Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 297
» Latest member: Mathew
» Forum threads: 6,933
» Forum posts: 12,900

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 461 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 459 Guest(s)
Bing, Google

Latest Threads
Oratory Conference: "St. ...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 09:27 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 37
Fr. Hewko Catechism: The ...
Forum: Catechisms
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 08:15 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 41
Thursday Night Holy Hour ...
Forum: Appeals for Prayer
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:06 PM
» Replies: 18
» Views: 9,360
Holy Mass in New Hampshir...
Forum: May 2025
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:57 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 51
5 worrying things you nee...
Forum: Pope Leo XIV
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:25 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 133
BREAKING: Cardinal Prevos...
Forum: Pope Leo XIV
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:18 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 84
New pope set to emerge fr...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 12:57 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 91
Black smoke after Thursda...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 10:10 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 76
Fr. Hewko, Catechism: Mor...
Forum: Catechisms
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 09:07 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 67
Oratory Conference: Firs...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 09:02 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 56

 
  Archbishop Lefebvre - Various Works in English
Posted by: Stone - 11-27-2020, 08:45 AM - Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - No Replies

Various Works of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - online format

Books
Archbishop Lefebvre & the Vatican - A complete set of the documents exchanged between Rome and Archbishop Lefebvre in the time leading up to and immediately following the episcopal consecrations of June 30, 1988 - Compiled by Rev. Fr. François Laisney
An Open Letter to Confused Catholics - complete book by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre -Volumes I, II and III


1993
The New Catechism (January 12, 1993)

1991
Remarks with Respect to the New Bishop to Succeed His Excellency Bishop de Castro Mayer (February 20, 1991)
To Express Our Love of God in Prayer The Last Sermon of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (February 17, 1991)
Archbishop Lefebvre and Padre Pio

1990
Letter to Bishop de Castro Mayer (December 4, 1990)
Truth, Justice & the News Media (May 12, 1990)

1989
Archbishop's Sermon on his 60th Anniversary of Ordination (November 19, 1989)
Sermon for the Feast of Christ the King (October 29, 1989)
Ubi Maria Ibi Ecclesia (May 14, 1989)

1988

Schism and Monsignor Lefebvre (November 1988) -by Rev. T.C.G. Glover
Episcopal Consecrations (June 30, 1988) - Sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre
The Sermon On the Occasion of Ordinations to the Holy Priesthood (June 29, 1988)
Episcopal Consecrations:Recommendations to the Four Bishops Elect (June 12, 1988)
Episcopal Consecrations: Recommendations to the Four Bishops Elect (June 13, 1988)
Letter to His Holiness John Paul II (June 2, 1988)
The Episcopal Consecrations: A Decision and Explanatory Documents (June 15, 1988)
A Sermon for Pentecost (May, 1988)
Conference at St. Nicolas du Chardonnet (May 5, 1988)
Can Obedience Oblige Us to Disobey? (March 29, 1988)

1987
Sermon of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre On His Fourtieth Anniversary As a Bishop (Oct. 3, 1987)
Letter to the Future Bishops On the Feast of St. Augustine (August 29, 1987)
Bishops to save the Church (June 29, 1987) - Sermon at the Priestly ordinations in Ecône
Pastoral Lenten Letter (January 25, 1987)
Disobedience (1987)

1986

Twenty Years of Struggle (September, 1986)
Letter to Each of Eight Cardinals (August 27, 1986)
On the Occasion of the Reception of the Sacrament of Confirmation (20 April 1986)
Conference of Archbishop Lefebvre at Campbell, California (January 5, 1986)
Interview with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (January, 1986)

1985
What is a Carmel? (Nov. 13, 1985)
A Letter to His Holiness Pope John Paul II (August 31, 1985)
On the Occasion of Ordinations at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary (May 17,1985)

1984
In Conformity to God's Will (December 13, 1984) - Conference given to the priests of the District of France, at St. Nicholas du Chardonnet, Paris
The Church, The Priesthood and the Tridentine Indult (Oct. 29, 1984)
The New Code of Canon Law (March 24, 1984) - Conference given in Turin, Italy

1983

The Archbishop's Press Conference (December 9, 1983) -Conference given by Archbishop Lefebvre to focus light on the Episcopal Manifesto of November 21
An Episcopal Manifesto: (Nov. 21, 1983) -Two Bishops write to the Pope
Conference Of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (November 5, 1983)
On the Occasion of the Episcopal Consecration of Several Priests of the Society of St. Pius X (19 October 1983)
The declaration of Religious Liberty reduces the Church to the status of equality with false religions
A Message of Importance To American Friends & Benefactors (April 28, 1983)
Letter to Friends and Benefactors No. 24 (March 7, 1983)
The Case for the Defence (1983) -by Michael Davies

1982
The Infiltration of Modernism in the Church (1982) -the Archbishop's personal experience of the tragic corruption of modernism

1981
Sermon for the Feast of Our Lady of Compassion (April 10, 1981)

1980
On the Occasion of the Tenth Anniversary of the Society of St. Pius X (1 November 1980)
Letter To Friends & Benefactors, No. 19 (October 1, 1980)
Sermon on the Occasion of the Ordinations To The Holy Priesthood, Ecône (27 June 1980)
Letter to Friends & Benefactors, No. 18 (April 13, 1980)
What is Happening In The Church? A Sermon delivered at the Church of St. Simon Piccolo, Venice (April 7, 1980)

1979
Sermon to the Seminarians of Albano on their Entrance into the SSPX (Dec. 8, 1979)
Sermon the Feast Of Christ The King (28 October 1979)
Jubilee Sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre (Sept. 23, 1979)
On the Feast of the Assumption during the Angelus Pilgrimage (15 August 1979)
The 1979 Ordination Sermon (June 29, 1979)
Letter to Friends and Benefactors No. 16 (March 19,1979)

1978
Interview with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (1978)
The reality of purgatory and how we can help the souls there (Nov. 1, 1978)
On the Occasion of the Ordination of 28 Deacons (October 29,1978)
Letter to Friends and Benefactors No. 15 (September 8, 1978)
Archbishop Lefebvre On the Conclave (August 28, 1978)
Article in Il Gionale di Bergamo regarding ordinations (June 29,1978)
Sermon at the Ordination of 18 priest and 22 sub-deacons (June 29, 1976)
Letter to Friends and Benefactors No. 14 (May 1, 1978)
Sermon Delivered on Pentecost (1978)
Sermon Delivered on Easter Sunday (March 26, 1978)

1977
Three Great Gifts of God (September 18, 1977)
Real and Apparent Disobedience (September 3, 1977)
Tota Pulchra es, Maria, et Macula Originalis non est in te (December 8, 1977)
Sermon On the Occasion of the Profession of Three Sisters (April 17, 1977)
Fidelity (April 10, 1977)

1976
Sermon On the Occasion of Engagements in the Society of St. Pius X (Dec. 8, 1976)
Excerpts from a Sermon on the Occasion of the First Solemn High Mass of Father Denis Roch - (July 4,1976)
Sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre on the Feast of Corpus Christi (June 17, 1976)
Sermon at the Ordination of 13 priest and 13 sub-deacons (June, 1976)
The Ordinations of June 29, 1976 -by Michael Davies
Sermon Before an Association of Catholic Families in Southern France (May 2, 1976)

1975

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (November 1975)
Devotion to the mystery of the Cross (September, 14 1975) - Sermon on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross
The true Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ (September 8, 1975)
Twenty fifth Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (August 15, 1975)
Charity Remains Forever (Vigil of Pentecost, 1975)
Luther's Mass (February 15, 1975)

1974
The Campaign against Ecône, part I (1974)
To Preserve the Faith (Pentecost Sunday, 1974)
The Declaration of November 21, 1974

1973
Homily on the Feast of the Epiphany (7 January 1973)

1972
Feast of The Immaculate Conception (December 8, 1972)

1949
Confronting Godlessness (February 24, 1949)


Source

Print this item

  "Cor Divisa" - A Heart Divided
Posted by: Stone - 11-27-2020, 08:41 AM - Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Replies (1)

From a previous member on the 'Archived' Catacombs site:

Many know in Tradition the bio of the great Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre both of his family life and his service to the Catholic Church.  Exemplary in fact.  With his many achievements in the mission field, he was also elected as a Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers  on July 26, 1962. Their Motto being: "Cor unum et anima una" - "One heart and one soul".

Quote:Excerpt:
Abp. Lefebvre first instituted a major reform of the seminaries run by the Holy Ghost Fathers. He transferred several Modernist (relativistic, liberal) professors to non-educational posts. He ordered books by certain modern theologians, including Yves Congar and Marie-Dominique Chenu, to be removed from the seminary library, finding them too Neo-Modernistic. (One book of Chenu was inserted into the Index Librorum Prohibitorum in the 1942.[4])

Lefebvre was increasingly criticized by influential pro-reform members of his large religious congregation who considered him out-of-step with modern Church leaders and the demand of bishops' conferences, particularly in France, for drastic revision and reform.[5] A general chapter of the Holy Ghost Fathers was convened in Rome in September 1968. The first action of the chapter was to name several moderators to lead the chapter's sessions instead of Lefebvre.[6] Finding it impossible to lead the congregation after being undermined, Lefebvre then handed in his resignation as Superior General to Pope Paul VI.[7]

He would later say that it had become impossible for him to remain Superior of an institute that no longer wanted him nor listened to him. To replace him, on October 28 a new superior general was elected who proved willing to allow the demands for reforms. Lefebvre's tenure as Superior saw the congregation at its zenith in terms of numbers, missions, and missionary activity. Lefebvre left the Holy Ghost Fathers and went on to found the Society of Saint Pius X in Écône (Diocese of Fribourg), Switzerland.

When under the leadership of Abp. Lefebvre (1962-1968),  the Holy Ghost Father congregation increased greatly in benefit for the Church.  As an FYI, he still has to date the most distinguished credentials within the congregation.   After the Archbishop's time, the congregation suffered large losses like every other congregation ingesting the religion of man from Vatican II.

Yet, a different Heart was born two years later (1970) under the leadership again of Archbishop Lefebvre, in the blessed congregation of the Society of St. Pius X.  Their running motto being "Cor-Unum" - One Heart.  

Archbishop Lefebvre was the Founder and Superior General of the SSPX until 1982 giving the helm and appointment to Fr. Franz Schmidberger who served until 1994; he was succeeded by Bishop Bernard Fellay and present superior general.

After the death of the Archbishop (March 25, 1991), his congregation also took on the novelties and errors of Vatican II.  Covertly at first by G.R.E.C.  in 1994, just three years later, causing to date a massive split in the SSPX and civil war within Tradition.  This happened under the present superior general (Bishop Fellay) who desires the same as the liberals in the Holy Ghost Fathers, to update, and conform to the norms of Vatican II.

What would the Archbishop say today of his SSPX congregation going into the revolution of Vatican II?

There is a common theme here.  Under the solid Catholic faith and guidance of Archbishop Lefebvre "I have handed down what I have received", societies grow and blessing of God are manifest.  History shows this all too well.  God blesses what is of Himself.

Where ever God is, there is peace and abundance.  Where there is modernism, there is discord and divide.

A heart cannot be in union with itself unless it beats the same love.  St. Augustine show us what two loves do, and our Lord Himself said "Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand." (Matthew 12)

Only those who hear the voice of the Shepherd can walk in the cleanliness of the heart.

Fortunately for the Catholic world, there are still a few SSPX son priests left residing within the OLMC Seminary who refuse to update into the revolution only to remain steadfast holding to the same Catholic faith, though greatly persecuted, yet continuing the legacy of the Church "I have handed down what I have received".

Print this item

  How to Contact Us
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 08:48 AM - Forum: Welcome - No Replies

Contact Us[

We can be reached in two ways:

1. By a PM or 'private message' [accessible for registered members only - button is located at the top right of the page once logged in].

2. By email [for both guests and members] at the following address: contact@thecatacombs.org

Print this item

  The Rules
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 08:41 AM - Forum: Welcome - No Replies

There are only three:

The Catacombs Forum Rules


1. In all posts, there will only be allowed a prevailing spirit of charity. Derisive or apparently deliberately provocative comments will be deleted by the administrator or moderators. Persistency in this regard may result in being banned from the forum. In this same vein, please keep to the thread topic.

2. Our focus is on defined Church teaching and in fighting the Modernist errors of our day. We promote the apostolates of those clergy who promulgate those doctrines and teachings. Promotion of clergy or laity who promote novel teachings is not allowed.

3. Movements and teachings undefined or previously condemned by the Catholic Church, i.e. sedevacantism or theories that contain any of the tenets of sedevacantism, are not to be debated here. Posts that promote such errors will be removed by the administrator or moderators. Persistency in this regard may result in being banned from the forum.

