+- The Catacombs (https://thecatacombs.org)
+-- Forum: Catholic Resistance (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (https://thecatacombs.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre - Volume III (/showthread.php?tid=7483)
Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre - Volume III - Stone - 09-25-2025
![[Image: cover.jpg]](https://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_three/Images/cover.jpg)
Contents
Introduction
I 1979 - A Year of Hope
II The Pope, the Bishops and the Priests
III Catholic Universities
IV A Condemnation and an Instruction
V Mgr. Lefebvre: Two Viewpoints
VI The Role of the Pope
VII Is Sunday Mass to be Suppressed?
VIII The Ecumenical Heresy
IX A Sermon at Albano
X The Condemnation of Küng
XI Letter of Mgr. Elchinger to Mgr. Lefebvre
XII The Dutch Synod
XIII On the Feast of the Purification
XIV A Day in the Life of Archbishop Lefebvre
XV Dominicæ Cenæ
XVI From the Superior General's Desk
XVII The Religious Life
XVIII Thirty Pieces of Silver
XIX An Encyclical from the Pope Tübingen
XX Inæstimabile Donum
XXI Archbishop Lefebvre in Venice
XXII A Meeting with Cardinal Seper
XXIII Letter to Friends & Benefactors, No. 18
XXIV Frequent Confession
XXV Archbishop Gerety
XXVI Letters to the Pope and Cardinal Palazzini
XXVII Archbishop Hunthausen
XXVIII Priests in Politics
XXIX Lourdes -1980
XXX The National Pastoral Congress
XXXI Letter of Mgr. Lefebvre to Cardinal Palazzini
XXXII The 1980 Ordination Sermon
XXXIII Diverse Condemnations
XXXIV Archbishop Lefebvre is Not a Rebel
XXXV The Christian Family
XXXVI Our Lady Of Pointet
XXXVII Letters of Mgr. Lefebvre
XXXVIII Letter To Friends & Benefactors, No. 19
XXXIX Letter to the Sovereign Pontiff
XL Letter of Cardinal Seper to Mgr. Lefebvre
XLI The Bishops' Synod - 1980
XLII We Are Not Rebels
XLIII The 1980 Bishops' Synod
XLIV "Liberalism has Penetrated the Church"
XLV Letter of Mgr. Lefebvre to Cardinal Seper
XLVI Golden Jubilee of Mother Marie Christiane
XLVII Mgr. Lefebvre in Mexico
XLVIII Letter of Cardinal Seper to Mgr. Lefebvre
XLIX Masonry Condemned
L Letter to Friends and Benefactors, No. 20
LI Letter to Friends and Benefactors of the Sisters of the Society of St. Pius X No.1
LII Letter of Mgr. Lefebvre to Cardinal Seper
LIII Persevering in Tradition
LIV The 1981 Ordination Sermon
LV What is the Priesthood?
LVI Letter to Friends and Benefactors, No. 21
LVII Letter of Cardinal Seper to Mgr. Lefebvre
LVIII The Plight of the Papist Priest
LIX Mgr. Lefebvre, An Australian Viewpoint
LX Letter of Mgr. Lefebvre
LXI Rastafarianism
LXII Fasting and Abstinence
LXIII Letter to Friends and Benefactors, No. 22
LXIV Correspondence
LXV Pope John Paul II at Canterbury
LXVI A Sermon at Martigny
LXVII The 1982 Ordination Sermon
LXVIII Blessing of the Chapel of St Irenaeus
LXIX Letter of Mgr. Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger
LXX Only the Latin Mass is Forbidden Today
LXXI The First General Chapter
LXXII A Courageous Bishop Dies
☩ ☩ ☩
Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 3
Volume 3
Introduction
VOLUME II of the Apologia took the story of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre up to the end of 1979, with the celebration of his Golden Jubilee providing a fitting climax. It has been suggested that I should have referred to another event which brought the year 1979 to a very encouraging climax for every faithful Catholic. This was, of course, the action taken by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in December 1979 to prevent Hans Kung from teaching as a Catholic theologian. This was only one of a series of actions to uphold orthodoxy occurring in the first full year of the pontificate of Pope John Paul II, actions which made 1979 a year of hope for those who had been praying for a pope who would initiate a return to Tradition.
