December
2003
Dear
Faithful,
Unfortunately I have sad news to end the year. Some of you
may have seen it on the Internet. Indeed Father Aulagnier,
one of Archbishop Lefebvre’s first and closest companion
in the resistance, assistant to the Superior General, founding
district superior of the French district had to be expelled
from the Society. Last September we were saddened by the interview
of Father Aulagnier to the Wanderer. At first I thought of
replying earlier but then decided to wait to see how this
affair would end. This interview, along with an extended article
published in French on his website as well as in a French
daily newspaper proved to be the last straw.
For
a long time now, since 1998, he had publicly and virulently
opposed the Society’s stand regarding negotiations with
Rome. As well he disobeyed our constitutions and repeatedly
disobeyed Bishop Fellay’s explicit orders thus giving
a bad example. He had also created a very difficult situation
within the Society trying to sway its members in pursuing
an accord with Rome thus trying to cause division and even
rebellion against the legitimate authority. The problem was
not that he had contrary opinions but that he was airing them
in public and trying to undermine the Superior General and
the Society. This state of affairs had lasted long enough.
Because it was Father Aulagnier and the respect he commanded
in the Society, Bishop Fellay and the General Council were
very patient but sometimes, even patience can be a fault.
After reading Father Aulagnier’s interview a few questions
come to mind: why grant an interview to a newspaper, which
is clearly against the SSPX? Are birds of a feather starting
to flock together? Secondly Father Aulagnier seems to imply
that those who disagree with his opinion and agree with the
Superior General and the majority of SSPX members regarding
the so-called reconciliation are “yes men”. This
is not only insulting it is ludicrous. On the contrary as
we will see, the SSPX’s present stand would seem more
faithful to the Archbishop.
Now
I have not read Father Aulagnier’s French articles I’ve
only read the interview in the Wanderer. According to this
article, I think we can summarize Father Aulagnier’s
arguments in favor of a “reconciliation” in the
following: 1. The danger of schism. 2. His friendship with
the “heroic” priests of Campos. 3. “The
attitude of Rome is new.” 4. “Additionally I think
that there is a danger in seeing this conflict last for ages.”
Let us consider these points.
1. The danger of schism.
Our
resistance is not rebellion. It is the necessary attitude
of Catholics who want to keep the faith when faced with prelates
who attack, deny or threaten it. We do not want to become
Protestants! We continue to believe in the divinity of Our
Lord and His social Kingship, His Church. The fact that we
keep the faith and we continue to speak with the Roman authorities
shows there is no danger of schism because we still recognize
their authority. Dispensations and other ecclesiastical permissions
have been sought and received from the Roman authorities.
What is in question is not their authority but whether we
can trust them or not. It is not just a matter of having a
majority in a Roman commission. It is a matter of can we put
ourselves under them and trust them to protect our Faith?
Unfortunately the present Roman authorities have proven over
and over they cannot be trusted, that they have not changed
as we will point out later on.
The
solution to this crisis will come from Rome when the Roman
authorities come back to the integrity of the Faith. But until
then we do well to continue our resistance. How long this
will
take is not our problem but God’s. But we cannot for
the sake of a fake unity join those who promote errors, who
reduce the Church to a human institution, or simply one religion
among others thus destroying it. So we continue Tradition
and continue to denounce those who reject it in the name of
a new conciliar church. As Archbishop Lefebvre said: by cutting
themselves off from the previous popes, the modern Roman authorities
are the ones who are schismatic. When Rome returns to the
Faith the only matter for discussion will be who will become
a bishop and who will he replace?
2.
His friendship with the “heroic” priests of Campos.
Friendship is indeed a noble sentiment. But does it come before
one’s duty or before one’s Faith. Further, I simply
ask the question: Does it take heroic virtue to capitulate
in the fight for Tradition in order to obtain recognition?
Did it take heroic virtue to renounce their spiritual father,
Bishop de Castro Mayer, to abandon and turn against their
former comrades in arms? I don’t think so. Is Father
Aulagnier also on the verge of choosing between the pre-Vatican
II and the post-Vatican II Archbishop Lefebvre? As if there
was a difference.
3. The attitude of Rome is new
This is the most unbelievable reason of all. Where has Father
Aulagnier been for the past 5 years? Have the modern Roman
authorities really changed? Has he forgotten what they have
done to the Fraternity of St Peter, which is their own creation?