Print this item

  Welcome to The Catacombs
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 08:38 AM - Forum: Welcome - Replies (1)

Welcome to The Catacombs!

Following our Lord who said, “Teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

We are Catholics born in the newest Catacomb within this grave crisis of the Church, stemming from the modernist revolution of Vatican II. A Revolution which has so encompassed and distorted the Catholic Faith throughout the four corners of the world so as to leave our Faith nearly obliterated. Our Lady had forewarned and lamented in La Salette and Fatima,  “Souls will be lost…for not listening to my Son…His hand is heavy.”

The Catacombs Forum is but another voice rising from the underground of this crisis, hoping to imitate Our Lord in His example in choosing to come into this world from the lowly manger in the Cave. Born in nothing…to herald the greatness of His Father,“Gloria in excelsis Deo: Glory to God in the Highest!”

This forum was created in view of serving the needs of those who desire to remain true to the Catholic Traditions that Our Holy Mother Church has taught and handed down, especially through the  guidance of our Lord’s servant, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. "Tradidi quod et accepi: I have handed down what I have received."

Upon the Rock of Christ conviction is set. May God bless our little effort that we offer for Him and His beautiful Mother.


Instaurare omnia in Christo: to Restore all things in Christ

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - (Famous) Sermon at Lille 1976
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 07:30 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - Replies (1)

This is an account with important contextual information and with commentary interspersed throughout. The Sermon, in it's entirety, will follow this account.

The Mass at Lille
 29 August 1976

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...%3DApi&f=1]

The Mass at Lille was an event of considerable importance. Firstly, it constituted in the most dramatic manner possible the response of the Archbishop to his suspension, the terms of which forbade him to celebrate Mass. Secondly, it enabled him to put his case to an audience of millions around the world. Thirdly, it was clearly as a result of the impact made by this Mass that the Pope felt obliged to receive the Archbishop despite repeated Vatican claims that this would never be done until he made an act of submission to the "Conciliar Church." Fourthly, the reporting of this Mass and its background provides one of the clearest instances of the extent to which the Catholic and secular press is prepared to go to misrepresent the Archbishop. Fortunately, I was present at the Mass with some friends and can thus provide a first-hand account of what took place. I also have the complete text of the Archbishop's controversial sermon and have had access to a professionally made recording which includes every word.

Among the allegations made concerning the Mass at Lille is that it was intended by the Archbishop as an act of public defiance, a huge public demonstration against the authority of the Holy See. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lille is, of course, in the Archbishop's own native region of France. He had been asked by some of his friends and relations to offer Mass there on 29 August and had agreed. It was to be a semi-private occasion for two or three hundred people at the most. But the media got to learn of the proposed Mass and began building it up into an act of contestation, a trial of strength between the Archbishop and the Pope. Then, as a result of this publicity, traditionalists from further afield got to know about the Mass and began to make inquiries about its venue as they wished to attend. This posed the organizers and the Archbishop himself with a problem as they had not made arrangements to cope with a congregation of more than a few hundred. The Archbishop 's decision was unequivocal-the arrangements that had been made were to stand and those from further afield were to be discouraged from coming. That this was indeed the case is also something to which I can add my personal testimony. After learning of the proposed Mass I had thought it might be appropriate to arrange for a few hundred British Catholics to go to Lille as a gesture of solidarity with Mgr. Lefebvre in the face of the Vatican sanctions. But I did not want to do this without being certain that there would be a public Mass with sufficient space for everyone wishing to attend. I arranged for a phone call directly to the Archbishop at Ecône and his personal reply was quite definite: the Mass was to be private, he did not want anyone from outside Lille to come, and anyone planning to do so should be discouraged. This was only one week before the Mass was scheduled to take place.

During the week before the Mass it became clear to the organizers that several thousand of the faithful were going to arrive whether the Archbishop wanted them to or not and so, at the last minute, they decided to hire the vast auditorium of the International Fair in Lille. This, they reckoned, would be more than sufficient to cope with any number that might arrive. This was reported in the British secular press on Saturday, 28 August, and so I made a last-minute decision to attend and, just before midnight, I left London's Victoria Station on the boat train with just one friend.

We met a few more traditionalists on the boat and arrived at Lille early on Sunday morning. On our way to the International Fair we were most impressed by the zeal and organization of the Lille Catholics. Stewards with arm-bands were strategically posted along the route to indicate the way and coaches had been laid on for those who felt unable to walk. There were very few police in evidence -a dozen or so traffic police at the most. When we reached the perimeter of the large grounds in which the Fair is situated a steady stream of cars had already begun to arrive. However, when I entered the huge auditorium I feared that an error of judgment had been made. A local paper which I had bought at the station gave the seating capacity as 10,000 and there was clearly room for several thousand people to stand. Under the circumstances a congregation of 4,000 would have been a remarkable gesture of support for the Archbishop-but such a number would have appeared lost in this vast hall. I could already envisage the line the press-the Catholic press in particular-would take. The headlines would read: HALL ONLY HALF FULL FOR LEFEBVRE MASS. However, as the time for the Mass drew nearer the line of cars and procession of pedestrians grew more and more dense and, having waited outside for a friend coming by car, I found that at about 10:45 all the seats had been taken, the standing space was packed and it appeared that I would not be able to get into the auditorium. I managed to insert myself into a jam-packed mass of people which was literally inching its way along a corridor towards the auditorium. A number of young stewards did their best to persuade those inside to cram themselves up even more closely to allow a few more in. At least one report claimed that the stewards were Gestapo types wearing jackboots! I can testify that all those I saw were extremely inoffensive looking young men wearing leisure suits and that I did not notice a single jackboot anywhere in the congregation! A Soviet paper reported the presence of thousands of Italian fascists although, newspaper reporters apart, there did not appear to be a single Italian present.

The Archbishop's enemies have also spared no effort to publicize the fact that the journals of extreme right-wing political groups were being sold outside the auditorium; including Aspects de la France-the journal of Action franscaise. What the papers did not point out is that on at least three occasions before the Mass an announcement was made that the Archbishop did not want any literature sold outside the auditorium and that if this was done it would be in opposition to his wishes. 'When this matter was raised during a press conference given by the Archbishop on 15 September 1976 (the full text of which was published in ltineraires of December 1976) he made the following points: he was displeased at the fact that Aspects de la France had been sold outside the auditorium at Lille; he did not read this journal; he did not know those who produced it; he had never met Charles Maurras;1 he had not even read his works; and he was thus ignorant of his political philosophy.

It needs to be appreciated that political attitudes in France cannot be assessed on the basis of attitudes in English-speaking countries. In France political feeling tends to be more polarized, more extreme, and far more deeply felt than in England. It can only be understood in the light of the French Revolution and subsequent history -particularly the inter-war period and the German occupation. At the risk of a serious over-simplification, it is reasonable to state that up to the Second World War Catholicism in France tended to be identified with right-wing politics and anti-Catholicism with the left. Since the war, and especially since Vatican II, the official French Church has veered sharply to the left and has adopted all the postures identified with the Liberal consensus which is accepted throughout the West, e. g. on the virtues of the Viet Cong and the evils of capitalism. Thus, a large proportion of right-wing Catholics was predisposed to support any religious movement opposed to the policies of the French hierarchy. The political views of some of the French Catholics who support the Archbishop would certainly be odious to many English-speaking traditionalists - although such views are more understandable (if not acceptable) within the French context. However, if they wish to support the Archbishop (and not necessarily for the right reasons) there is nothing he can do about it. His own alleged right-wing political philosophy is nothing more than straight-forward Catholic social teaching as expounded by the Popes for a century or more. Those familiar with this teaching need only read his book A Bishop Speaks to see at once that his so-called "political" utterances are no more than paraphrases of teaching contained in papal encyclicals. The French hierarchy has replaced this social teaching with diluted Marxism to such an extent that anyone adopting the Catholic position is now automatically accused of fascism. Whenever the Archbishop is accused of intermingling the traditional faith and right-wing politics a demand should be made that chapter and verse be provided to substantiate the allegation. The almost invariable Liberal response will be to ignore such a demand but, if a reply is given, it will be found that what is being objected to is the consistent teaching of the Popes.

What should be quite obvious is that Mgr. Lefebvre cannot prevent anyone who wishes to support him from doing so.

It is quite certain that there is no formal link whatsoever between Mgr. Lefebvre and any political party in any country. He has a right to his own political views, so have his priests, so have those who support him. But support for the Archbishop does not involve adherence to any political standpoint, only to the traditional faith, the traditional liturgy, and the social teaching of the Popes.

The congregation at Lille certainly represented a balanced cross-section of French society. In its 31 August issue, Le Monde, which has never attempted to disguise its hostility towards the Archbishop, commented on the make-up of the congregation in terms which coincided exactly with my own impression. Contrary to reports that the atmosphere of the Mass was political rather than religious, the report affirmed that for the vast majority of those present it was "an act of piety, a gesture of solidarity with a bishop who was the object of sanctions, a gesture of fidelity to the traditional Church… Men were in a definite majority, there were large numbers of young people, and entire families with their children ...the general impression was of a normal parish congregation with a far from negligible proportion of workers."

The same report adds that everyone from Lille seemed to know what was going on. The duty clerk in the ticket office at the station told Le Monde 's reporter: "I'm broken-hearted at not being free to go to the Mass. I'm 100 per cent behind Mgr. Lefebvre. I haven't put a foot inside my parish church for ages because of the clowning that goes on there; they don't get so much as a sou (cent) out of me any more." On the way to the Mass his taxi driver also declared himself to be a strong supporter of Mgr. Lefebvre.

The extent of the Archbishop's support in France was made clear in an opinion poll published earlier in the month by the newspaper Progres de Lyon and reported in The Times on 14 August. It revealed that while 28 per cent of Catholics approved of the Archbishop's stand only 24 per cent opposed it, the rest being indifferent or unwilling to express an opinion. In typical fashion, the London Universe (England's largest-circulation Catholic weekly) withheld the figures from its readers and informed them that the poll had revealed that the great majority of French Catholics "are more concerned about matters other than Mgr. Lefebvre." Similarly, among the glaring inaccuracies in its report on the Mass at Lille it claimed that there were 200 riot police on duty at the Mass -there was not a riot policeman in sight and that the sermon carried hints of anti-semitism when, in fact, there was not a single phrase in the whole sermon referring to the Jews, even indirectly.

The Mass at Lille was celebrated with immense fervor and great dignity. A report in Le Monde remarked on Mgr. Lefebvre's serenity and tranquil dignity despite the strain he must have been undergoing since his suspension. The volume and quality of the congregational participation in the sung parts of the Mass -with more than twelve thousand Catholics from at least six countries singing una voce, with one voice, and broadcast to millions on TV and radio, provided the most effective possible rebuttal to the nonsensical claim that the traditional Mass provides an obstacle to congregational participation.

The complete text of the sermon will not be given here. Most of it is simply a restatement of points made in other sermons contained in this book and it is extremely long - about 8,500 words. Under the circumstances, particularly the overcrowding in the hall, a much shorter sermon might have been far more effective. But the Archbishop, clearly affected by the emotional nature of the occasion and the frequent applause from the congregation, probably went on for a much longer time than he had intended. He makes no secret of the fact that his sermons are not written before-hand. He begins with a few ideas of what he would like to say and carries on from there, with the result that he sometimes makes remarks which had not been planned and which, perhaps, he might rather not have made. However, lest it be alleged that this sermon has been omitted to cover up some of the controversial passages in it, these passages will be quoted in full, together with some other important passages.

The Archbishop began his sermon as follows:
Quote:My Dear Brethren,

Before addressing a few words of exhortation to you, I should like first to dispel some misunderstandings. And to begin with, about this very gathering.

You can see from the simplicity of this ceremony that we made no preparations for a ceremony which would have gathered a crowd like the one in this hall. I thought I should be saying Holy Mass on the 29 August as it had been arranged, before a few hundreds of the faithful of the Lille region, as I have done often in France, Europe, and even America, with no fuss.

Yet all of a sudden this date, 29 August, through press, radio and television, has become a kind of demonstration, resembling, so they say, a challenge. Not at an: this demonstration is not a challenge. This demonstration is what you wanted, dear Catholic brethren, who have come from long distances. Why? To manifest your Catholic faith; to manifest your belief; to manifest your desire to pray and to sanctify yourselves as did your fathers in faith, as did generations and generations before you. That is the real object of this ceremony, during which we desire to pray, pray with all our heart, adore Our Lord Jesus Christ Who in a few moments will come down on this altar and will renew the sacrifice of the Cross which we so much need.