It was further suggested that by documenting the case of Archbishop Lefebvre in isolation from these events, the account I had given lacked balance, and gave the impression that while the Vatican was taking action against traditional Catholics, epitomized by the Archbishop, it was ignoring the deviations from orthodoxy among Liberal or progressive Catholics. It was by no means my intention to give such an impression, and the explanation of my failure to refer to these events is simply that the book was concerned solely with the case of Archbishop Lefebvre, and not with presenting a generalized picture of events in the Church during the period that it covered. However, in this and subsequent volumes I shall broaden the scope of my account and refer to events not relating directly to the Archbishop. This should have the effect both of broadening the interest of the book and helping to place the case of Archbishop Lefebvre in its correct historical perspective. I shall begin this volume by listing some of the events which made 1979 a year of such hope.
This volume should be particularly useful in helping the reader to put the case of Archbishop Lefebvre in its correct historical perspective. It includes abundant documentation to prove that, as Pope Paul VI admitted, the Church is undergoing a process of self-destruction. Against a background of continual decline in every aspect of Catholic life subject to empirical verification, from baptisms to vocations, we see entire hierarchies acquiescing in, if not actively encouraging, the subversion of Catholic teaching on faith and morals among the flocks for whose pastoral care they are responsible. This volume will document frequent instances of excellent pronouncements from the Pope and the Holy See intended to halt the abuses and the decline, but, alas, no steps are taken to discipline the overwhelming majority of bishops who do not make even a pretense at implementing the papal directives. "The hungry sheep look up and are not fed." The most depressing incident narrated in this book is that of a visit by the Chief Shepherd of Christ's flock to Canterbury Cathedral where he behaved, to all intents and purposes, as if the Anglican sect and its invalidly ordained ministers form part of the one true Church founded by Our Lord.
This volume also documents the visits of a good shepherd, a bonus pastor, into the dioceses of shepherds who have opened the doors of the sheepfold to allow wolves to enter and ravage their flocks with impunity. Unfortunately, in the eyes of the media and of the Vatican, it is the good shepherd who must be censured and not the bad shepherds, the hirelings, who have abandoned their flocks. It cannot be denied that Archbishop Lefebvre breaches the letter of Canon Law; it cannot be denied that his judgments are sometimes hasty and expressed intemperately. Equally, it cannot be denied that he is motivated by a single desire - the salvation of souls: Salus animarum suprema lex - "The salvation of souls is the supreme law."
The most effective answers to the distorted and frequently vindictive accounts of the Archbishop which appear in the Catholic press can be found in his sermons, of which a good number appear in this volume. They are profoundly spiritual and totally Catholic. Their message is simple: "Let us keep the Faith - the simple and solid faith of the just and the faithful soul, according to the model of Mary and Joseph and all who have followed their example." This "simple and solid Faith" is expressed in beautiful and inspiring terms in the Profession of Faith of the priests of Campos, Brazil, which concludes this volume, as Appendix II. This is the Faith of our Fathers, this is the Faith that we must hold and we must cling to if we are to be saved. "Blessed be God!" wrote Cardinal Newman, "We have not to find the truth. It is put into our hearts, to preserve it in- violate, and to deliver it to our posterity." It is to this sublime task that Archbishop Lefebvre and the priests of his Society have dedicated their lives. May God bless them for it and sustain them in it.
I must offer my thanks to my friend, Norah Haines, without whose help this volume would not yet be complete. I cannot thank her sufficiently for all that she has done to help me with so many books, for so many years. I must also thank my son, Adrian, for translating the correspondence between Archbishop Lefebvre and the Holy See, and Father Philip Stark for translating the Archbishop's sermons and other items from the French. Finally, I must thank Carlita Brown for typesetting yet another of my books without complaining (too much) about the constant corrections and revisions.
