Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to rorate-caeli.blogspot.com

Rorate Caeli
Showing posts with label Lefebvre. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lefebvre. Show all posts

Heard in the SSPX Priories: A Consecration of New Bishops for the SSPX is coming, sooner rather than later

 We can't add much more right now, but talk is growing.


The SSPX leadership will obviously request Rome's approval, as Abp. Lefebvre himself requested in 1987/1988 (with unclear, then clear, results...), but what exactly will unfold is unclear at the moment.


We'll have more to add soon.

TRENT, Italy, June, 1979, Address by Abp. Lefebvre: “The Second Vatican Council: what would the Fathers of the Council of Trent have to say about it?” An exclusive translation.

 


Introductory remarks from the translator

This is an excerpt from a long article in “La Tradizione Cattolica”( Year XXXIV – n°2 (124) – 2023).  It is the transcript of an address the Archbishop gave in Trent on June 17th  1979.  It was difficult to translate because as the Archbishop himself says in his introductory remarks: ‘First of all, please excuse my Italian, as I do not have complete command of the language,  but I think it will be easier to speak [ directly] to you myself – even if I make mistakes -  rather than have someone translate  for me.’


I believe this is one of the reasons that this particular speech has not been translated into English [ it may be in a book in English – but I couldn’t find a trace of it online]– as the Archbishop is not speaking from a prepared speech – but speaks from the heart - ‘off the cuff.’  So the Italian is repetitive, colloquial and delightfully to the point, without a trace of malice.  The Archbishop speaks with the piercing sincerity of a man of God who loves Holy Mother Church – and is not afraid to call ‘a spade a spade’ when he speaks of how the Church [i.e. the administration of the visible institution] has been taken over by men who are devoid of the Catholic Faith.  (‘They are really not good Catholics.  They are really not true Churchmen’).  He even names the men bent on the demolition of the Church (as a visible institution).  And this is in 1979 – who  knows what he’d say now. 



 

Resistance is never futile: An interview with Christian Marquant, founder of Paix Liturgique

We are pleased to present the text of an interview we recently conducted with Monsieur Christian Marquant of Paix Liturgique (“Liturgical Peace”). He belongs to the generation of extraordinary people who, as young men, acted decisively when their elders shrank from doing so: they resisted the imposition of liturgical novelty upon the people of God. Here, for the first time online, Christian recounts his adventures and misadventures from the mid-1960s to the present—above all, the establishment and work of Paix Liturgique, a multilingual, data-driven enterprise for the restoration of the usus antiquior all around the world. We are grateful for the many historic photos Mr. Marquant shared with us, most of which appear here for the first time. Dr. John Pepino kindly translated the interview from French into English.

 

Christian Marquant, Summorum Pontificum Conference, October 2020, Rome

The “Long March” of Paix Liturgique


Rorate Caeli: Dear Christian, you are the man who orchestrates Oremus-Paix Liturgique. Could you tell us about this movements and its activities?

 

Christian Marquant: It would hard to tell you what we are today without telling you at least some of our history as Catholic activists. It all began in the mid-1960s.

Lefebvre: I have passed on what I received

 A new monument to the late Marcel Lefebvre.




EXPOSÉ: New Interview with Fr. Charles Murr on Mother Pascalina, Bugnini, Paul VI, and Other Major Figures


Preliminary Note: For decades, traditionalists have suspected or accused Annibale Bugnini of being a Freemason, based essentially on hearsay and circumstantial evidence. The matter remained doubtful to such an extent that the eminent French historian Yves Chiron, himself a traditionalist, was unable to credit the rumor, judging the evidence inadequate and inconclusive. The situation began to change last May when Kevin Symonds presented credible details, courtesy of Fr. Brian Harrison, naming Cardinal Dino Staffa as the one who brought Paul VI the "smoking gun" information on Bugnini, which precipitated the latter's sudden fall from grace. 

It is therefore of major significance that more and better evidence — in the form of an interview conducted by Kevin Symonds with Fr. Charles Theodore Murr, author of The Godmother: Mother Pascalina: A Feminine Tour de Force (2017) — has now appeared that independently confirms the same sequence of events. With such confirmatory proofs, it is fair to say that there is no longer any reasonable doubt that the moving force in the Consilium was, indeed, a Freemason. 

New Edition of Davies’s Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre

This post has a very simple purpose: to alert Rorate readers that Angelus Press has brought out a new and very handsome edition, in three matching hardcover volumes, of the critically important work by Michael Davies entitled Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre. 