I should like also to dispel another misunderstanding. Here I beg your pardon, but I have to say it: it was not I who called myself head of the traditionalists. You know who did that not long ago in solemn and memorable circumstances in Rome. Mgr. Lefebvre was said to be the head of the traditionalists. I do not want to be head of the traditionalists, nor am I. Why? Because I also am a simple Catholic. A priest and a bishop, certainly; but in the very conditions in which you find yourselves, reacting in the same way to the destruction of the Church, to the destruction of our faith, to the ruins piling up before our eyes.

Having the same reaction, I thought it my duty to form priests, the true priests that the Church needs. I formed those priests in a "Saint Pius X Society," which was recognized by the Church. All I was doing was what all bishops have done for centuries and centuries. That is all I did -something I have been doing for thirty years of my priestly life. It was on that account that I was made a bishop, an Apostolic Delegate in Africa, a member of the central pre-conciliar commission, an assistant at the papal throne. What better proof could I have wanted that Rome considered my work profitable for the Church and for the good of souls? And now when I am doing the same thing, a work exactly like what I have been doing for thirty years, all of a sudden I am suspended a divinis, and perhaps I shall soon be excommunicated, separated from the Church, a renegade, or what have you! How can that be? Is what I have been doing for thirty years liable also to suspension a divinis?

I think, on the contrary, that if then I had been forming seminarians as they are being formed now in the new seminaries I should have been excommunicated. If then I had taught the catechism which is being taught in the schools I should have been called a heretic. And if I had said Mass as it is now said I should have been called suspect of heresy and out of the Church. It is beyond my understanding. It means something has changed in the Church; and it is about that that I wish to speak.

The next passage to be cited evoked a great deal of unfavorable comment, principally because of the use of the word "bastard," particularly with reference to priests emerging from the reformed seminaries. Liberals were quick to seize upon this passage to imply that the Archbishop had intended to be personally offensive to these young priests. Nothing could be further from the truth. A careful reading of the controversial passage will show that the Archbishop was making a valid analogy and using the word with great precision. Unfortunately the word "bastard " sounds far more offensive in English than in French and for this reason I could wish that the Archbishop had found some other term for making his point.

As the text will make clear, he first takes up an image met with frequently in the Old Testament, and often phrased in terms far more blunt than those of the Archbishop, that the infidelities of the Jewish people constituted adultery. Israel was the spouse of Yahweh; when the Jews strayed to the "high places" to participate in pagan cults this constituted an adulterous liaison. The great temptation facing Catholics since the French Revolution has been to enter into an adulterous liaison with Liberalism, the pervading spirit of our times. Since Vatican II, large sections of the Church have succumbed to this temptation, none more evidently than the French hierarchy. Similarly, an attempt has been made to unite (in a clearly adulterous manner) Catholic and Protestant worship and doctrine. Thus many of the young priests emerging from our seminaries today (and I have personal experience of this) are a confused mixture of Liberalism and Protestantism, with possibly some vestigial Catholicism. Such is their confusion that they could not name their spiritual ancestry if asked, and to term them doctrinal bastards is blunt but accurate. Anyone who has attended a typical celebration of the New Mass will hardly need to be told that to call it a bastard rite is, if anything, an understatement.

The controversial passage reads as follows:
Quote:The union desired by these Liberal Catholics, a union between the Church and the Revolution and subversion is, for the Church, an adulterous union, adulterous. And that adulterous union can produce only bastards. And who are those bastards? They are our rites: the rite of Mass is a bastard rite, the sacraments are bastard sacraments-we no longer know if they are sacraments which give grace or which do not give grace. We no longer know if this Mass gives the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ or if it does not give them. The priests coming out of the seminaries do not themselves know what they are. In Rome it was the Archbishop of Cincinnati who said: "Why are there no more vocations? Because the Church no longer knows what a priest is." How then can She still form priests if She does not know what a priest is? The priests coming out of the seminaries are bastard priests. They do not know what they are. They do not know that they were made to go up to the altar to offer the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ, to give Jesus Christ to souls, and to call souls to Jesus Christ. That is what a priest is. Our young men here know that very well. Their whole life is going to be consecrated to that, to love, adore, and serve Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.

The adulterous union of the Church with the Revolution is consolidated with dialogue. When the Church entered into dialogue it was to convert. Our Lord said: "Go, teach all nations, convert them." But He did not say to hold dialogue with them so as not to convert them, so as to try to put us on the same footing with them.

Error and truth are not compatible. We must see if we have charity towards others, as the Gospel says: he who has charity is one who serves others. But those who have charity should give Our Lord, they should give the riches they possess to others and not just converse with them and enter into dialogue on an equal footing. Truth and error are not on the same footing. That would be putting God and the Devil on the same footing, for the Devil is the father of lies, the father of error.

We must therefore be missionaries.

We must preach the Gospel, convert souls to Jesus Christ and not engage in dialogue with them in an effort to adopt their principles. That is what this bastard Mass and these bastard rites are doing to us, for we wanted dialogue with the Protestants and the Protestants said to us: "We will not have your Mass; we will not have it because it contains things incompatible with our Protestant faith. So change the Mass and we shall be able to pray with you. We can have intercommunion. We can receive your sacraments. You can come to our churches and we can come to yours; then it will be all finished and we shall have unity." We shall have unity in confusion, in bastardy. That we do not want. The Church has never wanted it. We love the Protestants; we want to convert them. But it is not loving them to let them think they have the same religion as the Catholic religion.

The next passage to be quoted was the most controversial in the whole sermon. It contains a reference to Argentina, about 150 words long out of a sermon of about 8,500 words, and it is the passage which was seized upon by Liberals, secular and Catholic, to categorize the entire speech as political and even to go as far as to compare Mgr. Lefebvre with Hitler! This is what the Archbishop said:
Quote:There will be no peace on this earth except in the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The nations are at war -every day we have page after page of the newspapers about it, we have it on radio and television. Now because of a change of Prime Minister they are asking what can be done to improve the economic situation, what will strengthen the currency, what will bring prosperity to industry, and so on. All the papers in the world are full of it. But even from an economic point of view Our Lord Jesus Christ must reign, because the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ is the reign of the principles of love, indeed of the commandments of God which give society its balance, which make justice and peace reign in society .It is only when society has order, justice, and peace that the economy can prevail and revive. That is easily seen. Take the Argentine Republic as an example. What state was it in just two or three months ago? Complete anarchy, brigands killing right and left, industries totally ruined, factory owners seized and held to ransom, and so on. An incredible revolution, and that in a country so beautiful, so balanced, and so congenial as the Argentine Republic, a Republic which could be extraordinarily prosperous and enormously wealthy. Now there is a government of principle, with authority, which brings back order into life and stops the brigands murdering; and lo and behold! the economy is reviving, workers have employment, and they can return to their homes knowing that no one is going to knock them on the head because they will not strike when they do not wish to strike. That is the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ that we want; and we profess our faith, saying that Our Lord Jesus Christ is God.

Before making any comment on this passage I will quote an explanation which the Archbishop gave himself when questioned upon it during a press conference on 15 September 1976.2 Let it be noted once again that the passage in question is one of about 150 words in a sermon of about 8,500 words. The following question was posed to the Archbishop:
Quote:"You have recently been reproached with your sympathy for regimes like that in Argentina. Is this true or false?"

The Archbishop's answer reads as follows:
Quote:I have just been talking to you about principles, I might say political principles, which one may have, the political principles of the Church. She has principles, political principles, principles for society, for She considers that society is created by God, like the family. The family has its laws: there are father, mother, and child; and each has a law and a position in the family. Similarly in civil society. The Church considers that it is a creature of God, and that this creature of God also has its laws so that it can develop normally and give all its members the fullest possibility for their own development. Of course we want governments to observe these laws. I took that example, but I might have taken another, for, as you know, I do not write my speeches -a pity, perhaps -but I do not think about them well in advance. So, trying to give an example of Christian order, of the notion people have of Christian order which brings things back to peace and justice, with the hierarchy which is necessary in a society, I quoted this example because it is recent and known to everybody, and also because the situation was really frightful, the Argentine being in a state of anarchy, with assassinations and abductions-a situation on the brink of the abyss, on the verge of total anarchy. A government then took over, but I think that, given the ideas of some of these men (I know some of the Argentinian bishops and I was there myself not long ago), I think that these men who took over the government did so in a Christian spirit. That they are not governing perfectly, that they exaggerate, that not everything is perfect, I do not doubt for a moment (I do not think that any government in the world has ever been perfect) ; but they did, I think, return to principles of justice, and that is why I gave that example. I said: you see that when Christian principles are restored a society is rediscovered which can live, which is livable, in which people can live, where they need not always be asking themselves if they are going to be assassinated at the street corner, or be robbed, or have a bomb in their garden, and so on. All I wanted to do was give an example: but that does not mean I am a supporter of the government of the Argentine or of the government of Chile. I might have used Chile as an example. I could perhaps have quoted governments which were in total anarchy and which then re-established order. Such an order might be tyrannical, and then it is a different matter: we are not talking of introducing slavery .I must say that I did not use that example so as to support the government in the Argentine or to play politics. I do not play politics.

I would not wish to make any detailed comments on the regimes in Argentina and Chile as I have made no detailed personal study of them. What is perfectly clear is that in both cases the military only took over the government because life had been made literally impossible by the previous regimes. Let British or American readers spend a few moments calculating the precise meaning of an 800 per cent inflation rate, let them calculate the cost of the basic necessities of life multiplied eightfold and decide just how tolerable they would have found regimes which had brought about such a state of affairs.

It must also be remembered that in both countries Marxist terrorists consider themselves bound by no ethical norms in achieving their aims. During my own military service I had personal experience of two terrorist campaigns, in Malaya and Cyprus, and, leaving aside the question as to whether right is on the side of the military or the terrorists, it is hard for the security forces to conform to the rule book when dealing with men who violate civilized standards of behavior. To take Northern Ireland as an example, there can be no doubt that the situation there has been caused by an unjust partition of Ireland and unjust treatment of the Catholic population. The Catholics have a legitimate grievance which they have been unable to rectify through the accepted political channels. Nonetheless, when a soldier or policeman has seen his comrades blown to pieces by a terrorist bomb, or seen the carnage in a bomb-blasted shop, with woman and children lying dead or bleeding from lost limbs, is not likely to think much about the historical background when he gets his hands on a gunman. He should - but doesn't. It is wrong but understandable.

It is thus quite unjust for Liberals, Catholic or otherwise, to sit in judgment on the regimes in Chile and Argentine when they have no first- and probably even little second- or even third-hand knowledge of the background to the current situation in these countries. It is also a fact that the governments of Chile and Argentina have been subjected to a campaign of systematic defamation in the secular and Catholic press. To take just one example, those who rely for their information on the British Catholic press would imagine that the prisons of Chile are bursting with political prisoners when, in fact, there is not a single political prisoner in the entire country.3

As regards Argentina, the far from right-wing French journal L 'Express admitted in its issue of 30 August, the day after the sermon at Lille, that:
Quote:General Videla, brought to power by a coup d'etat, has managed at the last moment to save the economic situation of the country .With an 800 per cent inflation during the last twelve months of Isabel Peron's presidency, with no means of paying off its debts abroad, the Argentine was on the verge of bankruptcy. By freezing prices and freezing salaries, inflation has been brought down by at least 3 per cent a month.... The Argentine can resume its development on a solid foundation.

As for the "coup d'etat" of the Argentinian armed forces, on their side there was neither ambition nor despotism. They would have preferred (like the Brazilian armed forces in 1964) not to have to intervene. But there was nobody else. The Courrier de Paul Deheme makes that clear in its No. 7,967 of 16 September 1976:
Quote:The Argentinian armed forces refused for a long time to act, and on 24 March 1976, when they made their decision, the chaos had reached such a pitch that they could no longer delay. I remind you, moreover, of what I wrote to you on 17 March, a week before their seizure of power: "The armed forces are going to have to make draconian decisions whether they like it or not.'

The major part of the Archbishop's sermon was concerned with an impassioned defense of the traditional faith and a scathing indictment of the "Conciliar Church "-a Church in which consecrated churches are put at the disposal of Muslims but withheld from faithful Catholics wishing to offer the traditional Mass. The Archbishop laid stress on the need for traditionalists to put their case in a restrained and unaggresive manner:
Quote:We are against no one. We are not commandos. We wish nobody harm.

All we want is to be allowed to profess our faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ.