Work on Volume IV is already well underway, but I cannot yet say when it is likely to appear.
Michael Davies
27 Apri11988
St. Peter Canisius
RE: Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre - Volume III - Stone - 09-26-2025
Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 3, Chapter I
Volume 3, Chapter I
1979 - A Year of Hope
Laicization, Celibacy, Invalid Masses, Individual Confession
The Pope Condemns French Theological Work
The Remnant -30 Apri1 1979
POPE JOHN PAUL II, in his first such act as Pontiff, has approved a Vatican declaration stating that a book by a French Catholic theologian presents views which conflict with Catholic dogmas.
Quote:The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith released a carefully worded statement (3 April) which declares that Father Jacques Pohier's book Quand je dis Dieu (When I Say God), contains "affirmations which manifestly fail to conform to Revelation and the teaching of the Church."
The statement was signed by Cardinal Franjo Seper, Prefect of the Congregation and Archbishop Jérôme Hâmer, O.P., its secretary. Among its criticisms of the book, the Vatican agency said that it denies such tenets of the Faith as: "the Christian idea of a transcendent God; the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, which was taught by the Council of Trent and, recently, by Pope Paul VI in his encyclical Mysterium Fidei; the specific role of the priest in the actualization of the Real Presence; and the exercise of infallibility in the Church." The declaration added further that ''as far as regards the divinity of Christ, Father Pohier expresses himself in so singular a manner that it is not possible to determine if he still possesses such truth in the traditionally Catholic sense."
Pope Rejects Laicization Trend: Strongly Reaffirms Priestly Celibacy
The Remnant - 30 April 1979
Pope John Paul II has strongly reconfirmed celibacy for Latin Rite priests and, in a major document, has indicated that he will not easily grant laicizations or special dispensations from priestly life from now on.
The document is a papal letter addressed "to all the priests of the Church on the occasion of Holy Thursday, 1979." In it the Pope said objections raised against priestly celibacy are based on arguments "whose anthropological correctness and basis in fact are seen to be very dubious and of relative value." The Church therefore urges "that all those who receive the Sacrament of Orders should embrace this renunciation (of marriage) for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven," the letter said.
In a shorter companion letter addressed to the world's bishops, the Pope asked them to, intensify " every possible effort" to encourage new vocations to the priesthood.
Both letters were linked in their titles to Holy Thursday, the day on which priests renew their promises to their bishops. In the 35-page letter to priests, the Pope placed strong emphasis on lifelong fidelity to the vows of their ordination, comparing their commitment at the time of ordination to the lifelong commitment made by married couples. "It is a matter of keeping one's word to Christ and the Church," he said. He rejected laicization as an easy answer to a crisis in one's vocation, although the words of the text do not rule out all possibilities of granting laicization in certain cases. The Pope did not say what he will do with laicization requests from now on, but his words indicated a "tough line" will be taken, according to the NC dispatch from Rome. He asked priests to re-read sections of Vatican II documents that highlight the "common priesthood" of the faithful and urged them to note the essential difference between this priesthood and the ordained priesthood under Holy Orders. "You priests," he noted, "are expected to have a care and commitment which are far greater and different from those of any lay person." He urged priests not to succumb to calls to be like other people, when in fact they are" always and everywhere the bearers of a particular vocation." " And this," he continues, "you can never forget; this you can never renounce; this you must put into practice at every moment, in every place and in every way." "Those who call for the secularization of priestly life and applaud its various manifestations will undoubtedly abandon us when we succumb to temptation. We shall then cease to be necessary and popular," he wrote. He conceded that although priests must be "close to the people and all their problems," their work must be done "in a priestly way" and they must be in first place men of prayer and must be especially devoted to the Mother of Christ, "who in a special way is the Mother of priests."
Besides rejecting the idea of the laicization process as simply an "administrative intervention," the Pope took pains to emphasize that priesthood and celibacy presume freely chosen, mature commitments for life, similar to the kind of permanent commitment given by a married couple.