The first volume, published in 1979, recounts the years from 1905-1976, providing a comprehensive collection of source materials essential for serious research on the Archbishop. The words of Davies in his introduction have lost nothing of their timeliness:

Count Neri Capponi, Defender of the Traditional Mass, Requiescat in pace

Count Neri Capponi (left) with Michael Davies at a FIUV meeting

A dear friend and reader of Rorate Caeli alerted us to the fact that a great traditionalist of the 20th century, Count Neri Capponi, died yesterday, on the feast of St. Lucy. Requiem aeternam dona ei, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat ei. Requiescat in pace.

Lefebvre & 1988 Consecrations 30 years on: Part III (May-June 1988)


Part I: July 1987 - February 1988
Part II: March 1988 - May 5, 1988

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), received in the Fraternity House at Albano Laziale (near Castel Gandolfo) the final text of the Protocol which was sent to him by Cardinal Ratzinger. It was 4:30 PM as the old bishop signed the text. His most extensive biographer, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais (one of the chief negotiators in that afternoon and who would be consecrated on June 30), described the scene:

His face perfectly expresse[d] the mixed feelings which gripped him: "real satisfaction," as he would write to Ratzinger, and silent mistrust which he spoke of to the sisters in the Cenacolo convent [of the Discepole del Cenacolo, in Velletri, near Albano] at 3 PM: "If Don Putti [Fr. Francesco-Maria Putti, a Traditional Roman priest and spiritual son of Padre Pio, who guided and formed the sisters until his death in 1984] were here, what would he say? 'Your Grace, where are you going? What are you doing?' "
The Archbishop did not sleep during what must have felt like one of the longest nights of his life. The following morning, after Mass and Prime, he sent a letter to Cardinal with an ultimatum of his own: the deadline of June 30, 1988, mentioned in one of his previous letters exchanged in the negotiations was still valid. The text of that letter was:

Yesterday it was with real satisfaction that I put my signature on the Protocol drafted during the preceding days. However, you yourself have witnessed my deep disappointment upon the reading of the letter, which you gave me, bringing the Holy Father's answer concerning the episcopal consecrations.

Practically, to postpone the episcopal consecrations to a later undetermined date would be the fourth time that it would have been postponed. The date of June 30 was clearly indicated in my previous letters as the latest possible.

I have already given you a file concerning the candidates. There are still two months to make the mandate.

Given the particular circumstances of this proposal, the Holy Father can very well shorten the procedure so that the mandate be communicated to us around mid-June.

In case the answer will be negative, I would find myself in conscience obliged to proceed with the consecrations, relying upon the agreement given by the Holy See in the Protocol for the consecration of one bishop, member of the Society.

The reticence expressed on the subject of the episcopal consecration of a member of the Society, either by writing or by word of mouth, gives me reason to fear delays. Everything is now prepared for the ceremony of June 30: hotel reservations, transportation, rental of a huge tent to house the ceremony.

The disappointment of our priests and faithful would be extreme. All of them hope that this consecration will be realized with the agreement of the Holy See; but being already disappointed by previous delays they will not understand that I would accept a further delay. They are aware and desirous above all of having truly Catholic bishops transmitting the true Faith to them, and communicating to them in a way that is certain the graces of salvation to which they aspire for themselves and for their children.

In the hope that this request shall not be an insurmountable obstacle to the reconciliation in process, please, Eminence, accept my respectful and fraternal sentiments in Christo et Maria.

+Marcel Lefebvre
Upon receiving the letter, Cardinal Ratzinger immediately canceled the publication of the communiqué which had been prepared - which explains the scarce report by the secular media of what was taking place. Ratzinger first wrote a note to Lefebvre, asking him to "reconsider his position".

Lefebvre & 1988 Consecrations 30 years on: Part II (March-May 1988)


By the end of March 1988, the rumors regarding a possible reconciliation of the movement led by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Pope John Paul II reached feverish levels in Rome and around the world.

In early April, after nine months of talks, the Pope publicly charged the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, to negotiate the terms of reconciliation. As The New York Times reported on April 9:

Pope John Paul II today personally stepped into a dispute with one of his severest critics, urging Vatican officials to heal a rift with the ultraconservative Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre of France.

Six months after the Vatican began negotiations aimed at reinstating the rebel Archbishop, John Paul issued an unusual public statement voicing ''my desire that these efforts should continue.'' The statement was in the form of a letter to Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who is in charge of the talks.