So, for that reason, we are driven from our churches. The poor priests are driven out for saying the Old Mass by which all our saints were sanctified: Saint Jeanne d'Arc, the holy Cure of Ars, the little Therese of the Child Jesus were sanctified by this Mass; and now priests are driven brutally, cruelly, from their parishes because they say the Mass which has sanctified saints for centuries. It is crazy. I would almost say it is a story of madmen. I ask myself if I am dreaming. How can this Mass have become some kind of horror for our bishops and for those who should preserve our faith? But we will keep the Mass of Saint Pius V because the Mass of Saint Pius V is the Mass of twenty centuries. It is the Mass of all time, not just the Mass of Saint Pius V; and it represents our faith, it is a bulwark of our faith, and we need that bulwark.

We shall be told that we are making it a question of Latin and soutanes. Obviously it is easy that way to discredit those you disagree with. But Latin has its importance; and when I was in Africa it was marvellous to see those crowds of Africans of different languages -we sometimes had five or six different tribes who did not understand one another - who could assist at Mass in our churches and sing the Latin chants with extraordinary fervor. Go and see them now : they quarrel in the churches because Mass is being said in a language other than theirs, so they are displeased and they want a Mass in their own language. The confusion is total, where before there was perfect unity. That is just one example, You have just heard the epistle and gospel read in French -I see no difficulty in that; and if more prayers in French were added, to be said all together, I still see no difficulty. But it still seems to me that the body of the Mass, which runs from the offertory to the priest's Communion, should remain in a unique language so that all men of all nations can assist together at Mass and can feel unity in that unity of faith, in that unity of prayer. So we ask, indeed we address an appeal to the bishops and to Rome: will they, please, take into consideration our desire to pray as our ancestors did, to keep the Catholic faith, our desire to adore Our Lord Jesus Christ and to want His reign. That is what I said in my last letter to the Holy Father-and I thought it really was the last, because I did not think the Holy Father would have written to me again.

The Archbishop also laid stress on the fact that while Communists and Freemasons were welcome in the Vatican, Catholic traditionalists were not. An audience of millions throughout the world was able to see at first hand the mask being torn from the face of the "Conciliar Church "- a Church characterized by harshness, hypocrisy, intolerance, and calculated cruelty to its most faithful children: a Church prepared to sacrifice its doctrinal and liturgical patrimony in the interests of an illusory ecumenical goal. There can be little doubt that it was the embarrassment resulting from this public exposure that resulted in the subsequent papal audience for the Archbishop.

It is also obvious that this massive demonstration of support for the Archbishop came as a great shock to the Vatican. Technically, after his suspension, not a single Catholic should have been present at the Mass, and the local bishops had reminded the faithful of this and warned that they should not be present even out of curiosity. It is also worth restating the fact that this Mass was in no way intended as a major public demonstration of support for the Archbishop and the traditional faith - it was made public only at the last minute. Had the Archbishop wished to arrange a demonstration of the massive support he enjoys and asked for this to be organized through the month of August it is doubtful whether there would have been a building in France large enough to accommodate the congregation.

The message which came from Lille was clear .The regime in the Vatican had insisted that the first, the only duty of Catholics was to accept all its directives without question. It wanted absolute and blind obedience. If it forbade today what it commanded yesterday it was not for the faithful to reason why but to obey. But the Catholics present at Lille showed, by their presence, that with Mgr. Lefebvre their commitment is to the traditional faith. In so far as the Vatican upholds that faith it will enjoy their support; where it fails to build up the Body of Christ but introduces measures which effectively undermine it then they will say "No," even to Pope himself.

Notes
1. Founder of Action francaise.

2. Itinéraires, No.208, December 1976, p. 127

3. The last political prisoner in Chile (the Communist ex-Senator Jorge Montes) was released on 17 June 1977 and allowed to travel to East Germany in exchange for eleven East German political prisoners, Chile today, No.33 (12 Devonshire Street, London, W1). For a factual background account of the Chilean situation read The Church of Silence in Chile, 450 pp., $7 postpaid from Lumen Mariae Publications, P. O. Box 99455, Erieview Station, Cleveland, Ohio 44199. Available in Britain from Augustine Publishing Co. Essential background reading on this topic is contained in two valuable Approaches supplements, “Dossier on Chile,” and “Hatred and Lies Against Latin America,” which prove, inter alia that Amnesty International had published false information, eg. alleging that people are missing who are not missing at all.

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - Real vs. Apparent Disobedience 1977
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 07:04 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - Replies (1)

Real and Apparent Disobedience

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...%3DApi&f=1]

Homily of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
On the Occasion of a New Priest's First Mass
at Poitiers, France September 3, 1977

Dear Father, you have the joy today of celebrating Holy Mass in the midst of your dear ones, surrounded by your family, by your friends and it is with great satisfaction that I find myself near you today to tell you also of my joy and prayers for your future apostolate, for the good which you will do for souls.

We will pray especially to St. Pius X, our patron, whose feast it is today and who has been present during all your studies and your formation. We will ask him to give you the heart of an apostle, the heart of a saintly priest like him. And since we are right here in the city of St. Hilary, of St. Radegonde and the great Cardinal Pie, well, we shall ask of all those protectors of the city of Poitiers to come and aid you so that you may follow their example, so that you may defend as they did in difficult times, the Catholic Faith.

You could have coveted an easy and comfortable life in the world. You had already begun the study of medicine. You could have gone in that direction. But no, you had the courage, even in times like these, to come and ask to be made a priest at Ecône. And why Ecône? Because there you found Tradition, you found that which corresponded to your faith. It was an act of courage which does you honor.

And that is why I would like, in a few words, to answer the accusations which have appeared in the local papers following the publication of the letter of Msgr. Rozier, Bishop of Poitiers. Oh, not in order to polemicize. I carefully avoid doing that. Generally, I do not answer these letters and I prefer to keep silent. However, since you as well as me are called into question it seems to me well to justify you here. We are not called into question because of our persons but because of the choice we have made. We are incriminated because we have chosen the so-called way of disobedience. But we must understand clearly what this way of disobedience consists of. I think we may truthfully say that, if we have chosen the way of apparent disobedience, we have chosen the way of true obedience.

Then I think that those who accuse us have perhaps chosen the way of apparent obedience which, in reality, is disobedience. Because those who follow the new way, who follow the novelties, who attach themselves to new principles contrary to those taught us by Tradition, by all the Popes, by all the Councils, they are the ones who have chosen the way of disobedience.

Because one cannot say that one obeys authority today while disobeying the entire Tradition. Following Tradition is precisely the sign of our obedience. Jesus Christus heri, hodie et in saecula, "Jesus Christ yesterday, today and forever."

One cannot separate Our Lord Jesus Christ. One cannot say that one obeys the Christ of today but not the Christ of yesterday, because then one does not obey the Christ of tomorrow. This is of vital importance. This is why we cannot say that we disobey the Pope of today and that, for that reason we disobey the Pope of yesterday. We obey the Pope of yesterday, consequently, we obey the one of today, consequently, we obey the one of tomorrow. For it is not possible that the Popes teach different things; it is not possible that the Popes gainsay each other, that they contradict each other.

And this is why we are convinced that in being faithful to all the Popes of yesterday, to all the Councils of yesterday, we are faithful to the Pope of today, to the Council of today and to the Council of tomorrow and the Pope of tomorrow. Again: Jesus Christus heri, hodie et in saecula. And if today, by a mystery of Providence, a mystery which for us is unfathomable, incomprehensible, we are in apparent disobedience, in reality we are not disobedient but obedient.

How are we obedient? In believing in our catechism and because we always keep the same Credo, the same Ten Commandments, the same Mass, the same Sacraments, the same prayer—the Pater Noster of yesterday, today and tomorrow. This is why we are obedient and not disobedient.

On the other hand, if we study what is taught nowadays in the new religion we realize that it is not the same Faith, the same Creed, the same Ten Commandments, the same Sacraments, the same Our Father. It is sufficient to open the catechisms of today to realize that. It is sufficient to read the speeches which are made in our times to realize that those who accuse us of disobedience are those who do not follow the Popes, who do not follow the Councils, who, in reality, disobey. Because they do not have the right to change our Creed, to say today that the angels do not exist, to change the notion of original sin, to say that the Holy Virgin was not always a virgin, and so on.

They do not have the right to replace the Ten Commandments with the Rights of Man. Nowadays one speaks of nothing but the rights of man and no one speaks of his duties which are in the Ten Commandments. We don't see that it is necessary to replace the Ten Commandments in our catechisms with the Rights of Man. And this is very grave. The commandments of God are attacked and thus those laws defending the family disappear.

The most Holy Mass, for example, which is the synthesis of our Faith, which is precisely our living catechism, the Holy Mass has been deprived of its nature, it has become confused and ambiguous. Protestants can say it, Catholics can say it. Concerning this I have never said, and I have never followed those who say that all the new Masses are invalid. I have never said anything of the sort but I believe that it is in fact very dangerous to make a habit of attending the New Mass because it no longer is representative of our Faith, because Protestant notions have been incorporated into the New Mass.

All the Sacraments have, to some "extent, been deprived of their nature and have become similar to an invitation to a religious assembly. These are not Sacraments. The Sacraments give us grace and take away our sins. They give us divine life, supernatural life. We are not simply part of a purely natural, purely human, religious collectivity.

This is why we keep to the Holy Mass. We keep to it also because it is the living catechism. It is not only a catechism written and printed on pages which can disappear, on lifeless pages. Rather it is our living catechism, our living Credo. This Credo is essentially the history, as it were, the "song" of the redemption of our souls by Our Lord Jesus Christ. We sing the praises of God, Our Lord, Our Redeemer, Our Saviour who became man to shed His blood for us and thus to give birth to His Church and the priesthood so that the Redemption might continue, so that our souls might be bathed in the blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ through Baptism, through all the Sacraments, in order that we might participate in the nature of Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, in His divine nature by means of His human nature and so that we might be admitted eternally into the family of the Most Holy Trinity.

This is our Christian life. This is our Faith. If the Mass is not the continuation of the Cross of Our Lord, the sign of His Redemption, is no longer the reality of His Redemption, then it is not our Credo. If the Mass is nothing but a meal, a eucharist, a "sharing" if one can sit around a table and simply pronounce the words of the Consecration in the midst of a meal, it is no longer our Sacrifice of the Mass. And if it is no longer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ is no longer accomplished.

We need the Redemption of Our Lord. We need the Blood of Our Lord. We cannot live without the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He came on earth to give us His Blood, to communicate to us His life. We have been created for this and it is the Holy Mass that gives His Blood to us. This sacrifice continues in all reality. Our Lord is really present in His Body, in His Soul, and in His Divinity.

That is why He created the priesthood and this is why there must be new priests. This is why we wish to make priests who can continue the Redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ. All the greatness, the sublimity of the priesthood, the beauty of the priesthood, is in the celebration of the Holy Mass, in the saving words of the Consecration. It is in the making Our Lord Jesus Christ descend onto the altar, continuing the Sacrifice of the Cross, shedding His Blood on souls through Baptism, the Eucharist, the Sacrament of Penance. Oh, the beauty, the greatness of the priesthood! A greatness of which we are not worthy, of which no man is worthy. Our Lord Jesus Christ wanted it. What greatness, what sublimity!

And our young priests have understood this. You can be certain they have understood. Throughout their seminary days they loved the Holy Mass. They will never penetrate the mystery perfectly even if God gives them a long life on earth. But they love their Mass and I think they have understood and will understand even better that the Mass is the sun of their life, the raison d'être of their priestly life so that they may give Our Lord Jesus Christ to the souls of the people and not simply so that they may break bread in friendship while Our Lord is absent. Because grace is absent from these new Masses which are purely a eucharist, a mere symbol of a sign and symbol of a sort of charity among human beings.

This is why we are attached to the Holy Mass. And the Holy Mass is the expression of the Ten Commandments. And what are the Ten Commandments if not the love of God and of our neighbor? How better is this love fulfilled than in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? God receives all the glory through Our Lord Jesus Christ and His sacrifice. There can be no greater act of charity for man than this sacrifice. And, is there any act of charity greater than that of giving one's life for those whom one loves? Our Lord Himself asked that.

Consequently, the Ten Commandments are fulfilled in the Mass, the greatest act of love which God could have from man, the greatest act of love that we could have from God. Here are the Ten Commandments. Here is our living catechism. All the Sacraments take their radiance from the Eucharist. All the Sacraments, in a certain sense, are like satellites of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. From Baptism right through to Extreme Unction, the Sacraments are only reflections of the Eucharist since all grace comes from Jesus Christ, present in the Holy Eucharist.