During the fifteen years of Pope Paul VI's pontificate, an estimated 2,000 laicizations were granted per year, according to the NC dispatch. Then, after Pope John Paul II’s election last October, the processing of such cases came to an abrupt halt, the explanation being that the Pope wanted "to reconsider the question in its entirety." Several years ago, before Pope Paul VI sped up the laicization process and began granting requests more readily, the requests usually involved complex factors, such as serious psychological problems. More recently, however, the requests for laicization became a more or less routine matter, with not a few priests virtually demanding dispensations as a matter of "right."
The NC noted that Vatican sources hold that the Pope can stop laicizations of priests without any change in Church law. The reason is that, under the law, dispensation from priestly duties or from the promise of celibacy is considered a "gift" or a "grace" from the Pope, not something to which a priest has a "right" under any and all circumstances. In other words, unless there is serious reason to doubt the validity of the ordination itself, normally there is no juridical process involved.
Pope John Paul II's newly evinced stance on the laicization and celibacy question was immediately criticized in certain quarters. Frank Bonnike, for instance, a facilitator for CORPUS, a U. S. organization for resigned priests, faulted the Pope. "It [the Pope's letter] may meet the needs in Poland," he said, "but not serve the Church elsewhere." Bonnike, himself a former priest of the Roc-ford, Ill. diocese, criticized the Pope for what he called his "hard-line" policy and said that the reaffirmation of priestly celibacy is "once again a put-down for women."
To take a "tough line" on granting laicizations "is like putting a pregnant woman on hold," Bonnike said. "If a person reaches that point in their life when they're recognizing their need to continue their work with a soul mate, I don't see how taking a tough line is going to stop that" (Catholic Bulletin, April 20, 1979).
Rome Acts Against Invalid Masses in the U.S.A.
9 May 1979
There is not the least doubt as to what constitutes valid matter for the Holy Eucharist. Where the bread is concerned, it must be pure wheaten flour kneaded with natural water. The bread must be unleavened in the Latin Church and leavened in the Eastern rites. If a Latin priest used leavened bread or an Eastern rites priest used unleavened bread the Sacrifice would be valid but illicit, unless it was a case of an emergency.1
The imposition of the New Mass in the United States was followed by widespread stress on the Mass as a meal. Less and less was heard of its sacrificial nature. In order to accentuate their belief that the "Sunday liturgy" is essentially a community meal, Liberal clerics began to encourage the preparation of altar breads by their parishioners. The very fact that the altar breads had been prepared by the local community was, in itself, supposed to make the celebration more "meaningful."
Many of the faithful began to wonder whether the altar breads used in their parishes constituted licit matter; and, in some cases, whether the validity of the sacrifice itself was endangered. Their fears proved to be only too well founded. An examination of some of the recipes used made it clear that they constituted cake rather than bread, 2and that those celebrations of Mass in which they were utilized were invalid. Worse still, when the indignant faithful complained to such prelates as Archbishop Bemardin of Cincinnati or Archbishop Hunthausen of Seattle, their protests were received with reactions ranging from indifference to hostility. Not surprisingly, they complained to Rome. Many letters were received from American Catholics making the very modest request that they should be able to fulfill their Sunday obligation in their own parish, something which was not possible if their parish priest was celebrating invalid Masses. They were equally reasonable in suggesting that when they offered stipends for the celebration of Masses, then these Masses should indeed be celebrated for their intentions.
The Vatican eventually acted through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. On 11 May 1979 Pope John Paul II approved the text of a letter to be sent to the President of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops requiring that the law of the Church be observed in the preparation of Eucharistic bread. Cardinal Seper concluded his letter as follows:
Quote:As Your Excellency is aware, it is particularly important to ensure careful observance of the traditional theological interpretation about the making of Eucharistic bread, so that the faithful can be assured that every Eucharist is celebrated with matter that is both valid and licit.
Cardinal Seper also stressed in his letter that: "There is an obligation in strict justice regarding the application of Masses for intentions promised by the stipend."
