blown away by the wind? Or seminaries, bishops... !

These are voices that are welcome in the Church, but they are only words of people who are on the sidelines.

That's very good, but I'm afraid it's sterile."

https://resistance.vraiforum.com/t1262-Puanteur-pharisaique.htm

Original (French) conference here:

https://laportelatine.org/actualites/actualites-generales/faut-il-encore-prier-pour-le-pape

Meg · « **Reply #1 on:** October 06, 2020, 01:54:34 PM »

Thanks for posting this Sean. I saw it also on the Non Possumus blog, and was going to post a link, but glad that you beat me to it.

Fr. Gleize says that +ABL only received anathemas from Rome after he consecrated the four bishops. But actually, +ABL was suspended long before that because he wouldn't close down his Econe seminary. And why was Econe a problem? Because +ABL strongly spoke out against the Vll council. But those were just words, right, Fr. Gleize?

The truth must be spoken even by those who do not have seminaries and priests, such as the SSPX has. Why does Fr. Gleize think that only they are entitled to speak the Truth? Actually, the SSPX rarely speaks out against Vatican ll anymore. I think it is they who are jealous of all of the attention that +Vigano is getting. Yet the SSPX doesn't have the guts to do the same.

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #2 on:** October 06, 2020, 01:58:10 PM »

It’s a little early to be making those kind of analyses, don’t you think? Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t do anything for 5 years after the council. So maybe give Vigano another couple of years before criticizing his lack of organization. But probably Fr Gleize will be found to be correct. But who knows at this point?

Matthew · « **Reply #3 on:** October 06, 2020, 02:07:16 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2020, 01:30:05 PM

He's an overzealous neophyte.

He says what he says, it's very good; it goes very far!

They (Msgr. Schneider and Msgr. Vigano) speak loud and clear, they lament, they are sometimes harder than we are. But what do they do?

What has disturbed Rome? When did Rome launch anathemas on Archbishop Lefebvre?

It was not when he criticized religious freedom, or during the Lille Mass. It was when he made priests and consecrated bishops.

Archbishop Lefebvre left something behind. Not words, not wind.

I am very happy to hear Mgr Schneider and Mgr Vigano, but I say to myself "what are they going to do?".

I can see both sides of this argument.
This man makes some very good points -- when is Msgr. Vigano going to really rattle Rome's cage? Words are fine, but let's see some action!

On the other hand, if words (speaking out) was equal to "nothing" than censorship wouldn't be a thing! The pen is mightier than the sword. The pen (ideas, words) can inspire dozens, hundreds, even thousands of people to those coveted fruitful "ACTIONS" you're looking for.

And so...

Mr G · « **Reply #4 on:** October 06, 2020, 02:22:11 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2020, 01:30:05 PM

Excerpt of a June 19 conference transcribed on the French Resistance forum by "Joseph:"

....

"He (Bishop Vigano) takes note of what is in the Church, but for us it is not new. [For some of the younger priests and many of the faithful that were born into the SSPX, this is new]

I would not want to be disrespectful, but for us, priests of the Fraternity, it is touching and it is naive; because we have been in there for 50 years. [True, you have been - past tense. Where are you now SSPX? ]

So we are happy about it, of course! But it's like the youngest member of the family who finally realizes that the world is bad.

He's an overzealous neophyte. [At least he is zealous]

He says what he says, it's very good; it goes very far! [At least you admit that, but you would never know that be reading the SSPX websites]

They (Msgr. Schneider and Msgr. Vigano) speak loud and clear, they lament, they are sometimes harder than we are. But what do they do? [They speak and warn of the dangers, which the SSPX does not do]

What has disturbed Rome? When did Rome launch anathemas on Archbishop Lefebvre?

It was not when he criticized religious freedom, or during the Lille Mass. It was when he made priests and consecrated bishops.

Archbishop Lefebvre left something behind. Not words, not wind.

I am very happy to hear Mgr Schneider and Mgr Vigano, but I say to myself "what are they going to do?". [ Ask them. Offer to help.]

Because they will die one day, but what will they leave behind? Words that will be blown away by the wind? Or seminaries, bishops... ! [And you SSPX, will you consecrate bishops?]

These are voices that are welcome in the Church, but they are only words of people who are on the sidelines. [such as many priests and faithful of the SSPX, who are slipping from the sidelines back into the NWO]

That's very good, but I'm afraid it's sterile." [If it wakes up the SSPX to get back into the fight, then it is not sterile, we shall see as time goes on ]

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #5 on:** October 06, 2020, 02:47:05 PM »

Quote from: Meg on October 06, 2020, 01:54:34 PM

Thanks for posting this Sean. I saw it also on the Non Possumus blog, and was going to post a link, but glad that you beat me to it.

Fr. Gleize says that +ABL only received anathemas from Rome after he consecrated the four bishops. But actually, +ABL was suspended long before that because he wouldn't close down his Econe seminary. And why was Econe a problem? Because +ABL strongly spoke out against the Vll council. But those were just words, right, Fr. Gleize?

