In Defense of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

Walter Matt, Editor, The Remnant
2539 Morrison Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55117

Dear Mr. Matt:

After reading your lead stories in the June 15 Remnant, I have decided to cancel my subscription. Aside from your comments, which seem to me incredibly like those of the secular press, I take umbrage at your having carried Mr. Opelle's reply to criticism of Fr. Bruckberger. You have not even the courage to publish these criticisms; but you do not hesitate to carry his answer!

I am not some nameless "element within the Society of St. Pius X." My arguments have the personal approbation of His Grace, Msgr. Lefebvre. I therefore make the following answer to Mr. Opelle:

1. "Fr. Bruckberger tells it as he see it..."

This may be true; but how far does he see? I have it on reliable authority that he still offers the Novus Ordo. How can such a priest be called traditional, who does not understand the connection between doctrine and liturgy?

2. "...his article is a contribution to a realistic understanding of the traditional movement."

There is precious little in his article, as I myself pointed out to you, which has a bearing on reality, particularly on the traditional "movement." I know of no such "movement." Traditionalists stay within the living Tradition of the Church. Others have moved on...

3. "For any Catholic bishop, no matter how orthodox and courageous in defending the Catholic deposit of faith, to consecrate bishops without the papal permission would be... an irreparable harm done to the authority of Christ over the Church."

This is most interesting. Just how are the consecrations supposed to have harmed Christ's authority? It seems to me that His Authority is unassailable. Perhaps Mr. Opelle means that it has harmed the authority of Christ's Vicar? In reality, the effect was the exact opposite. The pope has allowed his position to be ecumenized and collegialized away. The Archbishop and the new bishops of the Society will uphold true papal authority. They will, in this manner, be saving the Church and the papacy for the future.

4. "In committing and supporting such an act, one cannot simply state that he has not left the Church, when actions defying the constituted authority belie that stance in the common perception of everyone everywhere."

a. I note that Mr. Opelle includes those "supporting" the consecrations as outside the Church, along with the one "committing" the act. Is he ignorant that even the New Code of Canon Law states that the consecrator and consecrated, alone, would incur this penalty? No supporting priest, religious, or layman can incur this sentence, as it is laid down.

b. Traditionalists have been "defying the constituted authority" for a long time by refusing the Novus Ordo, new sacraments, new theology, new catechetics, new laws, new ad nauseam. The penalty for this most recent defiance might have been stiffer, but the reason is just as grave as it was originally. Necessity knows no law. In this case, the defense of the faith and its perpetuation is a grave necessity.

c. Perception in these matters needs to be far from "common", it needs to be Catholic. No one who does not value his Catholic faith above every other good will be able to see the issue clearly.

5. "'And the Lord said: Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not; and thou, being once convened, confirm thy brethren'". (Lk. 22, 31-32)

"This promise was made to Peter, not to any other apostle or bishop. Sacred Tradition had constantly enshrined this exclusive prerogatives of the pope to confirm his brethren. For a bishop to act in presumptive fashion against this papal prerogative, even supposedly for the highest reasons, say, to save the Church, flies in the face of the sacred promise and of Tradition, itself. Do we not have faith that only Our Lord Jesus Christ can 'save the Church', and that in due time He will make available the special graces that Peter will need to repair the damage..."

a. I note, firstly, that this is the passage used to prove the infallibility of the pope, not his right to appoint bishops. Our Lord here predicted the confusion to come to the Church. Switching from the plural "you" to the singular "thou", He said that Peter, "being once converted", would confirm his brethren. Now a conversion is a turning toward God. The pope must return to the Tradition to see what Our Lord really taught. He will not find what must be believed elsewhere.

"Confirm thy brethren," Confirm them in what? He must confirm, or strengthen, them in the faith. Our Lord guaranteed the papacy would not err: "...but I have prayed that thy Faith fail not." Yet we know from Vatican I that the pope is not infallible in all things, especially when he departs from Tradition.

b. All bishops are responsible for the perpetuation of the faith within their own spheres. Unfortunately, it seems that Msgr. Lefebvre alone will lift a finger to actually perpetuate it.

Now, it would ordinarily constitute schism to invade the diocese of a bishop, and intrude another in his place. In fact, this has been true from very ancient times, and does not depend on the canon of Pius XII regarding the Chinese communists. But this did not stop St. Eusebius, in the fourth century, from consecrating bishops, deposing Arian bishops, and placing Catholic bishops in their sees.