Since 1969, the American bishops have never shown a moment's hesitation in disciplining or even persecuting any priest who dared to say the Tridentine Mass, but in some cases they appeared totally indifferent to the fact that many of their priests were taking stipends for celebrating invalid Masses which involved material idolatry on the part of the congregation (as they were worshipping a piece of cake). The Bishops' Committee on the Liturgy referred the matter back to the Holy See and advised that "the present practice of many parishes not be disturbed until there are other directives from the Holy See."
Nine months after the letter from Cardinal Seper, Archbishop Bernardin conceded reluctantly that, where the Archdiocese of Cincinnati was concerned, "many - perhaps most - of the recipes in use will have to be rejected." He also expressed considerable concern, but not for those who had provided stipends for invalid Masses, nor for the faithful who had not, in some cases, assisted at Mass for several years as the celebrations at which they had been present were invalid. Archbishop Bernardin's concern was expressed as follows: "I realize, of course, that those people who have become accustomed to the newer breads will be disappointed. I ask you, therefore, to do all you can to help them accept this decision." In view of the fact that Archbishop Lefebvre had been suspended a divinis for a disciplinary matter, it seems legitimate to wonder what adequate penalty might have been devised for Archbishop Bernardin. The answer is that he was eventually elevated to the rank of cardinal. One shudders to think that men such as this, who have clearly lost all sense of what being a Catholic means, will play a part in the election of the next pope!
Archbishop Hunthausen of Seattle carried his defiance of the Holy See to extraordinary lengths, and even claimed that the faithful owed their allegiance primarily to him rather than Rome. He could be induced to make at least a token gesture of compliance only after public protests and paid advertisements in newspapers protesting about his refusal to insist that valid Masses were celebrated in his archdiocese. The extent to which Archbishop Hunthausen was leading his flock out of the Church became so manifest and so notorious that in 1986 an auxiliary bishop was appointed for the Archdiocese of Seattle and given responsibility for certain aspects of its government. But in 1987 the Vatican surrendered to pressure from the Liberal hierarchy of the United States, removed the auxiliary bishop, and restored full authority to Archbishop Hunthausen. The case of Archbishop Hunthausen will be documented in due chronological order, and compared with that of Archbishop Lefebvre. It will be apparent that the difference in their treatment by the Vatican, and the sanctions imposed upon them, constitute a scandal of the first magnitude.
Pope Insists on Individual Confession
The Remnant - 16 May 1979
Pope John Paul II has again stressed the importance of individual or private confession and has again called for diligent observance of the strict Vatican norms governing general absolution in special circumstances.
In an address April 26 to various bishops who were making their official (ad limina) visits to Rome, the Pope recalled his first encyclical letter in which he had noted the "need to guard the Sacrament of Penance" and "stressed that the faithful observance of the centuries - old practice of individual confession with a personal act of sorrow and the intention to amend and make satisfaction (for sin) is an expression of the Church's defense of man's right to a more personal encounter with the crucified forgiving Christ." He pointed out that the documents cited in that encyclical "make reference to a point of capital importance: the solemn teaching of the Council of Trent concerning the divine precept of individual confession."
"Seen in this perspective," Pope John Paul continued, "the diligent observance by all the priests of the Church of the pastoral norms of Sacramentum Pænitentiæ (rules on Penance published by the Vatican's Doctrinal congregation in 1972) in regard to general absolution is both a question of loving fidelity to Jesus Christ and to His redemptive plan, and the expression of ecclesial communion in what Paul VI called' a matter of special concern to the Universal Church and of the regulation of her supreme authority' ." Pope John Paul also quoted Pope Paul's words last year to a group of U.S. bishops concerning priestly ministry: "Other works, for lack of time, may have to be abandoned, but not the confessional."
1. Valid: i.e., transubstantiation would take place and the bread would become the Body of Christ, Illicit: contrary to the law of the Church
2. Documentation concerning these recipes and all the points which follow concerning invalid eucharistic matter in the U.S.A. is provided in Appendix VI to Pope Paul’s New Mass
RE: Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre - Volume III - Stone - 09-29-2025
Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 3, Chapter II
Volume 3, Chapter II
The Pope, the Bishops and the Priests
by Louis Salleron
L'Aurore --31 May 1979
On 8 April last, Palm Sunday,1 the Pope addressed a long letter to "all the priests of the Church" to remind them of the nature of their priesthood, and to exhort them to remain faithful to it.
