Pope Francis Blather vs. Clear and Transparent Teaching

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, defender of Doctrine and Sacred Tradition

Have you waded through any of the recent Vatican documents that appear under Pope Francis' name? Let's face it; Francis doesn't write them. But he employs some of the most blathering voices on the planet. I try to read the documents, but bang my head on the wall when I see Laudato Si's 246 paragraphs or the 325 paragraphs of Amoris Laetitia. (Poor Topsy and Tuptim get totally bogged down wading through them.) Of course there is the tyrannical and short Traditionis Custodes, only two pages with footnotes. The fall of the guillotine only takes a few seconds after all.

I thought of all this while I was working on a timeline about the SSPX events this morning. Reading and contrasting the 1974 Declaration of Archbishop Lefebvre with the documents coming out of the Vatican these days is like looking at a clear crystal brook as opposed to a fetid swamp. But I'll let you read the short Declaration to see for yourself. It's easy to read, easy to understand, and totally transparent. When you finish you know exactly what Archbishop Lefebvre believes and why he did what he did.

First a little history. The Archbishop wrote the Declaration following an apostolic visitation of the seminary in Econe by two modernists assigned by the Vatican. Here is how Michael Davies described it in his book, Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre:

The Apostolic visitation of the seminary at Econe took place from November 11-13, 1974. The two Visitors were both Belgians: Bishop Descamps, a biblical scholar, and Msgr. Onclin, a canonist. The Apostolic Visitation was carried out with great thoroughness. Professors and students were subjected to searching and detailed questions concerning every aspect of life in the seminary. However, considerable scandal was occasioned by opinions which the two Roman Visitors expressed in the presence of the students and staff. For, according to Archbishop Lefebvre, these two Visitors considered it normal and indeed inevitable that there should be a married clergy; they did not believe there was an immutable Truth; and they also had doubts concerning the traditional concept of Our Lord's Resurrection.

In response to these scandalous statements, Lefebvre issued the Declaration about a week later which is crystal clear. My comments in red.

1974 Declaration of Archbishop Lefebvre

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. [It's clear that Lefebvre had no intention of leaving the Catholic Church. He was rejecting the modernist views of those in Rome taking Holy Mother Church hostage and abusing her.]

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. [Anyone living through the insanity of the 70s and 80s with clown Masses, butterfly vestments, "hymns" that advanced heretical teachings, women all over the sanctuary, horrible catechetical books for children, etc. knows this is absolutely true.]

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. [Again -- Lefebvre had no intention of leaving the Church. He recognized the hostile takeover by her enemies.]

“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. [Read Goodbye Good Men and recall the reality of seminaries riddled with homosexuality and gatekeepers to keep out orthodox aspirants to the priesthood.]

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. [I would use the word "revolution" which is exactly what it was and continues to be. The revolution has escalated with the Orwellian move of filling the Pontifical Academy for Life with death peddlers.]

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. [Eternal Rome is truly a dark place these days with holograms projected on the Vatican and scandalous nativity scenes.]

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

________________________________________________

Let me reiterate once again. The SSPX is not in schism. Marcel Lefebvre had no intention of leaving the Catholic Church. The priests of the SSPX have faculties. You don't give faculties to priests who are in schism. The SSPX is in an irregular situation but have not left the barque of Peter. Now the question. If the Synod on Synodality results in one more Motu Proprio declaring that homosexuality is normal and good and calling for the recognition and blessing of same-sex unions, will the bishops go along like bobble head dolls? We know that some will likely rejoice: Cupich, McElroy, Farrell, Paglia, Coccopalmerio, etc. What about the rest? Archbishop Lefebvre recognized the crisis early on. Many are still wearing blinders. Meanwhile, souls are being lost. 

Lord Jesus, save us from the Church wreckers. If necessary, send the asteroid!