Now sacrament and sacrifice are intimately united in the Mass. One cannot separate sacrifice from sacrament. The Catechism of the Council of Trent explains this magnificently. There are two great realities in the Sacrifice of the Mass: the sacrifice and the sacrament deriving from the sacrifice, the fruit of the sacrifice. This is our holy religion and this is why we hold to the Mass. You will understand now, perhaps better than you understood before, why we defend this Mass and the reality of the Sacrifice. It is the life of the Church and the reason for the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ. And it is the reason for our existence, our union with Our Lord in the Mass. Therefore, we cry out if they try to take away the nature of the Mass, to deprive us in any way of this Sacrifice! We are wounded. We will not have them separate us from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

This why we hold firmly to the Sacrifice of the Mass. And we are convinced that our Holy Father, the Pope, has not forbidden it and that no one can ever forbid the celebration of the Mass of all time. Moreover, Pope St. Pius V proclaimed in a solemn and definitive manner that, whatever might happen in the future, no one might ever prevent a priest from celebrating the Sacrifice of the Mass; and that all excommunications, all suspensions, all the punishments which a priest might undergo because he celebrated this Holy Sacrifice would be utterly null and void, in futuro, in perpetuum.

Consequently, we have a clear conscience whatever may happen to us. If we are apparently disobedient, we are really obedient. This is our situation. And it is right for us to tell this, to explain it, because it is we who continue the Church. Really disobedient are those who corrupt the Sacrifice of the Mass, the Sacraments and our prayers, those who put the Rights of Man in the place of the Ten Commandments, those who transform the Credo. Because that is what the new catechisms do.

We feel deep pain at not being in perfect communion with the authors of those reforms. Indeed, we regret it infinitely. I would like to go at this very minute to Msgr. Rozier and tell him that I am in perfect communion with him. But it is impossible for me. If Msgr. Rozier condemns this Mass which we say, it is impossible. Those who refuse this Mass are no longer in communion with the Church of all time.

It is inconceivable that bishops and priests, ordained for this Mass and by this Mass, men who have celebrated it for perhaps twenty or thirty years of their priestly lives, persecute it with an implacable hatred—that they hound us from the churches, that they oblige us to say Mass here, in the open air, when the Mass is meant to be said in the churches constructed for that purpose. And was it not Msgr. Rozier himself who told one of you that if we were heretics and schismatics he would give us churches in which to celebrate our Masses? This is something beyond belief. If we were no longer in communion with the Church but heretics or schismatics we could have the churches. It is quite evident that we are still in communion with the Church. There is a contradiction in their attitude which condemns them. They know perfectly well that we are in the right because we cannot be outside of truth when we simply continue to do what has been done for two thousand years, believing what has been believed for two thousand years. This is not possible.

Once again, we must repeat this sentence and continue to repeat it: Jesus Christus heri, hodie et in saecula. If I am with the Jesus Christ of yesterday I am with the Jesus Christ of today and of tomorrow. I cannot be with the Jesus Christ of yesterday without being with the Jesus Christ of tomorrow. And that is because our Faith is that of the past and that of the future. If we are not with the Faith of the past we are not with the Faith of the present, nor yet of the future. This is what we must always believe. This is what we must hold to at any price— our salvation depends upon it. Let us ask this today of the guardian saints of Poitiers, ask it especially for these dear priests, for this new priest. Let us ask it of St. Hilary, of St. Radegunda who so loved the Cross—it was she who brought to this land of France the first relic of the True Cross and so loved the Sacrifice of the Mass; and finally, of Cardinal Pie who was an admirable defender of the Catholic Faith during the last century. Let us ask these protectors of Poitiers to give us the grace of fighting without hatred, without rancor.

Let us never be among those who try to polemicize, to disrupt, to be unjust to their neighbors. Let us love them with all our hearts but let us hold to the Faith. At all costs let us keep our Faith in the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Let us ask this of the most Holy Virgin Mary. She can only have had a perfect faith in the divinity of her Divine Son. She loved Him with all her heart. She was present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Cross. Let us ask of Him the faith that she had.


Source

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - Sermon at Credo Pilgrimage 1975
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 07:02 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - Replies (1)

The Credo Pilgrimage

[Image: archbishop_lefebvre_rome460_1.jpg?itok=VaQLZQ5u]
Archbishop Lefebvre leads the Credo Pilgrimage

On 25 May 1975, Mgr. Lefebvre, the Seminary professors, and the students of Ecône went to Rome to lead the Credo Holy Year Pilgrimage. The account of this Pilgrimage which follows was originally printed in The Remnant of 23 June 1975. It was entitled "Lauda Sion."

"The Pilgrimage to Rome in May, 1975, led by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, is of such historic significance in so many respects that it appears almost impossible to present any of them adequately. There are four major basilicas in Rome at which pilgrims for the Holy Year of 1975 can gain their indulgence - St. Peter's, St. John Lateran, St. Mary Major, and St. Paul's Without-the-Walls. During the weekend of 24-26 May, Holy Year pilgrims from all over the world were astounded to see an event which took place at each of these basilicas in almost identical circumstances. A venerable prelate in full episcopal robes, a prelate whose very being radiated holiness, serenity, and Christian joy, entered each basilica followed by a procession of a nature sufficient to convince any spectator that far from being in a process of self-destruction or 'auto-demolition' as Pope Paul has expressed it, the Church must be entering upon a period of renewed vigor, the kind of second Spring which Cardinal Newman had promised. The prelate, Archbishop Lefebvre, was followed by what seemed an endless double file of priests and seminarians. There were, in fact, about 120, but they seemed to be far more. Behind the seminarians came a group of nuns in an unfamiliar habit, the postulants of the new order founded by the Archbishop. Then came the faithful in their thousands, faithful Catholics from countries as far apart as Australia and Argentina - and as they entered the basilicas, they sang.

Lauda Sion Salvatorem,
lauda ducem et pastorem,
in hymnis et canticis.

This sublime hymn of praise to Christ our God, present in the Blessed Sacrament, surged up to the bright blue sky above the basilicas as the pilgrims filed in, and then filled the basilicas with praise after they entered. Pilgrims with other groups and the Roman clergy as well were quite overwhelmed by the scale and fervor of this Pilgrimage. Nothing like it had been seen before during this Holy Year, nothing like it will be seen again. It had not been the largest pilgrimage to come - although it would seem blasphemous to describe the group which had taken over St. Peter's exactly one week before as a pilgrimage. Indeed, the appearance in St. Peter's Basilica of about 9,000 charismatics, some of whom danced and some of whom gibbered, brings immediately to mind St. Matthew's warning concerning the 'abomination of desolation which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place.' Indeed, if the Mass concelebrated by Cardinal Suenens and five hundred Pentecostal priests was valid, then the passing of Hosts from hand to hand, to be broken in pieces by the congregation and offered even to tourists of any belief or none, was in truth an abomination!

Here then is one aspect of great significance: the Pentecostals received special papal authorization to use the Main Altar of the Confession of St. Peter; Cardinal Suenens was warmly embraced by the Pope; and the Pope addressed the charismatics - certainly with some words of caution and admonition, but also with a great deal of warmth and praise. There was, on the other hand, no papal welcome for Archbishop Lefebvre; he would not have been given the High Altar to celebrate Mass for his Pilgrimage, because the Mass he would have celebrated would have been the Mass codified by Pope Saint Pius V, Mass as it was said in Rome during his pontificate, virtually the only form of Mass to be celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica from the time it had been built. But such is the state of the Church today that it is this form of Mass, arguably the supreme achievement of Western Christianity, which is now regarded, practically speaking, as an abomination. The Pentecostals with their guitars, their dancing, their gibberish, are acceptable. The age-old Mass is not.

Thus the presence of the Archbishop and his pilgrims in Rome so soon after the Pentecostals both symbolized and manifested the two-centuries-old struggle between Liberal and traditional Catholicism, which reached its climax on the ninth of May in this Holy Year of 1975, when canonical approval was withdrawn from his Society of St. Pius X and the Seminary at Ecône.

Here, then, is the next aspect of great significance with regard to this Pilgrimage: it was remarked above that anyone seeing the great procession led by the Archbishop entering one of the Roman basilicas would have concluded that the Church could not be undergoing a process of self-destruction or 'auto-demolition.' When it is realized that those in authority in the Church at present are intent upon destroying the Seminary which is forming such holy and such fervent young priests, then self-destruction is the only term applicable. It is no wonder that, as the great procession entered St. Peter's Basilica, it sang the Parce Domine.

Traditional Catholic devotions took place in all the basilicas visited by the Credo pilgrims - and, in addition to the four major basilicas mentioned, these included St. Sebastian, St. Lawrence, and the ruins of Maxentius. The traditional Roman Mass was sung for huge congregations in St. Mary Major, Maxentius, and St. Lawrence. At least one hundred more must have been said during the course of the Pilgrimage by the many priests who took part, from both the Ecône Seminary and the groups which came from different countries. Some of these Masses were offered at side altars in St. Peter's, including that of St. Pius X. L'Osservatore Romano had published an expression of 'pained surprise' at the fact that all the Masses for the Credo pilgrims were to be Tridentine Masses and thought this inappropriate in a year of 'reconciliation.'

The fact of the matter is that precisely in this year of 'reconciliation' the prime aim of the Church ought to be to reconcile herself with her own traditions - the abandoning of which has caused nothing but disaster. Veneration for her traditions was once the prime characteristic of the Church of Rome, yet today the official Vatican newspaper can express regret at the celebration of the Mass of St. Pius V - the greatest of these traditions. However, with or without the approval of the Vatican, the Mass which had been the only Mass for Roman-rite pilgrims in the Holy Year 1950, and for its predecessors for centuries before, was celebrated with due ceremony and due honor once again in this Holy Year of 1975. It was the fervent prayer of all present that it will be the only Mass permitted for Roman-rite pilgrims in the year 2000.

Most of the pilgrims considered the Pontifical High Mass sung in the ruins of the ancient Basilica of Maxentius to have been the most memorable of the entire Pilgrimage. Loud speakers insured that the words and music of this ancient Mass echoed across Rome, the Mass whose origins reach back to the time of the martyrs with whom this basilica has such poignant associations, and so many of whom lie buried in its precincts. Many pilgrims and citizens who were not taking part in the Credo Pilgrimage were overjoyed to discover a celebration of the traditional Mass and swelled the ranks of a congregation which certainly exceeded three thousand in number. The Mass ended with the singing of the Te Deum, and all knelt on the stony ground while His Grace passed along giving his blessing.

The Mass which ended the 'official' Pilgrimage in the Basilica of St. Lawrence was equally impressive. The great basilica was literally packed to the doors and, despite the fact that a good number of priests helped to distribute Holy Communion, this still took almost twenty-five minutes, during which time the pilgrims waited with patience and sang with devotion. Archbishop Lefebvre preached very important sermons during Mass in the basilicas of Maxentius and St. Lawrence.

The all-night vigil for this Pilgrimage was held in the Church of San Girolamo della Carità. Some of those who had been on previous traditionalist pilgrimages regretted the fact that it was not held in St. Peter’s square, and indeed those who have had the grace to take part in these vigils had good reason for doing so. However, the fact that this Pilgrimage was led by the Archbishop made it necessary to make its essentially religious character clear throughout - anything which could give the appearance of a demonstration or a confrontation had to be avoided. It is likely that the timing for the withdrawal of canonical approbation from the Society of St. Pius X was designed to provoke some form of violent or intemperate reaction during the Pilgrimage. There was no such incident; the dignity and restraint shown by all present was as remarkable as their fervor. It would, of course, be argued by the Liberal establishment that the celebration of the traditional Mass was in itself an act of provocation, hence the admonition in L'Osservatore Romano. But any Catholic, whatever his position or rank, who would consider the celebration of the traditional Mass 'provocative' has reached a stage where we can only say, 'God help and forgive him', and breathe a prayer on his behalf.

During the all-night vigil, an unceasing stream of hymns and prayers was offered up to God, above all for the restoration to our altars of the traditional Mass, which was celebrated every two hours throughout the night by one of the priests present. One of the most impressive sights was the entry of the pilgrims into the indescribably beautiful Basilica of St. Paul's Without-the-Walls on Monday morning. The clergy of the Basilica gave their fullest cooperation and put every facility at the disposal of the pilgrims, including their loudspeaker equipment. As in all the basilicas, the three Paters, Aves, and Glorias necessary for gaining the indulgence were recited, and Credo was sung and the general atmosphere was such that it really did seem hard to believe that anything had changed since 1950 - that these fine young seminarians, who are the pride and joy of hundreds of thousands of the faithful, will never be ordained if the present 'parallel magisterium' has its way.

During the weekend innumerable prayers and acts of penitence were offered up by the pilgrims, in groups or as individuals. Some made the ascent of the Scala Santa on their knees on three or more occasions - not the least among them being the English-speaking pilgrims. It seems permissible to wonder whether, if the New Mass should be abolished and the old one restored, a single Catholic would ever get down on his knees and make the slow and painful journey up the Scala Santa in the interests of Archbishop Bugnini's Novus Ordo Missae.