The truth must be spoken even by those who do not have seminaries and priests, such as the SSPX has. Why does Fr. Gleize think that only they are entitled to speak the Truth? Actually, the SSPX rarely speaks out against Vatican ll anymore. I think it is they who are jealous of all of the attention that +Vigano is getting. Yet the SSPX doesn't have the guts to do the same.

Well, technically, Lefebvre was suspended after the 1976 priestly ordinations (which he was warned no to do), so in this respect Fr. Gleize is consistent and accurate as regards his words vs actions distinction between Lefebvre and Vigano.

Note carefully, today, however, that SSPX priestly ordinations are no longer a problem for Rome, and ask yourself why that might be.

Clearly, it is because the once problematic words of the old SSPX, no longer spoken, are no longer problematic, and consequently, it matters not to the Roman modernists how many SSPX priests get ordained, if they will continue to be of this branded/muzzled variety.

Fr. Gleize doesn't want to realize that since the SSPX salt has lost its savor, God is giving the Church new champions (e.g., Resistance, Vigano):

"The first shall be last, and the last shall be first."

PS: Note the slick placement of Vigano and Schneider on the same footing by Fr. Gleize, when in fact, the two are as polarized as Archbishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Ratzinger: Schneider believes the council can and should be saved, whereas Vigano believes it is irreparably riddled with error and possibly not even a valid ecuмenical council of the Church!

PAT317 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 06, 2020, 03:07:59 PM »

Quote from: Meg on October 06, 2020, 01:54:34 PM

Fr. Gleize says that +ABL only received anathemas from Rome after he consecrated the four bishops. But actually, +ABL was suspended long before that because he wouldn't close down his Econe seminary. And why was Econe a problem? Because +ABL strongly spoke out against the Vll council. But those were just words, right, Fr. Gleize?

.

Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2020, 02:47:05 PM

Well, technically, Lefebvre was suspended after the 1976 priestly ordinations (which he was warned no to do), so in this respect Fr. Gleize is consistent and accurate as regards his words vs actions distinction between Lefebvre and Vigano.

.
Actually, +Lefebvre was told to shut down his seminary in 1975, after he wrote his famous "Declaration" of Nov. 1974.

- 21 November 1974 Mgr. Lefebvre wrote his Declaration.
In this Declaration, he stated:

Quote

...we refuse...and have always refused to follow the Rome of Neo-Modernist and Neo-Protestant tendencies...
No authority, not even the highest in the hierarchy, can compel us to abandon or diminish our Catholic faith, so clearly expressed and professed by the Church's Magisterium for nineteen centuries.

- A statement condemning those who adhere to the Old Mass made by the French episcopate on 14 November 1974 was certainly aimed against Ecône, for at the same time the bishops let it be known that they would not accept any priests from Ecône in their dioceses.

- Feb./Mar. 1975 - Mgr. Lefebvre met the Commission of 3 Cardinals
- March 1975 Mgr. Mamie writes a letter suppressing the Society and the Seminary with the approval of the Commission of Cardinals

So, technically, he was asked to suppress his seminary because of his words the previous November.

Although one could argue that it was also because of his "action" of refusing to offer the New Mass.

Nevertheless, I find your points well-taken.

PAT317 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 06, 2020, 03:19:19 PM »

Quote

What has disturbed Rome? When did Rome launch anathemas on Archbishop Lefebvre?

It was not when he criticized religious freedom, or during the Lille Mass. It was when he made priests and consecrated bishops.

.
Also, he already made priests in the early 1970s.
.
In Dr. White's bio of +W, it is noted that several times in 1974 when TV crews wanted to do a program on Econe, +ABL chose Richard Williamson to be "the face of the seminary" for those programs. Even though there were ordinations in 1975 after the seminary had been ordered to be closed, it was the 1976 ordinations which Rome tried very hard to stop, the year Richard Williamson was due to be ordained. It was after those ordinations that Paul VI suspended +ABL.

[So in this sense, yes, it was due to his action of at least ordaining someone like Richard Williamson that year (in spite of ordaining men in previous years without penalty), and his refusal to offer the New Mass, that NewRome attacked him.]

PAT317 · « **Reply #8 on:** October 06, 2020, 03:29:54 PM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria on October 06, 2020, 01:58:10 PM

It’s a little early to be making those kind of analyses, don’t you think? Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t do anything for 5 years after the council. So maybe give Vigano another couple of years before criticizing his lack of organization.

.
I would hardly describe it as "didn't do anything" during those 5 years. If people would take the time to read his biography, they would know he did plenty. Even if all he did was his work on the Ottaviani Intervention, I wouldn't call it "doing nothing".

Ladislaus · « **Reply #9 on:** October 06, 2020, 03:37:44 PM »

I don't get this criticism. He calls him an "overzealous" neophyte, but then criticizes him for not doing anything.