On the same day, in another much shorter letter, he asked the bishops to help their priests fulfill their mission:
Have a special solicitude for their spiritual progress, for their perseverance in the grace of the priesthood. Since it is between your hands that they pronounce - and renew each year - their priestly promises, and especially their commitment to celibacy, do everything in your power to enable them to remain faithful to these promises which are demanded by the Holy Tradition of the Church.
These two letters, especially the one to priests, had a resounding impact. The immense majority of the faithful saw in them the first attempt to come to grips with the disorder and strife which had existed for far too many years. The attitude of John Paul II was all the more appreciated because he expressed himself so clearly, yet in simple, familiar words, even affectionate in tone - characteristic features of his government - which have so endeared him to everyone since the first day of his pontificate.
In France, however, there were - there are - waverings, counter-currents, grinding of teeth, the extent of which it would not be amiss to examine in detail.
On 18 April Cardinal Renard, Archbishop of Lyons, wrote to all the priests in his diocese informing them of the Pope's letter and adding a few personal comments, of which the following are essential:
Whatever position you may hold, parish priest, chaplain (to a hospital, to some movement, to a school, or to migrants), professor, a working priest, priest of Fidei donum, priest in a religious order, each one of you is, for us, a member of the presbyterium, engaged in a ministry which we have recognized and appreciated, even if it has not been possible for us to express it to you in a fraternal way, nor as often as we would have wished.
If, as the Pope now asks us, we must make every effort possible to encourage vocations, to train new generations of candidates for the priesthood, future priests, there can be no question of slowing down pastoral initiatives for the renewal of Christian communities large or small.
We hope that the baptized, in increasing numbers, will be witnesses of the Gospel in their entire lives, that they will accept responsibilities and prepare themselves for certain "ministries." A direct link must be seen to exist between our fidelity to this aim and the evangelical exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi on evangelization in the modern world (December 1975), and the duty we have to encourage entrants to the presbyterial ministry. The one cannot be achieved without the other. Vocations always come from fervent, open communities…
We do not want to end this letter without thinking of our brothers who, having married, no longer exercise the presbyterial ministry. Let us openly remain their brothers.
Elsewhere the Cardinal informed his priests that he was going to Rome at the end of April and could therefore inform the Pope of their comments and questions.
Many priests in the diocese of Lyons interpreted the letter from their Archbishop thus:
Here is the Pope's letter. If you do not agree with him write to me and I will inform him of your opinions. Do not be afraid that I shall let you down. The Pope must be obeyed, but as he is so far away he cannot clearly evaluate our pastoral initiatives. I will explain them to him. Have confidence in me as I have in you.
A familiar stance. I am their head, therefore I will follow them.
The priests, therefore, in their turn, wrote. They were not only those from the diocese of Lyons, but those (about 30) from regions to the east of the diocese, priests who represent the association of "married priests" (sic) and priests (87) who want to form a "collective" to fight all forms of oppression and repression in the Church and Society; those who, individually, had made their views known in various publications. In all, a small minority, but a minority which represents a widespread frame of mind, protected by bureaucrats and under the progressive wing of the French Episcopate.
The two most significant documents are (1) the call for the creation of a collective which is purely revolutionary (Marxist style), and (2) the letter to the Pope from the priests living east of the diocese of Lyons, a letter disarming in its puerile insolence, but revealing a typical post-conciliar mentality. Let the readers judge for themselves. These priests said to the Pope:
Your letter reads like a message from on high and is too much in keeping with a theology which does not fully accept the orientations of the Second Vatican Council. In your letter you give the name "laicization" to what is, for us the wish to share in the lives of our people (…) We can already state that in this respect your declaration is being used by those in France who are opposed to Vatican II.