The letter displayed the public will of the Pope to reach an agreement with Archbishop Lefebvre:

The necessity to distinguish that which authentically "edifies" the Church from what destroys it becomes, in this period [after the Council] a particular need of our service regarding the whole community of the faithful.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has, in the field of this ministry, a key role, as the documents on matters of faith and morals which your Dicastery has published in the last few years have been showing. Among the themes of which the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has had to deal in recent times are included the problems related to the "Fraternité of Pius X", founded and guided by Archbishop M. Lefebvre.

Lefebvre and the 1988 Consecrations 30 years on: Reliving the Events of 1988
Part I


The agitation in the Vatican halls had begun in early July, 1987, as reports arrived of the clear words of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in his sermon in the Mass of priestly ordinations celebrated in Ecône on July 29, 1987. The first reference was to the Assisi meeting of religious leaders a few months earlier - a historical event which to this day still mesmerizes Traditional Catholics. Lefebvre declared:

Never has history seen the Pope turning himself into some kind of guardian of the pantheon of all religions, as I have brought it to mind, making himself the pontiff of liberalism.

Let anyone tell me whether such a situation has ever existed in the Church. What should we do in the face of such a reality? Weep, without a doubt. Oh, we mourn and our heart is broken and sorrowful. We would give our life, our blood, for the situation to change. But the situation is such, the work which the Good Lord has put into our hands is such, that in face of this darkness of Rome, this stubbornness of the Roman authorities in their error, this refusal to return to the Truth and to Tradition, it seems to me that the Good Lord is asking that the Church continue. This is why it is likely that I should, before rendering an account of my life to the Good Lord, perform some episcopal consecrations.

Secret negotiations ensued. The October 18, 1987 edition of the New York Times included the great piece of Vatican news of the previous day:

Don't whitewash history: Paul VI was front and center the creator of the New Mass of Paul VI


Sandro Magister, the great Vaticanist of our age, has an article today with important excerpts from a biography of Paul VI in which it is claimed that he was almost a victim of the liturgical revolution, a bystander who had almost no control over what Bugnini did at the Consilium for the application of the liturgical reform.

Sorry, we don't buy that.

Saying Paul VI had little responsibility for the New Mass of Paul VI is like saying Louis XIV had no responsibility for Versailles, since he was not a mason and didn't actually build it with his hands.

Give us a break! Paul VI was the driving force of the liturgical reform. He was front and center the man responsible for it. Of course he was queasy about it: He was the executioner responsible for taking the traditional Roman liturgy to the scaffold, and even executioners feel queasy about doing their job.

All this whitewashing of history is taking place just because of the absurd canonization of Paul VI, which has been steamrolled against the sentiment of the faithful, who never had any devotion for this lousy pope and his disastrous pontificate. In order to implement his liturgical revolution, he led the persecution of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who only wanted to preserve the minimum of Tradition.

It is Lefebvre who should be canonized, not his persecutor.

De Mattei - An example of Catholic resistance: Princess Elvina Pallavicini

Roberto de Mattei
Corrispondenza Romana
July 12, 2017


Forty years ago a historical event took place: Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre held a conference on June 6th 1977 at the Pallavicini Palace in Rome, on the subject “The Church after the Council”. I  think it is worthwhile to recall that event, on the basis of notes and documents I have kept.
           
Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X (1970), after the priestly ordinations of June 29th 1976, was suspended a divinis on July 22nd of the same year.  Informed Catholics however, had serious doubts as to the canonical legitimacy of these measures and in particular, incomprehension with regard to the behavior of Paul VI who seemed to reserve his censorships for only those who said they wanted to remain faithful to Church Tradition.  In this climate of disorientation, in April of 1977, Princess Elvina Pallavicini (1914 -2004) decided to invite Monsignor Lefebvre to her palace in the Quirinal, to hear his reasoning.

Princess Pallavicini was 63 years old at the time and the widow of Prince Guglielmo Pallavicini who had been killed on his first war mission in 1940.  For many years she had been in a wheelchair as a result of progressive paralysis, but she was a woman of indomitable spirit. She had a close group of  friends and advisors around her, among whom were Marquis Roberto Malvezzi Campeggi (1907-1979), Colonel of the Papal Noble Guard at the time of the corps’ dissolution in 1970, and Marquis Luigi Coda Nunziante di San Ferdinando (1930-2015), former Commander of the Italian Navy. Initially, news of the conference circulating during the month of May did not stir up any concern from the Vatican.  Paul VI thought it would have been easy to convince the Princess to desist from her idea and entrusted the task to one of his closest collaborators, “Don Sergio” Pignedoli (1910-1980) whom he had made a cardinal in 1973. 