I think, despite +Vigano's "neophyte" status, he's hit the nail on the head with regard to the theological nature of the Crisis. I don't believe the connotations of "neophyte" are appropriate. He's certainly a "newcomer" but his thinking is quite mature.

As for being overzealous, I don't get that when the criticism is that he's done nothing.

Indeed, +Vigano should figure out what he can DO to help the Crisis, but does that make him "overzealous"?

It's also ridiculous to disparage +Vigano's theological efforts as mere "wind". Nonsense, Father. As Bishop Wiliamson always points out, IDEAS MATTER. He's putting out thinking and ideas, and good solid ideas are always of benefit. This sounds like it's coming from the same attitude Bishop Williamson criticized in the pre-Vatican II U.S. hierarchy where all they did was want to build things ... churches, schools, etc. but they cared little for solid theology and solid doctrine.

PAT317 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 06, 2020, 03:40:24 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on October 06, 2020, 03:37:44 PM

I don't get this criticism. He calls him an "overzealous" neophyte, but then criticizes him for not doing anything.

I think, despite +Vigano's "neophyte" status, he's hit the nail on the head with regard to the theological nature of the Crisis. I don't believe the connotations of "neophyte" are appropriate. He's certainly a "newcomer" but his thinking is quite mature.

As for being overzealous, I don't get that when the criticism is that he's done nothing.

Indeed, +Vigano should figure out what he can DO to help the Crisis, but does that make him "overzealous"?

.
Well said.
.
I think Meg may be right about the jealousy factor.

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #11 on:** October 06, 2020, 05:26:40 PM »

Quote from: PAT317 on October 06, 2020, 03:29:54 PM

.
I would hardly describe it as "didn't do anything" during those 5 years. If people would take the time to read his biography, they would know he did plenty. Even if all he did was his work on the Ottaviani Intervention, I wouldn't call it "doing nothing".

I am just accepting Fr Gleize’s definition. If Vigano is doing nothing in his estimation then by the same measure Archbishop Lefebvre did nothing until he started taking students. But if you want to say that writing and speaking against V2 is doing something then you can hardly accuse Vigano of doing nothing. Vigano should be given more time before accusing him of being all talk.

Nadir · « **Reply #12 on:** October 06, 2020, 05:44:40 PM »

Quote from: PAT317 on October 06, 2020, 03:40:24 PM

.
I think Meg may be right about the jealousy factor.

Indeed, and because ++Vigano is making SSPX look moribund.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #13 on:** October 06, 2020, 06:26:36 PM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria on October 06, 2020, 05:26:40 PM

I am just accepting Fr Gleize’s definition. If Vigano is doing nothing in his estimation then by the same measure Archbishop Lefebvre did nothing until he started taking students. But if you want to say that writing and speaking against V2 is doing something then you can hardly accuse Vigano of doing nothing. Vigano should be given more time before accusing him of being all talk.

Unfortunately, when Archbishop Lefebvre opened the seminary in 1970, he would only have been about 65 years-old.

Archbishop Vigano is already 80 years-old.

It might just be that teaching the truth in the wake of SSPX silence might be all that he has been called to do, to sustain us.

But if not, he had better get going, as time is not on his side )though he seems to possess vigor and good health to all outward appearances.

Plenus Venter · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2020, 12:04:22 AM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 06, 2020, 01:30:05 PM

But what do they do?...

That's very good, but I'm afraid it's sterile."...

He cries wolf! That is what Archbishop Vigano does! One of the duties of the good shepherd.

How odd (or evil) that this should be so little valued as "sterile" by the learned theologian of the SSPX. But is it any surprise given that he, along with most of his confreres, so meekly submitted to Bishop Fellay who informed us in a conference printed in the Angelus some years ago "Rome has asked that we criticize less. And I agree!"

No wonder he calls Archbishop Vigano "over-zealous". It's a wonder he didn't tell him to hold his tongue. After all, the entire Church is aware of the rot in the Church and the evil of Vatican II, because the SSPX announces it so boldly, right?

Compare this pitiful priggishness (or more truly this diabolical attack) with the congratulatory encouragement and support of the Resistance bishops' declaration standing in awe and admiration of a Prince of the Church who could make such lucid analyses and give such timely warnings after so many years immersed in Conciliarism. How inappropriate to compare this with the life work of Archbishop Lefebvre. A far more pertinent comparison is with the cowardice of the delinquent sons of Archbishop Lefebvre who have all but abandoned his fight against the evil. They prefer instead just to be good, to be "lovers, not fighters".

Author Topic: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte" (Read 1665 times)

SeanJohnson

Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Meg

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Clemens Maria

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Matthew

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Mr G

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

SeanJohnson

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

PAT317

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

PAT317

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

PAT317

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Ladislaus

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

PAT317

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Clemens Maria

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Nadir

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

SeanJohnson

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"

Plenus Venter

Re: Fr. Gleize Calls ++Vigano "Overzealous Neophyte"