For lay Catholics who are constantly accused of being against the Council and the post-conciliar orientations, it is gratifying and consoling to discover that the Pope shares this disgrace It is nonetheless disturbing that so many stupidities can be published with so much assurance.
The Heart of the Debate
But is it a question only of stupidities? No, the debate is far more serious. It is a completely new doctrine of the priesthood which, today, is poisoning "The Church of France." According to this doctrine, the priest is no longer a man set apart and endowed, by the Sacrament of Orders, with the power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, with the special mission to preach the Gospel and to teach the truths to be believed. He is now only a member of the faithful, man or woman, married or celibate, chosen by the community to serve them and give thanks to God.
The French Episcopate as a body, if not as individual members, subscribe to this subversive theology imposed upon it by its bureaucrats. Hence the inertia.
It is to the joint problems of the Mass and the priesthood that the crisis in the Church in France is due. The Pope will need all his patience and all his energy to end it.
* * * *
Louis Salleron's article helps in several ways to put the case of Mgr. Lefebvre in its correct perspective. Pope John Paul II's letter on the priesthood provides an excellent and even inspiring evocation of the true nature of the Catholic priesthood. Archbishop Lefebvre might well be the only French bishop who would give it unqualified acceptance and support, and insist that all the priests subject to him did likewise. The Pope's ideal of the priesthood is precisely the ideal proposed to the seminarians at Econe. It was noted and documented in Apologia I that the Holy See's Basic Norms for Priestly Training are observed more faithfully at Ecône than almost any other seminary in the West (see pages 69-70). Despite this, Mgr. Lefebvre is the only French bishop who is suspended a divinis. The other French bishops are all in good standing with the Holy See, even though, as a body, they subscribe to the revolutionary doctrine of the priesthood which is poisoning "The Church of France." It must also be noted that the catechetical instruction which they impose upon Catholic children in France is among the worst in the entire world.
Professor Salleron's article also illustrates the extent to which the Catholic ethos of the French Church has disappeared almost entirely outside traditionalist groups. Once this ethos is lost it is rarely regained. And those who have repudiated Tradition flaunt their revolutionary new religion before the Pope himself with what Professor Salleron terms aptly "puerile insolence." It must be one of the great ironies of Catholic history that in the post-conciliar era the epithet "rebel bishop" is retained for Mgr. Lefebvre alone. No doubt the English hierarchy under Henry VIII would have used the same epithet for St. John Fisher.
1. Novo incipiente nostro, 8 April 1979. Frequently referred to as the “Holy Thursday Letter to Priests." (Full text available in Flannery, Vol. II.)
RE: Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre - Volume III - Stone - 10-01-2025
Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre
Volume 3, Chapter III
Volume 3, Chapter III
Catholic Universities
POPE WARNS CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS
The Remnant – 31 May 1979
ACCORDING to a St. Paul Pioneer Press/Dispatch report of May 26, Pope John Paul II decreed last week that professors at Catholic universities "should refrain from challenging basic Church doctrine or face dismissal from their posts." The report went on to say that the Pontiff's warning is contained in an 87-page " Apostolic Constitution" and that it "tightened Vatican control over some 126 Church-run universities around the world." The decree reportedly puts an end to a controversial experimental period which Pope Paul VI had launched in 1968 in the wake of Vatican II. The present Holy Father insists that "new research (experimental or otherwise) should never be at the expense of the Church's Magisterium."
Meanwhile, in the current issue of Our Sunday Visitor, appears the report that the anti-papalist Hans Kung has again placed himself squarely in opposition to yet another Pope, this time Pope John Paul II. During an interview regarding his notorious views, Kung is said to have proposed that inter-communion begin at once, saying: "I would first start by giving a general permission to Catholics – especially those in mixed marriages, but others also –to go to other churches for the eucharistic meal. And we should open our doors for others to come to us."
As Our Sunday Visitor observed editorially, "Küng's 'one eucharist is as good as another' is directly contrary to Catholic teaching and is in direct opposition to what Pope John Paul II told Catholic bishops from the Caribbean, where occasionally ecumenical activity has gone beyond good sense. "Sharing the Eucharist presupposes unity in faith," the Pope declared. "Inter-communion between divided Christians is not the answer to Christ's appeal for greater unity."