The traditionalist Pilgrimage for the Holy Year of 1975 was, then, a great success in every way. It was a success for the honor and glory offered to Almighty God and the graces it brought down on the pilgrims; it was a success for the way in which the strength and resilience of the traditional Faith were made clear to the Vatican and, equally important, to the traditionalists themselves. There was not one who did not leave full of hope and encouragement."

The sermon which Mgr. Lefebvre preached in the Basilica of Maxentius on 25 May 1975 was published in The Remnant of 6 March 1976. It was entitled "The One True Religion."

Quote:
The One True Religion

My dear brethren:

If there is one day on which the Church's liturgy affirms our Faith, that day is the Feast of the Blessed Trinity. This morning, in the breviary which the priest formerly had to recite, he had to add to the psalms of Prime the Creed of St. Athanasius. This is the creed which affirms clearly, serenely, but perfectly, what we are bound to believe concerning the Blessed Trinity, and also concerning the divinity and the humanity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, all our faith is summed up in our belief in the Most Holy Trinity and in Our Lord Jesus Christ, God made Man. The whole of our Creed, which we shall sing in a few minutes, is focused, as it were, on the very person of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He it is who is our God, He our Savior; it is through Him that we shall enter Heaven. He is the door of the sheep-fold, He is the Way, the Truth, the Life. There is no other name on earth by which we may be saved: the Gospels tell us all this.

Therefore, when our Faith is being attacked from all sides we must hold steadfastly and firmly to it. We must never accept that there can be any compromise in the affirmation of our Faith. Herein, I think, lies the drama through which we have lived for the last ten, perhaps fifteen years. This drama, this tragic situation we are going through, lies in seeing that our Faith is no longer affirmed with certainty: that through a false ecumenism we have, as it were, reached the point of putting all religions on the same footing, of granting what is called "equal rights" to all religions. This is a tragedy because it is all entirely contrary to the truth of the Church. We believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ is our God, our Savior, our Redeemer; we believe that the Catholic Church alone has the Truth, thus we draw the proper conclusions, by respecting in our personal lives the Religion which Our Lord Jesus Christ founded. For, if other religions are quite prepared to admit that there can be other beliefs and other religious groups, we cannot do so. Why do other religions admit this? Because their religions are religions which have been founded by men and not by God. Our holy and beloved Religion has been founded by God Himself, by Our Lord Jesus Christ.

He it is who has given us the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, He who died upon the Cross. Already on the day of the Last Supper He wished, in a certain manner, to enact in advance what was to take place on the Cross, commanding us to do likewise continually to the end of time, thus making priests of those to whom He gave the power to consecrate the Eucharist. He did this by His own Will, His Will as God, because Jesus Christ is God; He has, thus, given us the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which we love so much, which is our life, our hope, and our salvation. This Sacrifice of Calvary cannot be transformed, the Sacrifice of the Last Supper cannot be transformed - for there was a Sacrifice at the Last Supper - we cannot transform this Sacrifice into a simple commemorative meal, a simple repast at which a memory is recalled, this is not possible. To do such a thing would be to destroy the whole of our Religion, to destroy the most precious thing which Our Lord has given us here on earth, the immaculate and divine treasure which He put into the hands of His Church, which He made a priestly Church. The Church is essentially priestly because she offers the redemptive Sacrifice which Our Lord made on Calvary, and which she renews upon our altars. For a true Catholic, one who is truly faithful to Our Lord Jesus Christ, anything which touches what He Himself established moves him to the very depths of his heart, for he loves it as the apple of his eye. So, if it comes, in any way, to the point of destroying from within what Our Lord Jesus Christ gave to us as the source of life, as the source of grace, then we suffer, we suffer dreadfully, and we demand absolutely that this spring, this fountain of life, this fountain of eternal life, this fountain of Grace be preserved for us whole and entire.

And if such is true of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, it is also true of the Sacraments. It is not possible to make any considerable changes in the Sacraments without destroying them, without running the risk of rendering them invalid, and consequently without running the risk of drying up the grace, the supernatural and eternal life which they bring to us. It is again Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself who established the Sacraments; it is not for us, we are not the masters of the Sacraments: even the Sovereign Pontiff cannot change them. Without doubt he can make changes in the rites, in what is accidental in any Sacrament; but no Sovereign Pontiff can change the substance of a Sacrament, for that was established by Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself who took such care in the founding of our holy Religion, Who left us directions as to what we must do, Who gave Himself to us in the Holy Eucharist through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. What more could we ask? What other religion can lay claim to possess such a thing? And why? Because the only true religion is that of the Catholic Church.

This is a matter of fundamental importance, fundamental for our behavior, fundamental for our religion, and fundamental also for the way we should behave towards those people who do not believe in our holy Religion. This is extremely important, because it is precisely towards those who do not believe, those who do not have our Faith, that we must have immense charity, the true charity. We must not deceive them by telling them that their religion is as good as ours - that is a lie, that is selfishness, that is not true charity. If we consider what profound riches have been given to us in this Religion of ours, then we should have the desire to make it known to others, and share these riches and not say to them: "But you already have all you need! There is no point in your joining us, your religion is as good as ours." See how this matter is one of paramount importance, for it is precisely such false ecumenism which makes the adherents of all the other religions believe that they have certain means of salvation. Now this is false. Only the Catholic Religion, and only the Mystical Body of Christ, possesses the means of salvation. We cannot be saved without Jesus, and we cannot be saved without grace. "He who does not believe," said Our Lord, "will be condemned." We must believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved. "He who believes shall be saved; he who obeys My commandments shall have eternal life; he who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood shall have eternal life." Here is what Our Lord taught us. Therefore, we should have a tremendous desire, a really tremendous desire, to communicate our Faith to others. And this is exactly what made the missionary spirit of the Church. If the strength, the certainty, of our faith is weakened, then the missionary spirit of the Church also diminishes, since it is no longer necessary to cross the seas, to cross the oceans, to go and preach the Gospel, for what is the good of it? Let us leave each man to his own religion, if that religion is going to save him.

Therefore, we must hold fast to our Faith, we must adhere strictly to its affirmation, and we must not accept this false ecumenism which makes all religions into sister-religions of Christianity, for they are nothing of the kind. It is very important to state this nowadays, because it is precisely this false ecumenism which had too much influence after the Council. False ecumenism is the reason why the seminaries are empty. Why is this so? Why are there no more vocations for the missionary orders? Precisely because young men no longer feel the need to make the Truth known to the whole world. They no longer feel the need to give themselves completely to Our Lord Jesus Christ simply because Our Lord Jesus Christ is the only Truth, the only Way, the only Life. What attracts the young to preach the Gospel is that they know they have the Truth. If vocations are withering away, it is due to this false ecumenism. How we suffer at the thought that, in certain countries, people speak of "eucharistic hospitality," of "inter-communion" - as if one could give the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ to those who do not believe in the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, consequently to those who do not adore the Holy Eucharist, because they do not believe in it! Without sacrilege, without blasphemy, the Body and Blood of Our Savior cannot be given to a person who denies His Real Presence in the Eucharist. On this point, therefore, we must have a firm and solid faith, a faith which does not compromise. This is entirely in keeping with the tradition of the Church.

Thus the martyrs believed who lie buried everywhere in this basilica, and in all the churches of Rome, who suffered here in this forum of Augustus, who lived among pagans for three centuries and were persecuted as soon as they were known to be Christians. They were thrown into prison...our thoughts turn to the Mamertine prison, so close to us here, where Peter and Paul were put in chains because of their faith: And shall we be afraid to affirm our faith? We would not in that case be the true descendants of the martyrs, the true descendants of those Christians who shed their blood for Our Lord Jesus Christ in affirmation of their faith in Him. They, too, could indeed have said, "But, since all religions are of equal value, if I burn a little incense before an idol, what does that matter? My life will be saved." But they preferred to die, they preferred to be thrown to the beasts in the Colosseum, quite close to us here. So many, many martyrs were thrown to the beasts, rather than offer incense to pagan gods!

So, may our presence here in Rome be an occasion for us to strengthen our faith, to have, if necessary, the souls of martyrs, the souls of witnesses (for a martyr is a witness), the souls of witnesses of Our Lord Jesus Christ, witnesses of the Church. Here is what I wish you, my most dear brethren, and in this we must be unflinching, whatever happens. We must never agree to diminish our faith; and if by misfortune it were to happen that those who ought to defend our Faith came to tell us to lessen or diminish it, then we must say: "NO." Saint Paul put this very well: "Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." Well, that, I think, sums up clearly what I wanted to say to you, so that when you return to your homes you may have the courage, the strength, despite difficulties, despite trials, to remain true to your Faith, come what may, to uphold it for yourselves, your children and future generations, the Faith which Our Lord Jesus Christ gave to us; so that the pathway to heaven may still have many pilgrims, that it may still be crowded with people on their journey upwards, that it may not be a deserted byway, while on the other hand, the road leading to hell is filled with those who did not believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ, or who rejected Him. We must think on these things, because it is what Our Lord told us: "If we do not believe, we shall be condemned."

Source

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - Declaration 1974
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 06:53 AM - Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - No Replies

1974 Declaration of Archbishop Lefebvre

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...%3DApi&f=1]


The famous "1974 Declaration" of Archbishop Lefebvre was an affirmation of the Catholic Faith in response to the Modernist crisis afflicting the post-conciliar Church.

On November 21, 1974 Archbishop Lefebvre, scandalized by the opinions expressed by the two Apostolic Visitors, drew up for his seminarians "in a spirit of doubtlessly excessive indignation" this famous declaration as his stand against Modernism.

Ten days before, two Apostolic Visitors from Rome arrived at the St. Pius X Seminary in Econe. During their brief stay, they spoke to the seminarians and professors, maintaining scandalous opinions such as, the ordination of married men will soon be a normal thing, truth changes with the times, and the traditional conception of the Resurrection of Our Lord is open to discussion.



We hold fast, with all our heart and with all our soul, to Catholic Rome, Guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions necessary to preserve this faith, to Eternal Rome, Mistress of wisdom and truth.

We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.

All these reforms, indeed, have contributed and are still contributing to the destruction of the Church, to the ruin of the priesthood, to the abolition of the Sacrifice of the Mass and of the sacraments, to the disappearance of religious life, to a naturalist and Teilhardian teaching in universities, seminaries and catechectics; a teaching derived from Liberalism and Protestantism, many times condemned by the solemn Magisterium of the Church.

No authority, not even the highest in the hierarchy, can force us to abandon or diminish our Catholic Faith, so clearly expressed and professed by the Church’s Magisterium for nineteen centuries.

“But though we,” says St. Paul, “or an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema” (Gal. 1:8).

Is it not this that the Holy Father is repeating to us today? And if we can discern a certain contradiction in his words and deeds, as well as in those of the dicasteries, well we choose what was always taught and we turn a deaf ear to the novelties destroying the Church.

It is impossible to modify profoundly the lex orandi without modifying the lex credendi. To the Novus Ordo Missae correspond a new catechism, a new priesthood, new seminaries, a charismatic Pentecostal Church—all things opposed to orthodoxy and the perennial teaching of the Church.

This Reformation, born of Liberalism and Modernism, is poisoned through and through; it derives from heresy and ends in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is therefore impossible for any conscientious and faithful Catholic to espouse this Reformation or to submit to it in any way whatsoever.

The only attitude of faithfulness to the Church and Catholic doctrine, in view of our salvation, is a categorical refusal to accept this Reformation.

That is why, without any spirit of rebellion, bitterness or resentment, we pursue our work of forming priests, with the timeless Magisterium as our guide. We are persuaded that we can render no greater service to the Holy Catholic Church, to the Sovereign Pontiff and to posterity.

That is why we hold fast to all that has been believed and practiced in the faith, morals, liturgy, teaching of the catechism, formation of the priest and institution of the Church, by the Church of all time; to all these things as codified in those books which saw day before the Modernist influence of the Council. This we shall do until such time that the true light of Tradition dissipates the darkness obscuring the sky of Eternal Rome.

By doing this, with the grace of God and the help of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and that of St. Joseph and St. Pius X, we are assured of remaining faithful to the Roman Catholic Church and to all the successors of Peter, and of being the fideles dispensatores mysteriorum Domini Nostri Jesu Christi in Spiritu Sancto. Amen.

