"Archbishop Lefebvre held a sedevacantist position." Mgr. Lefebvre drew up for the attention of Catholics a balance of the council's work which was clearly positive, basing it largely on the discourse …More
"Archbishop Lefebvre held a sedevacantist position."
Mgr. Lefebvre drew up for the attention of Catholics a balance of the council's work which was clearly positive, basing it largely on the discourse given by Paul VI at the closure of the second session. As well as being a bad analysis of the facts, we must undoubtedly see in this an expression of great confidence in the pope: "We are living at a time when the supernatural, when the action of the Holy Spirit is visible, tangible. Question the observers at the council they have no terms expressive enough to congratulate us and to envy our having a Bishop to whom has been given supreme power over the Church, a Bishop to turn towards when doubt or darkness crushes us and in whom we are assured of having the Light." [April 20, 1976 International Catholic Associations]
He never ceased from dodging the question which every faithful Catholic was asking: Is Paul VI the pope? He avoided it by putting forward a solution which opposed Tradition to the living Magisterium: "We applaud the Pope, echo of Tradition and faithful to the transmission of the deposit of Faith. We accept those novelties which are in close conformity with Tradition and the Faith. We do not consider ourselves bound by obedience to those novelties which go against Tradition and threaten our Faith." [Lettre aux amis et bienfaiteurs, No 9, 3 Sep 1975] Though he did not make it an absolute rule, this theory, Protestant in inspiration, became the foundation of Mgr. Lefebvre's line of conduct. In practice, he continued to say that he was in communion with the conciliar hierarchy and to dialogue with it, but he daily disregarded its authority. This showed itself particularly in a number of canonical irregularities. The Fraternity of St. Pius X set up its priories practically everywhere without the slightest regard to the jurisdiction of the local "bishop".
On 11th September "the rebellious bishop" knelt at Paul VI's feet and asked him for permission to make the experiment of Tradition: "You have only to say the word." At the end of the interview he marveled that this meeting could have been arranged in two days and declared: "Perhaps they have realized that I am not alone; they have taken account of the fact that almost 52% of French Catholics share my point of view. Perhaps they fear the disastrous consequences of a rupture." [Le Monde 14 November 1976] In fact Paul VI and the hierarchs of the new church, for whom it was difficult to excommunicate a faithful bishop without giving proof of their own apostasy, neutralized him by dialogue. And Mgr. Lefebvre entered all the more easily into their game since his refusal to go to the root of the problem predisposed him to do so. Each found in it what he wanted. For conciliar Rome the matter of Ecône was in reality at an end. As for Mgr. Lefebvre, the dialogue allowed him to safeguard his work to which he is attached above all else.
Mgr. Lefebvre met John Paul II on 16th December 1978. After the interview, he gave voice to considerable reservations. With extraordinary freedom of language he spoke of the man he recognized as the legitimate successor of Peter: "I think I am able to say that he appears to be fundamentally in agreement with the council and its reforms; I do not think that he questions it. This is clearly very serious because he is in favor of ecumenism, in favor of collegiality and in favor of religious liberty." [Cor Unum, October 1979] However, he still wrote to John Paul II on 24th December asking to be recognized and reintegrated with the conciliar church: "Most Holy Father, we beg you to say one single word ... 'Leave them alone': 'we authorize the free use of what Tradition through the centuries has used for the sanctification of souls'. What difficulty does this attitude present? None."
Everyone knows that Mgr. Lefebvre has been compared to St. Athanasius. He has himself quoted the saint to justify his own behavior. [Written answer to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 13 Jan 1979] But if St. Athanasius had contented himself with the formation of priests, leaving aside the promises made to the Church by Our Lord, the world would now be Arian.
Mgr. Lefebvre drew up for the attention of Catholics a balance of the council's work which was clearly positive, basing it largely on the discourse given by Paul VI at the closure of the second session. As well as being a bad analysis of the facts, we must undoubtedly see in this an expression of great confidence in the pope: "We are living at a time when the supernatural, when the action of the Holy Spirit is visible, tangible. Question the observers at the council they have no terms expressive enough to congratulate us and to envy our having a Bishop to whom has been given supreme power over the Church, a Bishop to turn towards when doubt or darkness crushes us and in whom we are assured of having the Light." [April 20, 1976 International Catholic Associations]
He never ceased from dodging the question which every faithful Catholic was asking: Is Paul VI the pope? He avoided it by putting forward a solution which opposed Tradition to the living Magisterium: "We applaud the Pope, echo of Tradition and faithful to the transmission of the deposit of Faith. We accept those novelties which are in close conformity with Tradition and the Faith. We do not consider ourselves bound by obedience to those novelties which go against Tradition and threaten our Faith." [Lettre aux amis et bienfaiteurs, No 9, 3 Sep 1975] Though he did not make it an absolute rule, this theory, Protestant in inspiration, became the foundation of Mgr. Lefebvre's line of conduct. In practice, he continued to say that he was in communion with the conciliar hierarchy and to dialogue with it, but he daily disregarded its authority. This showed itself particularly in a number of canonical irregularities. The Fraternity of St. Pius X set up its priories practically everywhere without the slightest regard to the jurisdiction of the local "bishop".
On 11th September "the rebellious bishop" knelt at Paul VI's feet and asked him for permission to make the experiment of Tradition: "You have only to say the word." At the end of the interview he marveled that this meeting could have been arranged in two days and declared: "Perhaps they have realized that I am not alone; they have taken account of the fact that almost 52% of French Catholics share my point of view. Perhaps they fear the disastrous consequences of a rupture." [Le Monde 14 November 1976] In fact Paul VI and the hierarchs of the new church, for whom it was difficult to excommunicate a faithful bishop without giving proof of their own apostasy, neutralized him by dialogue. And Mgr. Lefebvre entered all the more easily into their game since his refusal to go to the root of the problem predisposed him to do so. Each found in it what he wanted. For conciliar Rome the matter of Ecône was in reality at an end. As for Mgr. Lefebvre, the dialogue allowed him to safeguard his work to which he is attached above all else.
Mgr. Lefebvre met John Paul II on 16th December 1978. After the interview, he gave voice to considerable reservations. With extraordinary freedom of language he spoke of the man he recognized as the legitimate successor of Peter: "I think I am able to say that he appears to be fundamentally in agreement with the council and its reforms; I do not think that he questions it. This is clearly very serious because he is in favor of ecumenism, in favor of collegiality and in favor of religious liberty." [Cor Unum, October 1979] However, he still wrote to John Paul II on 24th December asking to be recognized and reintegrated with the conciliar church: "Most Holy Father, we beg you to say one single word ... 'Leave them alone': 'we authorize the free use of what Tradition through the centuries has used for the sanctification of souls'. What difficulty does this attitude present? None."
Everyone knows that Mgr. Lefebvre has been compared to St. Athanasius. He has himself quoted the saint to justify his own behavior. [Written answer to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 13 Jan 1979] But if St. Athanasius had contented himself with the formation of priests, leaving aside the promises made to the Church by Our Lord, the world would now be Arian.