It will be interesting to see how Pope John Paul II reacts to Hans Kung's latest defiance of papal teaching and whether the University of Tübingen, where Kung still holds forth, will feel free to dismiss this unorthodox gad-fly. Also, whether the Catholic University of America, where the notorious heresiarch, Father Charles Curran, still holds forth, will take such disciplinary action as Pope John Paul has now prescribed.
* * * *
The reaction to Küng's defiance was to deprive him of the right to teach as a Catholic theologian, a step which would be taken before the end of the year. The same decision would be taken in the case of Father Curran, but not until 1986.
DECLINE IN PRIESTS AND SEMINARIANS IN ITALY
The Remnant – 31 May 1979
The number of Catholic seminary students in Italy has dropped from 30,595 in 1962 to 9,953 in 1978. During the same 16-year period, the number of priests in Italy dropped by more than 2,000 – from 43,538 to 40,866.
The figures were disclosed by Bishop Attilio Nicora, an Auxiliary Bishop of Milan, at a plenary meeting in Vatican City of the Italian Catholic Bishops' Conference.
To put the numbers in clearer perspective, Bishop Nicora pointed out that Italy's population had increased by six million between 1961 and 1977. Italy has a current population of 56,675,000, with Catholics constituting 97.5% of the total.
Bishop Nicora called the figures "objectively serious and worrisome."
* * * *
The decline in the numbers of both priests and seminarians is common to all Western countries. It might have been hoped that the bishops of these countries would have noted the success of the seminaries founded by Mgr. Lefebvre, and followed his example by introducing a traditional formation in their own seminaries; but, alas, most would prefer to cease ordaining priests rather than admit that the policies they have adopted have been disastrous. This is also true of their equally disastrous policies in such spheres as religious education and the liturgy. The prestige of the bishops depends upon the success of these new policies, ergo the policies are successful.
CARDINAL OTTAVIANI DIES AT 88
The Remnant – 17 August 1979
Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, a major spokesman for traditionalism during the Second Vatican Council and one of several cardinals responsible for the so-called "intervention" against the New Mass brought into being by that Council, 1 died on 3 August in his apartment after a long illness, Vatican Radio reported.
The Cardinal, who together with the late Cardinal Bacci, protested against what they called the "theological deviation" of the New Mass from the position taken by the Council of Trent, held the honorary title of Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican department concerned with guarding the Church's doctrine on faith and morals.
It was Cardinal Ottaviani, who, in his letter to His Holiness Pope Paul VI (3 September 1969), pleaded with the Pope "not to deprive us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the fruitful integrity of that Missale Romanum of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your Holiness and so deeply loved and venerated by the whole Catholic world… The Cardinal was an uncompromising defender of theological orthodoxy and an unyielding foe of Modernist trends which have swept through the Church for the past many decades. His loss to the Church is great. He will be sorely missed. R.I.P.
Cardinal Wright Dies
The same issue of The Remnant reported the death of Cardinal John Wright who, as Prefect for the Congregation for the Clergy, had initially given wholehearted support to Mgr. Lefebvre and the Society of St. Pius X, but then succumbed to pressure from Liberal forces within the Vatican and became a member of the commission of three cardinals which condemned the Archbishop and demanded the closure of the seminary at Ecône.2
1. A fully documented account of the “Ottaviani Intervention” is available in chapter XXIII of Pope Paul’s New Mass. It is explained there that fifteen Cardinals had agreed to sign a covering endorsing the critique of the New Mass sent to Pope Paul VI, but, for reasons which are explained in this chapter, thirteen of them lost their nerve and the covering letter was signed eventually only by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci. This does not detract in any way from its historic importance, or from the fact that Mgr. Lefebvre’s misgivings charged with upholding the orthodoxy of Catholic doctrine.
2. See Apologia, Vol. I, Index: Wright, John Joseph, Cardinal.