Conciliar Possession

By Don Denis Puga, FSSPX
Le Chardonnet
June, 2017

Father Denis Puga is the new parish priest at the FSSPX Church of Saint-Nicolas du Chardonnet  in Paris, which publishes the newsletter of the same name.

Shortly before undergoing His terrible Passion, Our Lord solemnly warned His disciples: “Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat” (Luke, 22, 31). This warning is also for us today, as the Church, following Her Master, is undergoing a terrible crucifixion. Our Church has been abandoned and betrayed.  Our Church has been taken over.

The prudence of a combatant requires that he must never underestimate his adversary. St. Paul tells us that our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the princes of darkness. Our adversary? The Demon himself, the Prince of this world, as Jesus was to point out often with great precision. 

We cannot sanctify ourselves outside the present concrete situation of the Holy Catholic Church, the Ark of Salvation which, alone, can lead us safe and sound onto the shores of eternal life.

Now, this Church – we have to acknowledge  is in a catastrophic state, like “a boat leaking water in every side” according to a recent Pope despite the fact the he himself, in his lifetime, contributed  in causing many of the leaks. 

Bishop Schneider: "I have asked Msgr. Fellay not to delay his acceptance any longer"

“The movement to restore the traditional Mass is the work of the Holy Spirit, and is unstoppable”

Our partners at Adelante La Fe (Rorate in Spanish) today published an exclusive interview with His Excellency Bishop Athanasius Schneider. The answers he gives are very blunt and bold -- even for the great bishop. It's pretty clear even by just skimming his answers that he believes the time has come for the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). 


HEADLINES

“There are many places where priests act more like Protestant ministers than Catholic priests”

“There are families that must travel more than 100 km (60 mi) so that they can go to a dignified Mass and hear sound doctrine”

“The faithful must ask the priests for kneelers so that they can kneel”

“We have a eucharistic-heart disease, and as long as we fail to heal it, the whole body will remain ill and will not produce fruit”

“In today’s climate, it’s a true miracle that we have vocations”

“Gender ideology is a depravity, a final form of Marxism”

“If they can, parents should withdraw their children from schools where they are taught gender ideology”

Another Blockbuster Article from Neil McCaffrey in 1977 -- Just Substitute "Francis" for "Paul VI"

With all the commentary on the current Synod (as well as the always-effervescent discussions of the SSPX), we can sometimes forget how deep are the roots of our present crisis. We've been here before; we are seeing the working-out of that which was long in place. 

This article was originally written in 1977, prior to the suspension of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The author of this piece was neither a member of the SSPX nor a partisan. But he did know the Church inside-out, and knew something of Catholic history and politics. If the reader subtitutes "Francis" for "Paul VI," he will see the eerie parallels on every level.

Rorate Caeli thanks Roger McCaffrey of Roman Catholic Books for allowing us to publish this daring and perceptive essay, which will also appear in the next print issue of The Traditionalist, due out in November. (Any inquiries regarding the magazine may be directed to [email protected].)


Archbishop Lefebvre, Pope Paul VI, and Catholic Tradition

by Neil McCaffrey

"The Catholic Church in Crisis"
- a 1978 essay by Fr. Louis Bouyer

The Catholic Church in Crisis

LOUIS BOUYER [1]

Translation © COPYRIGHT 2015
 John M. Pepino


What has come to be called “the Lefebvre affair” deserves a close investigation. At first glance, one may think that it reveals only the somewhat strange mentality, a ghetto mentality, of Catholics who are incapable of coming out of their isolation, of their life within a closed community in a safeguarded dream.  In reality, once one examines it seriously, it reveals a deep malaise in French Catholicism and, therefore, in French society as a whole. And it would be a mistake to believe that this malaise is a recent one: it goes back a long way and its symptoms will never be healed so long as we refuse to go back to its sources. And still there would be more to say. It could never have developed, branched out, and lastly grown such monstrous and grotesque buds, had modern Catholicism’s most characteristic trait not come about, namely: a phenomenal, and not altogether healthy, development of the papacy. And here again what is at stake is the whole evolution of French society and, more generally, of that Western society which was long synonymous with “Christendom.” If such is the case, it won’t be a waste of time to push our analysis of the “Lefebvrist” phenomenon further than is usually done.