Has he forgotten about the two sacrilegious prayer meetings
of Assisi? The last one took place a week after they granted
recognition to the “heroic” priests of Campos
who did not say a word about it. By the way, hasn’t
he noticed how quiet the “heroic” priests of Campos
are since they signed their agreement? Doesn’t he know
that on May 24 2003, at the same time as Cardinal Castrillon
Hoyos was offering the traditional Mass in St Mary Major,
the Pope was giving the Catholic church of Saints Vincent
and Anastasius, which contains the embalmed hearts of 22 popes,
to the Bulgarian Orthodox to share? Some change!
He seems to have forgotten what Archbishop Lefebvre knew well
and denounced: there are two Romes: Catholic Rome and the
neo-modernist Rome. As did Archbishop Lefebvre, we adhere
with our whole heart to Catholic Rome but reject the neo-modernist
Rome. Catholic Rome has been infiltrated and is occupied by
Modernists. This is a fact. The proclamation by Cardinal Castrillon
that “The old Roman rite thus conserves in the Church
its right of citizenship” is nice but changes nothing.
It is perfectly in line with the neo-modernist ecumenism of
the neo-modernist Romans, which is: Why not accept also the
Mass of St Pius V? We accept everything else.
But
we are not looking for acceptance. We will not be happy if
at the next Assisi prayer meeting Bishop Fellay stands closer
to the Pope than the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama shouldn’t
even be there. We hope that at the next prayer meeting at
Assisi to pray for peace the Pope will be surrounded by all
the Catholic bishops consecrating Russia to the Immaculate
Heart of Mary. This is where the true peace is. Encouraging
prayers to false gods will not bring peace.
So the words of Archbishop Lefebvre to John Paul II in 1988
are still valid today: “The time for cooperation
has not yet come.” Absolutely nothing has changed.
The present Roman authorities continue to be faithful to their
principles of the new theology, new ecclesiology new evangelization
exemplified by the spirit of Vatican II and Assisi in which
they want to draw us and of which we want no part.
The SSPX also continues faithful to the Catholic principles
transmitted by the Archbishop. “We do not view reconciliation
in the same way. Cardinal Ratzinger see it in the sense of
bringing us to Vatican II. We see it as the return of Rome
to Tradition. We cannot come together. It is a dialogue between
the deaf.” For the renewal of the dialogue with
Rome “I will raise the question on the doctrinal
level: ‘Are you in agreement with the great encyclicals
of all the previous popes? Are you in agreement with Quanta
cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei, Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi
of Pius X, Quas primas of Pius XI, Humani generis of Pius
XII? Are you in full communion with these popes and their
teaching? Do you still accept the anti-modernist oath? Are
you in favor of the social kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ?
If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors it
is useless to talk. As long as you refuse to reform the council
in light of the doctrine of these popes who preceded you there
is no dialogue possible. It is useless… The opposition
between us is not a small thing. It is not sufficient for
then to tell us: you can say the old Mass… No the opposition
between is not there, it is the doctrine.” 1
4.
“I think that there is a danger in seeing this conflict
last for ages”.
In my opinion, I think we might see here the real reason for
Father Aulagnier’s change. The fight is dragging on.
He has been at the center of this fight for over 30 years.
Maybe he is tired of the fight! But this is not the first
time that a conflict over the faith has lasted for ages. The
Arian crisis lasted over 70 years, the papal exile in Avignon
68 years, the great Schism 39 years. Is this a reason to abandon
the fight to come to some arrangement? It’s a good thing
St Athanasius didn’t get tired of being exiled, threatened,
falsely accused, excommunicated etc. He wouldn’t be
St Athanasius.
He seems to have forgotten that: “In other times
heretics and schismatics left the Church. Today, as St Pius
X warned us, they remain to make her evolve from within and
to seduce, if it were possible all or part of the flock of
the holy bishop… But one does not deal with this kind
of enemy all the more so that he is cunning. One does not
negotiate with him a false and separate peace. One fights
him till the end, strong in his right – Deus vult -
God wills it – reminding him of the truths he attacks
in vain… Rome knows it made an error, a grave error:
the excommunication (against Mgr Lefebvre). How to repair
the error? Time will tell. In any case not without a frank
return of the hierarchy to the total and integral confession
of the catholic faith whole and entire. The day will come
when Rome by its conversion will find our serenity.2
Seems like has lost his serenity.
Dear faithful do not lose your serenity, stand calm firm in
the unchanging faith of all times. Do not abandon the fight.
Sure it is dragging out. But we will win.
As
usual we thank you for your continued support and assure you
of our daily prayers for you and yours especially during the
holy season of Advent and Christmastide. May you all have
a happy and blessed Christmas and may the newborn Lord and
His holy Mother and St Joseph reward and bless you in the
coming year.
With my blessing
Father Jean Violette
1.
Fideliter #66 November-December 1988
2.
Father Paul Aulagnier Fideliter #65 September-October
1988
|