His Grace has not offered to do any deposing. He has said that the new bishops will not have jurisdiction to rule, which comes from the pope. The archbishop told the new bishops-elect:

"I will bestow this grace upon you, confident that without too long a delay the See of Peter will be occupied by a successor of Peter who is perfectly Catholic, and into whose hands you will be able to put back the grace of your episcopacy so that he may confirm it.

Archbishop Lefebvre ordains a new priest on June 29

"The main purpose of my passing on the episcopacy is that the grace of priestly orders be continued, for the true Sacrifice of the Holy Mass to be continued, and that the grace of the Sacrament of Confirmation be bestowed upon children...

"I beseech you to remain attached to the see of Peter, to the Roman Church, mother and mistress of all the churches, in the integral Catholic Faith, expressed in the various creeds of our Catholic Faith, in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, in conformity with what you were taught in your seminary. Remain faithful in the handing down of this faith so that the Kingdom of Our Lord may come" (emphasis mine).

c. Our Lord will give the grace to confirm the faith to the Holy Father; but the pope can always refuse this grace. It is this crime which has caused the present crisis in the Church. No one claims that the scandalous acts of the pope are acts of the magisterium. But his refusal to invoke the magisterium is a terrible sin (objectively), and is to blame for confusion of today.

6. "The alacrity with which some good people are induced to embrace a petit eglise (their own little church) course of action is no doubt born of their desperation after over twenty years of waiting."

No one following Msgr. Lefebvre is setting up his own "little church", or helping him to found one. The archbishop has a right and a duty to act as he has to preserve the Church. According to Canonist Georg May:

"In the Church as in civil society there can be conceived a state of necessity, of emergency, or of urgency which cannot be overcome by observing the positive law. Such a situation exists in the Church when the continuation, order, or activity of the Church are threatened or harmed in an important way. This menace can bear mainly on teaching, liturgy, and ecclesiastical discipline."

"A state of emergency justifies emergency law... which (applies) where there is a threat against the perpetuity or activity of the Church."

"This emergency can be resorted to only when one has exhausted all possibilities of re-establishing the normal situation by relying on positive law. Emergency law includes also the positive authorization to take the measures, to launch the initiatives, to create the organisms, necessary for the Church to be able to continue its mission of preaching the divine truth and of dispensing the grace of God..."

"The principle of proportionality must be observed. The Church and firstly its organs has the right, but also the duty, to take all measures necessary to remove dangers. In an emergency situation the Church's pastors may take extraordinary measures to protect or re-establish the Church's activity. If an organ of the Church does not carry out its necessary or indispensable functions, the other organs of the Church have the right and the duty to utilize the power they have within the Church so that the Church's life may be guaranteed and its end may be attained. If the church authorities refuse their approval, the responsibility of the other members of the Church increases, but so does their juridical competency or right to act."

7. "...the obstinate character of Jansenism emerges in its defiance of the authority of the Church and pope, always for reasons of higher moral discernment of the individual conscience placed above tradition and the Church... As Fr. Bruckberger relates, it is always having the last word, at whatever the cost."

This comparison of His Grace to the Jansenists is a deliberate slander for which Fr. Bruckberger, Mr. Opelle, and others will have to pay dearly. For one thing, the archbishop has not placed himself above the tradition of the Church—that is what present Rome has done. Neither is he a stubborn old man, bent on having his way "come hell or high water". This might be an accurate description of Cardinal Casaroli, Archbishop Hunthausen, or even the "nuns" who maintained their right to a "divergent" view of abortion.

Msgr. Lefebvre is doing his duty as a Catholic bishop is supposed to when the Church is in shambles. I propose that the duty of Catholic laity is to support such a bishop in whatever way they can. (And to thank him for what he has done!) In this way, they will uphold their faith, strengthen the Church, and remain loyal to the Successor of St. Peter.

Since The Remnant obviously does not realize its Catholic duty, and is busy promoting a weakling faith which can do nothing to defend or preserve itself, I will no longer support it with my money. Cancel my subscription immediately.

In Jesus and Mary,

Wayne Nichols
407 N. Sixth Street, Apt. B
St. Marys, KS 66536