November 21, 1974
Econe, Switzerland

Print this item

  November 26th
Posted by: Stone - 11-26-2020, 06:29 AM - Forum: November - Replies (1)

[Image: saint_peter_of_alexandria.jpg]
Saint Peter of Alexandria
Patriarch and Martyr
(† 310)

The Church of Alexandria, founded by the Evangelist Saint Mark in the name of the Apostle Saint Peter, was the head of the churches of Egypt and of several other provinces; it had lost its Metropolitan when Saint Thomas of Alexandria died at the end of the third century. Saint Peter, a priest of that city, replaced him, and soon was governing the church amid the terrors of the persecution by Diocletian and Maximian. Two bishops and more than six hundred Christians were in irons and on the verge of torture; he sent to them pastoral letters to animate them to fervor and perseverance, and rejoiced to learn that a number of them had won the grace of martyrdom.

Many, however, had preferred apostasy to a cruel death. Saint Peter was obliged to instigate penances in order for them to return to the communion of the faithful. When he deposed a bishop who had incensed an idol during the persecution, his act of justice acquired for him the hostility of a certain Arius, the bishop's favorite, who became thereafter the author of a schism and an instrument of the cruel emperor Maximian who persecuted the Christians. He in fact animated this tyrant against Saint Peter. The sentence of excommunication which Saint Peter was the first to pronounce against the two schismatics, Arius and Melitius, and which he strenuously upheld despite the united efforts of powerful members of their parties, is proof that he possessed firmness as well as sagacity and zeal.

The Patriarch was soon seized and thrown into prison. There he encouraged the confessors imprisoned with him to sing the praises of God and pray to their Saviour in their hearts, without ceasing. Saint Peter never ceased repeating to the faithful that, in order not to fear death, it is necessary to begin by dying to oneself, renouncing our self-will and detaching ourselves from all things. He was soon to give proof of his own perfect detachment in his glorious martyrdom.

While in prison he was advised in an apparition as to his successors in the Alexandrian church, and he recognized that the day of his eternal liberation was at hand. He informed these two faithful sons that his martyrdom was imminent. In effect, the emperor passed sentence of death on him, despite the fact that a crowd of persons had come to the prison with the intention of preventing by force the martyrdom of their patriarch; they remained all night for fear he might be executed in secret. But Saint Peter delivered himself up to his executioners, and died by the sword on November 26, 310. His appearance on the scaffold was so majestic that none of them dared to touch him; it was necessary to pay one of them in gold to strike the fatal blow.

* * *

[Image: saint_john_berchmans.jpg]

Saint John Berchmans
Jesuit Seminarian
(1599-1621)
Patron of altar boys

Born in 1599 in Diest, a town of northern Belgium near Brussels and Louvain, this angelic young Saint was the oldest of five children. Two of his three brothers became priests, and his father, after the death of John's mother when he was eleven years old, entered religion and became a Canon of Saint Sulpice.

John was a brilliant student from his most tender years, manifesting also a piety which far exceeded the ordinary. Beginning at the age of seven, he studied for three years at the local communal school with an excellent professor. And then his father, wanting to protect the sacerdotal vocation already evident in his son, confided him to a Canon of Diest who lodged students aspiring to the ecclesiastical vocation. After three years in that residence, the family's financial situation had declined owing to the long illness of the mother, and John was told he would have to return and learn a trade. He pleaded to be allowed to continue his studies. And his aunts, who were nuns, found a solution through their chaplain; he proposed to take John into his service and lodge him.

Saint John was ordinarily first in his classes at the large school, a sort of minor seminary, even when he had to double his efforts in order to rejoin his fellow students, all of excellent talent, who sometimes had preceded him for a year or more in an assigned discipline. He often questioned his Superiors as to what was the most perfect thing to say or do in the various circumstances in which he found himself. Such was the humility which caused the young to advance without ceasing on the road to heaven. Later he continued his studies at Malines, also not distant from Diest, under the tutelage of another ecclesiastic, who assigned to him the supervision of three young boys of a noble family. In all that John did he sought perfection, and he never encountered anything but the highest favor for his services, wherever he was placed.

He found his vocation through his acquaintance with the Jesuits of that city, and manifested his determination to pursue his course, although his father and family opposed it for a time. It had been decided that he would continue his studies at the Jesuit novitiate of Malines, with about 70 other novices. With another young aspirant, he was waiting in the parlor to be introduced, when he saw in the garden a coadjutor Brother turning over the ground in the garden. He proposed to his companion to go and help him, saying: Could we begin our religious life better than with an act of humility and charity? And with no hesitation, both went to offer their assistance. How many young persons in that situation would have thought of such an offer? This incident reveals the profound charity and interior peace which characterized this young religious at all times.

As a novice he taught catechism to the children in the regions around Malines. He made his instructions so lively and interesting that the country folk preferred his lessons to the ordinary sermons. The children became attached to him, and in a troop would conduct him back to the novitiate, where he distributed holy pictures, medals and rosaries to them. At the end of his novitiate in 1619 he was destined to go to Rome to begin serious application to philosophy, but his superiors decided to send him home for a few days first. A shock awaited him at the train station of Malines, where he was expecting to meet his father; he had died a week earlier. John was given time to take the dispositions necessary to provide for the younger brothers and sister. When he departed, it was apparently with a premonition that he would perhaps never see them again, for he said in a letter to the Canon of Diest with whom he had dwelt, to tell the younger ones for him: Increase in piety, in fear of God and in knowledge. Adieu.

With a fellow novice he began the two months' journey on foot to Rome, by way of Paris, Lyons and Loreto, where the two assisted at the Christmas Midnight Mass. Both of these two young Jesuits would die within three years' time, his companion in a matter of several months. John had time during these three years to give unceasing proofs of his already perfected sanctity; nothing that he did was left to chance, but entrusted to the intercession of his Heavenly Mother, to whom his devotion continued to increase day by day. He made an extraordinary effort during an intense heat wave in the summer of 1621, participating splendidly in a debate, which took place at a certain distance from the Jesuit residence, despite the fact he did not feel well. Two days later he was felled by a fever, which continued implacably to mine his already slight resistance, and he died in August of that year, after one week of illness. The story of his last days is touching indeed; in a residence of several hundred priests and students, there was none who did not follow with anxiety and compassion the progress of his illness. When the infirmarian told his patient that he should probably receive Communion the next morning — an exception to the rule prescribing it for Sundays only, in those times — John said, In Viaticum? and received a sad affirmative answer. He himself was transported with joy and embraced the Brother; the latter broke into tears. A priest who knew John well went to him the next morning and asked him if there was anything troubling or saddening him, and John replied, Absolutely nothing.

He asked that his mattress be placed on the floor, and knelt to receive his Lord; when the Father Rector pronounced the words of the Ritual: Receive, Brother, in viaticum, the Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ, all in attendance wept. Their angelic, ever joyous and affectionate young novice was called to leave them; no clearer tribute than their tears could have been offered to the reality of his sanctity, his participation in the effusive goodness of the divine nature. Devotion to his memory spread rapidly in Belgium; already in 1624 twelve engraving establishments of Anvers had published his portrait. He was canonized in 1888 by Pope Leo XIII, at the same time as two other Jesuits who lived during the first century of that Society's existence, so fruitful in sanctity — Peter Claver and Alphonsus Rodriguez.

Print this item

  On Religious Ignorance
Posted by: Stone - 11-25-2020, 07:34 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - Replies (1)

The Angelus - July 2017

Religious Ignorance

A Lenten sermon by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

“The Lord has looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there be any that understand and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are become unprofitable together…” These words of the psalmist are echoed by St. Paul: “…they are inexcusable, because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified Him as God or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts; and their foolish heart was darkened.”

Giant Scientists and Spiritual Dwarfs

How relevant these passages still are! How many people there are in our own day who care nothing for God or the things of Heaven, or who know nothing of the Christian religion and the mysteries of Christ! Worse yet, many baptized Christians still know little or nothing of their religion, and cannot even recite the most basic prayers. How many there are, some even university graduates, who are unable to distinguish between the true religion into which they were baptized and heresies and cults invented by men.

This ignorance may be excusable in those who have been brought up in a pagan environment and who are making praiseworthy efforts to escape from it, but there is no excuse for those who live in a Christian milieu and who, along with a certain degree of education, have everything which makes of man a creature truly made in the image of God.

Our Holy Father Pope Pius X said:
Quote:“Those who are still zealous for the glory of God seek to know why things divine are being held in less esteem. Some give one reason, some another, and according to his opinion each proposes a different means for the defense or the reestablishment of the Kingdom of God on earth. For Ourself, without wishing to disparage the opinions of others, we concur wholeheartedly with the judgment of those who attribute today’s spiritual laxity and weakness and their attendant grave ills, mainly to ignorance of the things of God. This is precisely what God spoke through the mouth of the Prophet Osee, saying:
Quote:‘Cursing and lying and killing and theft and adultery have overflowed: and blood hath touched blood. Therefore shall the land mourn, and every one that dwelleth in it shall languish.’”

How many there are who think they can make do with a religious education received before they were eleven years old, an age when one is nowhere near capable of mastering a secular science. It may be true that religion comes naturally to man, and that at an age when passions have not yet overshadowed intelligence the raising up of the heart and mind to God is easy and spontaneous, but at that stage of a human life, the true knowledge upon which conviction is based, and which will make it possible to resist the internal and external assaults of the devil and the world cannot be and have not been acquired.

What a crime is committed, albeit unknowingly, by those parents who can see no point in continuing their children’s religious education, once they have made their Profession of Faith [Editor’s note: at age 12 in France]. And how wrong are those folk who think religious knowledge is only good for children, that the adolescent and the adult should not be expected to learn anymore, and that a minimal religious observance—a late Sunday Mass and annual Easter Communion—is sufficient for living a good Christian life!


The Dazzling Lights of the City

Small wonder if in the future we find Christians fulfilling only the strict minimum of obligations imposed by the Church, and otherwise living in the world like everyone else, without faith or morals. To quote Pius X again:
Quote:“Human will, led astray and blinded as it is by wicked passions, has need of a guide to show it the way and to bring it back into the paths of righteousness whence it has mistakenly wandered. We do not have to seek this guide outside ourselves, for it is given to us by nature, it is our own intelligence. If that is not truly enlightened, that is, if it lacks the knowledge of the things of God, then we shall be back to the situation of the blind leading the blind: they will both fall into the ditch.”

Worse yet, more often than not, an adolescent will give up the practice of his or her religion entirely and will soon abandon all moral standards, much to the distress of the priests and nuns who have tried everything to keep such young souls on the path of duty and eternal salvation. Alas, if it is true that adults are more than ever fascinated and captivated by all those inventions of modern science which are drawing the world into such a state of feverish activity; if it is true that the human spirit is ever more attracted by all that enslaves the senses, then how are the young to resist if there is not deep in their hearts and minds a still more powerful attraction towards God?

And such an attraction requires a more prefect knowledge of the unfathomable riches of God’s mercy, of His omnipotence, and the infinite love He has shown for us by making His Divine Son both our brother and our food. For does not Our Lord teach that “this is eternal life: that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, Whom Thou hast sent?” Are we going to cast away eternal life through ignorance of things divine just so that we may follow the attractions of this decaying and transitory life?

Modern man is displaying an almost pathological agitation, brought on by a sensual activity out of all proportions to the physical strength which God has given him. Radio, the cinema and a whole host of modern inventions are largely to blame for this, but these things would do less damage if people knew how to use them with moderation. This is not the case, however, and wherever we turn, we are faced with the spectacle of humanity rushing avidly in pursuit of intense sensual experiences. The effect upon the intelligence, whose activity depends so largely upon the nervous system, is all too evident. Children and young people have great difficulty concentrating at school, and adults find it hard to sustain any intellectual effort, or to give their minds to any one thing for long.

What are we to expect, then, when it comes to religious matters, where the senses have only a very small role to play, and where one has to rise above their limited perceptions if one is to grasp spiritual realities?

Nonetheless, there is no denying, as our Holy Father Pope Pius XI put it,
“that man created in the image and likeness of God has his destiny in Him Who is Infinite Perfection and, although modern material progress has brought with it an abundance of worldly goods, he is today more than ever aware of their inadequacy to bring true happiness to individuals and to nations. Thus, he feels more insistently within himself that aspiration towards a higher state of perfection which the Creator has implanted in the heart of rational nature.”


The Ordinary Channels of Wisdom

How, then, are we to overcome the ignorance of God and of the divine mysteries which prevent the realization of this noble aspiration to which Pope Pius refers?

First, we have to desire true wisdom, that is to say, understanding of the things of God.

Next, we must seek this knowledge at its authentic source, and that is the Church.

Finally, and above all, we must give ourselves over to prayer.


It is not enough for the priest to speak and write: the faithful must also attend to him with a genuine desire to learn.

