The Pope revokes the sentence of excommunication upon the Lefebvrists

[fpb]

I am horrified. Of all the unwelcome, untimely, ill-conceived, unnecessary, insulting and disastrous measures Pope Benedict could have taken, this is the worst. On the very week that the most anti-Catholic and pro-abortion President has taken office in Washington DC, the Pope seems to indicate that open flirtations with Le Pen and Pinochet, notorious sympathies for Petain, open Jew-bashing of the vilest sort, are no obstacle to reconciliation with Rome. Thos of us who try to fight on a principled opposition to abortion and murder in all its forms have now had a ton of banana oil poured under our feet; any opponent of Catholic teaching will be able to raise the ugly spectre of Marcel "Marechal a nous!" Lefebvre, and the horrible living presence of Richard Williamson, whose moral and intellectual sins go even beyond his obscene denial of the Holocaust and belief in the Protocols. And what about Catholic leadership among Christians? For the last few decades, the mere force of events had driven many Christian bodies closer together, to discover that they shared so much of morality and belief, and against that dictatorship of relativism against which the Pope himself spoke such memorable words. And now, for the sake of a few hundred thousand obstinate, wilful and often bizarre schismatics, who never did anything on their own to earn or even encourage reunion, and who positively insulted the last two Popes, all this common ground, all this real and verifiable growth together, is endangered; because most Christians will see the Lefebvrists for what they are. Just because Richard Williamson is such an ugly caricature of the worst sort of traditionalists, real conservatives, let alone middle and liberals, will want nothing to do with him. How many Protestants and Anglicans in search of a decent Christian centre away from the various heresies and schisms of their own confessions will have seen this as confirmation that everything they had been told about Rome was in fact true? I am willing to bet that the conversion of adults will slow down considerably. And what about the Church itself? This act has been taken as much on the Pope's own decision as the famous Motu Proprio that sought to reinstate the Latin Mass. If the one can be described as reactionary, ill-advised, insensitive to Jew-bashing and admiration for tyrants, then so can the other. Far from strengthening the conservative side of the Church, the Pope has just delivered them a vial of poison. And at the same time, he has done nothing to please liberals, many of whom will read this to mean that one hard-right soul is more important to the Pope than one left-wing one, and either leave or reinforce even further their "inner schismatic" position. I will not leave the Church - I know how many like Williamson there are already; but many others may. There is absolutely no upside to this decision; every aspect of it is completely mistaken.

God help the Church. Mother of Victory, pray for us.

Comments

[fpb.livejournal.com]

In 1988, I was taking my second year of university here in London. That is beside the point, The nature of Lefebvre and his movement is a known matter. If you want to know what he was about, google "Lille sermon" or "Lille speech". To me, your questions are like someone asking what evidence I have that the BNP is Fascist.

[mentalguy.livejournal.com]

I hate to bring this up, but I don't think that will work. While I'd like to think my google-fu is fairly strong, after an hour or so I've not been able to locate the text of the Lille sermon, or really many details at all about it online (I am assuming it was the one given at Lille on August 29, 1976). Unlike a number of his other sermons from the same period, it does not appear to be reproduced anywhere that is easily accessible on the English-language web.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Which is significant in itself. Whatever you think of it, it was a historical sermon. Why should it not be accessible?

I'll try and come up with a few links, but I can't promise anything. I am extremely busy about now with a couple of major projects well behind time, and right now it is night in London and I feel sleepy.

[mentalguy.livejournal.com]

In case anyone reading this thread is wondering if the sermon was really so historical if it is so hard to find information about it, here is what traditionalist writer Michael Davies had to say about its importance -- this is from his 1976 article in The Remnant:

It would not be unreasonable to claim that the post-conciliar Church reached her moment of truth at Lille on Sunday 29 August 1976, at about 11:30 a.m. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre turned from the altar to address an immense congregation, possibly the largest congregation ever addressed by any priest during the course of his Mass. Those actually present certainly constituted the largest congregation assisting at any Mass in the world that day. There were seats for five thousand in the vast auditorium of the International Complex here at Lille. Every seat had been taken well before the Mass began and thousands more had crammed themselves into every available inch of space; at least eight or nine hundred had been unable to inch their way into the auditorium and hence were crammed into a long passage leading to the exit, outside of which stood many who could not even get a foot inside the door. There were at least seven thousand present here.

But on this Sunday, Mgr. Lefebvre was able to address himself to the world – television companies from many countries recorded the event, as did radio networks and reporters from innumerable journals. The number of reporters alone ran into hundreds....

The Mass at Lille on 29 August 1976 is certainly one of the most important and decisive events to take place within the Church since Vatican II. Indeed, it could be the most decisive event, as it provided the moment of truth which would enable Pope Paul to reverse the movement away from tradition...