I

First of all, who is Archbishop Lefebvre, and what exactly has he done to provoke such reactions in and around the Church of France? Is he not himself a typical reactionary who blurs, as is only to be expected, clerical reaction with political and social reaction? One could doubtless find many of his own words to provide an apparently ample justification for this simplistic description. But the actual facts are far from being as simple as they seem. Let us first note that Archbishop Lefebvre belongs to one of the greatest French missionary families: the Congregation of the Holy Ghost Fathers, whose superior general he was for a time. In that capacity he was for a long period the Archbishop of Dakar, and manifestly enjoyed full confidence on the part of the Holy See, which had made him its Apostolic Delegate for that entire region of Black Africa. Note carefully that at the time we were right at the end of the so-called “colonial” period, when the Church—for once!—was ahead of an inevitable politico-social process, decolonization, as she Africanized mission territories like that entrusted to Archbishop Lefebvre as quickly and as widely as possible. Now it is a matter of fact that he behaved in such an open and generous manner that all the African bishops, many of whom he had appointed himself, have remained to the bitter end his firmest defenders before the Holy See.  The Holy See’s delay in taking its well-known action against his post-conciliar activity—which action the French episcopate had been awaiting with understandable impatience—is principally due to these African bishops’ indefectible loyalty. This is all the more remarkable that, quite frankly, the same bishops hardly exhibit any comparable warmth towards his colleagues in France as a whole, and this despite the latters’ principled liberalism or progressivism. This was bluntly revealed in a particularly awkward scene that poor Cardinal Marty had to endure in Rome at the end of a synod of bishops where the Africans had generally voted to get the French off the permanent synodal organs.[2]

    
        Actually Archbishop Lefebvre, by virtue of his family background, belongs to the Northern French sort of Catholicism that formed generations of sincerely and deeply “social” employers without whose support Catholic Action generally, and the Jeunesse ouvrière catholique specifically,[3] would never have developed as extraordinarily as they did in our country between the two wars. You may call this “social Catholicism” paternalistic, but you’ll have to admit that it is a peculiar sort of paternalism that can encourage, or even to a large degree finance, such initiatives. The popularity that Cardinal Liénart long enjoyed among the genuinely working class of the North (where, for his part, he had stayed) as well as that which Archbishop Lefebvre stills enjoys in so-called “liberated” Africa is proof enough that one cannot be satisfied with sticking people into ready-made pigeon holes. Pigeon hole for pigeon hole and at the risk of scandalizing some people, I would say that  Archbishop Lefebvre’s Catholicism is basically in the tradition of Péguy,[4] which may explain his surprising success among the most popular social classes of France just as well as, if not more than, among more or less well-off circles. By this I first mean a Catholicism characterized, or even perfectly expressed, by that veneration of Joan of Arc “the good Lorraine girl,” “the saint of the homeland,” that so strikingly typified 1930s French Catholicism. It was a veneration that seemed even to eclipse that rendered to the Virgin, though not perhaps that of “Lourdes” (“Be Queen amongst us!” and so forth). In this Catholicism, “the Good Lord” was more or less identical with the Sacred Heart stamped on the blue-white-and-red flags that fluttered about Joan’s statue in the rue des Pyramides. Action Française,[5] of course, handily took hold of it, but it also got along well with a certain “1848” kind of socialism;[6] it was deeply popular but for all that also authoritarian and regimented—it came close to the satirical spoof by Muller and Reboux’s famous Cahiers: “ . . .  A yearly subscription gets you military honors; a two-year subscription gets you eternal salvation!”

Video Suggestion: "Archbishop Lefebvre - A Documentary" online

From a reader:

Many are aware of the role of French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre as the consecrator of bishops in the events that took place in Écône, Switzerland, on June 30, 1988, in a climate of extreme tension with the Holy See. What is less well known is his work as the most important character of the Church in the continent where its growth is truly explosive in our age -- Africa -- in the crucial decades of deconolization, and that he set in place around forty dioceses in the continent, before being a leading figure during the Second Vatican Council.

10 years without Michael Davies:
II- The Extraordinary Life and Times of Michael Davies, Latin Mass Hero
- and a list of his works


Michael Davies – “A Writer to Cherish”
Leo Darroch*
Michael Treharne Davies was born on 13th March 1936.  His father, a Welshman, was a Baptist and his mother, who was English, was a member of the Church of England. On leaving school in 1954 at the age of eighteen he joined the British Army as a regular soldier and served in Malaya, Egypt, and Cyprus. There is one comment in his army service records that is of particular interest.  In August 1957 his commanding officer stated that,