“My son,” says the prophet, “lean not upon thine own prudence…seek wisdom…take hold on instruction, leave it not: keep it, because it is thy life…O men, it is to you that I say; hearken to me, for I have wondrous things to tell.” Thus he exhorts the faithful to pay heed to his words and gives himself as an example: “I desired wisdom and it was given to me; I have loved it and sought it from my youth.”

Let us beware of stifling in ourselves, and especially in the souls of our children, this desire to know and love God which is within every human being. As St. Augustine puts it, “Thou, O Lord, hast made us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find their rest in Thee.” “As the heart panteth after the fountains of water” where it may slake its thirst, let us go, thirsting to the fount of wisdom.

All knowledge and all wisdom come from Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Splendor of the Eternal Father. It is of Him that the Old Testament speaks when it says: “Come over to me, all ye that desire me, and be filled with my fruits; he that harkeneth to me shall not be confounded…” and He Himself has said: “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them life everlasting…He that receiveth Me receiveth Him that sent Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me…” The college of Apostles, with St. Peter at its head, is the Church, and the Church continues to speak by the mouths of its bishops and its priests. So he who would come to the knowledge of God must heed the priest, who teaches in the name of the Church.

Now, the priest teaches in many ways. On Sundays and Holy days, he preaches; in Lent he gives special courses of instruction, and in his conversation and when making pastoral visits he gives advice, refutes errors, and points out the way of truth. It is to be deplored that some of the faithful have, without reasonable cause, got into the habit of fulfilling their Sunday obligation by attending a Mass at which there is no sermon.

A priest also teaches by catechizing both children and adults. In this connection, parents must be mindful of their grave obligation to send their children to catechism, even in addition to their secular studies. Religious instruction is no less essential for children in state schools than for those attending Catholic establishments. It is one of the most vital of parental duties to do everything possible to supply whatever may be lacking in one’s children’s schooling.

It has been a source of great joy to see the dedicated laity offering to assist the Fathers in teaching catechism. I can assure them that their zeal is most pleasing to God and the Church, and that heaven will bless them for that.

Another way in which the Church teaches is through the printed word, whether in books, magazines, newspapers or other publications designed to nourish and enlighten the intellect and to inform it regarding the things of God.

The book par excellence for anyone wishing to know about God is, of course, the Holy Bible. His Holiness Pope Pius XII has written:
Quote:“Let the bishops lend their support to every initiative undertaken by zealous apostles with the laudable aim of promoting and nurturing among the faithful the knowledge and love the Holy Books. Let them therefore support and smooth the way for those pious associations whose purpose is to disseminate among the faithful copies of the Sacred Scriptures, especially the Gospels, and which encourage the devout reading of them each day in Christian families…as St. Jerome says, “Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ,” and “if there be one thing in this life which keeps a man virtuous, and convinces him to maintain the equanimity of his soul amid all the sufferings and torments of this world, I believe that thing to be the meditation and the knowledge of the Scriptures.”

With all my heart, I encourage you, the faithful, to adopt this excellent practice, recommended by Our Holy Father the Pope, of reading together as a family each day some passage from these inspired books.


Concluding Exhortation

Dearly beloved brethren, neglect nothing which can bring you to a greater knowledge of our holy religion, and of the Giver of all graces, Our Lord Jesus Christ.

What strength and consolation, what hope in trials and tribulations is this Christian faith of ours, which transports us to the realities of eternity even while we are yet here on earth! But our desire for the knowledge of God, our longing to draw from the wellsprings of Truth, must be accompanied by prayer, the prayer of the blind man on the road to Jericho.
When Jesus asked him what he wanted he replied, “Lord, that I may see.” Imagine how that poor blind man must have uttered those words: “That I may see” even though he was asking only for the sight of transitory things. May we take up these words with a persistence and a longing which will touch the merciful heart of God. Let us make an effort to pray with greater humility, with greater contrition. A humbled and contrite heart God will not despise, and so the light of wisdom and knowledge will rise upon our souls, a dawning of peace and benediction, until the full day of the Lord shall shine on them forever in the eternity of the Blessed.

[Emphasis - The Catacombs]

Print this item

  Lecture on the Modernist Infiltration in the Church
Posted by: Stone - 11-25-2020, 07:28 AM - Forum: Resources Online - Replies (1)

By Michael Davies:

Print this item

  November 25th
Posted by: Stone - 11-25-2020, 06:24 AM - Forum: November - Replies (1)

[Image: saint_catherine_of_alexandria.jpg]

Saint Catherine of Alexandria
Virgin, Martyr, Patroness of Students, Philosophers and Young Girls
(† Fourth Century)

Catherine was a noble virgin of Alexandria, born in the fourth century. Before her Baptism, she saw in a dream the Blessed Virgin asking Her Son to receive her among His servants, but the Divine Infant turned away, saying she was not yet regenerated by the waters of Baptism. She made haste to receive that sacrament, and afterwards, when the dream was repeated, Catherine saw that the Saviour received her with great affection, and espoused her before the court of heaven, with a fine ring. She woke with it on her finger.

She had a very active intelligence, fit for all matters, and she undertook the study of philosophy and theology. At that time there were schools in Alexandria for the instruction of Christians, where excellent Christian scholars taught. She made great progress and became able to sustain the truths of our religion against even very subtle sophists. At that time Maximinus II was sharing the empire with Constantine the Great and Licinius, and had as his district Egypt; and this cruel Christian-hater ordinarily resided in Alexandria, capital of the province. He announced a gigantic pagan sacrifice, such that the very air would be darkened with the smoke of the bulls and sheep immolated on the altars of the gods. Catherine before this event strove to strengthen the Christians against the fatal lures, repeating that the oracles vaunted by the infidels were pure illusion, originating in the depths of the lower regions.

She foresaw that soon it would be the Christians' turn to be immolated, when they refused to participate in the ceremonies. She therefore went to the emperor himself, asking to speak with him, and her singular beauty and majestic air won an audience for her. She said to him that it was a strange thing that he should by his example attract so many peoples to such an abominable cult. By his high office he was obliged to turn them away from it, since reason itself shows us that there can be only one sovereign Being, the first principle of all else. She begged him to cease so great a disorder by giving the true God the honor due Him, lest he reap the wages of his indifference in this life already, as well as in the next. The consequences of her hardy act extended over a certain time; he decided to call in fifty sophists of his suite, to bring back this virgin from her errors. A large audience assembled to hear the debate; the emperor sat on his throne with his entire court, dissimulating his rage.

Catherine began by saying she was surprised that he obliged her to face, alone, fifty individuals, but she asked the grace of him, that if the true God she adored rendered her victorious, he would adopt her religion and renounce the cult of the demons. He was not pleased and replied that it was not for her to lay down conditions for the discussion. The head of the sophists began the orations and reprimanded her for opposing the authority of poets, orators and philosophers, who unanimously had revered Jupiter, Juno, Neptune, Minerva and others. He cited their writings, and said she should consider that these persons were far anterior to this new religion she was following. She listened carefully before answering, then spoke, showing that the ridiculous fables which Homer, Orpheus and other poets had invented concerning their divinities, and the fact that many offered a cult to them, as well as the abominable crimes attributed to them, proved them to be gods only in the opinion of the untutored and credulous. And then she proved that the prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures had clearly announced the time and the circumstances of the life of the future Saviour, and that these were now fulfilled. Prodigy; the head of the sophists avowed that she was entirely correct and renounced his errors; the others said they could not oppose their chief. Maximinus had them put to death by fire, but the fire did not consume their remains. Thus they died as Christians, receiving the Baptism of blood.

The story of Saint Catherine continues during the time of the emperor's efforts to persuade her to marry him; he put to death his converted wife and the captain of his guards who had received Baptism with two hundred of his soldiers. He delivered Catherine up to prison and then to tortures as a result of her firmness in refusing his overtures. The famous wheel of Saint Catherine — in reality several interacting wheels — which he invented to torment her, was furnished with sharp razor blades and sharp points of iron; all who saw it trembled. But as soon as it was set in movement it was miraculously disjointed and broken into pieces, and these pieces flew in all directions and wounded the spectators. The barbaric emperor finally commanded that she be decapitated; and she offered her neck to the executioner, after praying that her mortal remains would be respected.

The story of Saint Catherine continues with the discovery of the intact body of a young and beautiful girl on Mount Sinai in the ninth century, that is, four centuries later. The Church, in the Collect of her feast day, bears witness to the transport of her body. A number of proofs testified to the identity of her mortal remains found in the region of the famous monastery existing on that mountain since the fifth century. Her head is today conserved in Rome.

Print this item

  November 24th
Posted by: Stone - 11-25-2020, 06:18 AM - Forum: November - Replies (1)

[Image: saint_john_of_the_cross.jpg]

Saint John of the Cross
Doctor of the Church
(1542-1591)

Saint John of the Cross was born near Avila in Spain. As a child, he was playing near a pond one day. He slid into the depths of the water, but came up unharmed and did not sink again. A tall and beautiful Lady came to offer him Her hand. No, said the child, You are too beautiful; my hand will dirty Yours. Then an elderly gentleman appeared on the shore and extended his staff to the child to bring him to shore. These two were Mary and Joseph. Another time he fell into a well, and it was expected he would be retrieved lifeless. But he was seated and waiting peacefully. A beautiful lady, he said, took me into Her cloak and sheltered me. Thus John grew up under the gaze of Mary.

One day he was praying Our Lord to make known his vocation to him, and an interior voice said to him: You will enter a religious Order, whose primitive fervor you will restore. He was twenty-one years old when he entered Carmel, and although he concealed his exceptional works, he outshone all his brethren. He dwelt in an obscure corner whose window opened upon the chapel, opposite the Most Blessed Sacrament. He wore around his waist an iron chain full of sharp points, and over it a tight vestment made of reeds joined by large knots. His disciplines were so cruel that his blood flowed in abundance. The priesthood only redoubled his desire for perfection. He thought of going to bury his existence in the Carthusian solitude, when Saint Teresa, whom God enlightened as to his merit, made him the confidant of her projects for the reform of Carmel and asked him to be her auxiliary.

John retired alone to a poor and inadequate dwelling and began a new kind of life, conformed with the primitive Rules of the Order of Carmel. Shortly afterwards two companions came to join him; the reform was founded. It was not without storms that it developed, for hell seemed to rage and labor against it, and if the people venerated John as a Saint, he had to accept, from those who should have seconded him, incredible persecutions, insults, calumnies, and even prison. When Our Lord told him He was pleased with him, and asked him what reward he wished, the humble religious replied: To suffer and to be scorned for You. His reform, though approved by the General of the Order, was rejected by the older friars, who condemned the Saint as a fugitive and an apostate and cast him into prison, from which he only escaped, after nine months' suffering, with the help of Heaven and at the risk of his life. He took refuge with the Carmelite nuns for a time, saying his experience in prison had been an extraordinary grace for him. Twice again, before his death, he was shamefully persecuted by his brethren, and publicly disgraced.

When he fell ill, he was given a choice of monasteries to which he might go; he chose the one governed by a religious whom he had once reprimanded and who could never pardon him for it. In effect, he was left untended most of the time, during his last illness. But at his death the room was filled with a marvelous light, and his unhappy Prior recognized his error, and that he had mistreated a Saint. After a first exhumation of his remains, they were found intact; many others followed, the last one in 1955. The body was at that time found to be entirely moist and flexible still.

Saint John wrote spiritual books of sublime elevation. A book printed in 1923 which has now become famous, authored by a Dominican theologian*, justly attributed to Saint John and to Saint Thomas Aquinas, whom the Carmelite Saint followed, the indisputable foundations for exact ascetic and mystical theology. He was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church in 1926 by Pope Pius XI.

Print this item

  Pray for Priests and for Souls long deprived ofthe Sacraments
Posted by: Stone - 11-24-2020, 07:44 AM - Forum: Appeals for Prayer - No Replies

Dear friends,

We know that many souls in the Resistance have been deprived of the Holy Mass and the Sacraments for some time now, all in the name of fear of the 'pandemic' of 2020 which has severely restricted the priests in being able to freely travel.

Please keep these souls - all over the world - in your daily prayers. They are suffering now what will surely be the lot of us all at some point in the future.

As a reminder, we are not the first Catholics to be deprived of the Mass and Sacraments - though I believe it has not happened on such a global scale as it is now.

This 'folder' contains many consoling words from priests over the last centuries on remaining true to our Faith without the aid of the Sacraments: When there is no Priest.

The fact that there are so few good, uncompromising priests left in this world adds to our sorrow. But let us pray earnestly for these happy few priests - that they receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost in abundance that they may in turn, guide us in the True Faith!

Our Lady of La Salette and Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.



[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...%3DApi&f=1]

Print this item