it's such a silly thing to think that doing what the church has been doing for hundreds of years is somehow wrong... Keeping the promises of your ordination, plus teaching as you were taught... People who think badly of Monseñor Marcel Lefevbre are people who don't want to look at simple facts, he didn't create his own jurisdiction and he kept accepting the authority of the pope, that's why the SSPX accepts Pope Francis as pope and prays for him on every mass and public adoration of the most holy eucharist. Consacrating traditional bishops for the Church and in order to continue the traditional life of the Church is not an evil but a good, a good for the faith.
Irod Jetson...when the Church or the Pope as the Supreme Pontiff promulgated a new missal, it does not mean that the previously used missal has mistakes or was wrong..but it is just that the rite has been modified according to the need of the people in this age...for example: in the case of the Missale of Pope Paul VI, to reintroduce some elements from the older tradtions or prayers that have been lost and also to give more place to the Sacred Scripture, in order to make it easier for the people of God to grasp the connection between the Old and the new Testaments, etc. So when the new way of celebrating mass has been promulgated for the whole Church, it is natural to hope that every Catholic will be using it, instead of some groups still would like to retain the older forms etc...it potentially causes confusion among the people of God. So when Pope Benedict XVI said that the prayers of the Church from the centuries cannot be suddenly considered wrong. he was right, but not in the correct context. [Not to reduce my respect for brothers and sisters who have great devotion to the Eucharist.]
@@bennyefendieI recommend you watch mass of the ages chapter 1 and 2, also recommend you to watch the series of "the crisis of the Church" of the SSPX. there is a lot of information I couldn't fit in this message so it would be better if you inform yourself more about what really happened instead of just repeating the propaganda they have been feeding us for so long. The new mass is not in any way like any old rite.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Ha ha ha …. Lefebvre advises to do that very thing also. Do you know what a con man is? Read his works- he’s NOT A “con man!”
@@swhite3883 He ran into padre Pio before the fact and Pio exposed that he was up to something and warned Lefebvre to stop. So he starts an organization where he said the 1970 Latin mass aka the Novus Ordo, but then around 72 he adopted the idea of only saying the 1962 mass aka the TLM. He was against Vatican 2 and failed to mention the fact that he was one of the bishops of Vatican 2. He was asked about his encounter with Padre Pio. He claimed a different story, but his version just so happens to be identical to the gospel account of the baptism of Jesus, he puts himself in the place of Jesus above Padre Pio. A seminarian who was kicked out for sexually assaulting other seminarians in the modern church. Lefebvre tracked him down, became close friends with him and fast-tracked him to the priesthood. Lefebvre then got in trouble for trying ordain priests in secret in the 1970s. Now that priest has left a long line of victims and is currently living in marriage to another man. When he met St Paul VI he blamed the people in the society even thought the pope quoted his sermons. He claimed to be the prophet of Our Lady of Good Success. He is a con man.
Jesus said if you disobey the pope you will go to hell (Matthew 18:17). Lefebvre tried to ordain priests in secret, but he got caught and was ordered to stop. Lefebvre then ignored the pope and ordained them anyway. You should be praying that the Lord gave him the graces of conversion at his last moments.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 You're the one who needs to watch out for Hell, calumniator. Quo Primum says that anyone who tries to restrict the Tridentine Mass will face the wrath of Almighty God and the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul. Or I guess you can go ahead and do a pedophile clown dance in front of the heathen Pachamama with Bergoglio, and dance your way straight into an eternity in the Lake of Fire. You worship the Pope and that makes you a pagan. I worship Jesus Christ, a precondition of being a Catholic.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Disobey the Pope ? John Paul II , who kissed the Quran, which categorically denies the Trinity, Divinity, Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus in public was a Satanist. Allah the god of Islam is the old Moon god Baal, who is Satan. John Paul II carried on with a secret correspondence with a married woman for 30 years, even after becoming Pope. He is in Hell. Archbishop Lefebvre is a Saint and is in Heaven. Ref. Secret letters of John Paul II. 101 Heresies of John Paul II. Both from Internet.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Maybe, but Bishop Anthenatis gives a good explaination of what happened. I was formally against SSPXers & how this all happened with Archbishop Lefevre but now am not so sure 🙏
@@goldenarrow3 This is easy to figure out once you know what to do. Go back and review Lefebvre's claims and reasons for why he did what he did, keeping in mind he is a trained bishop, he was part of Vatican 2 and he claimed to be saving the church and that he was the prophet of the Marian apparitions of Our Lady of Good Success. Then compare all this to what Jesus said in Matthew's gospel chapters 16-18. Jesus' gospel is different to Lefebvre. Lefebvre sets himself up as the savior of the church. Even his encounter with Padre Pio, he steals the gospel's account of the Baptism of Jesus putting Himself in place of Jesus and Pio in the place of John. I have gone over this many time and I personally believe Lefebvre must have been a lunatic or satanic. Traditionalism is a clever trick from the devil, when you first look at it, it makes sense and is holy keeping the traditions of the church. But it does not match the words of Jesus in the gospels.
I thank God that Bishop LeFevre took a strong stance in trying to save the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. He was courageous in taking a stand, when no one else did. There are many who say he was wrong in what he did. Of course, there will always be naysayers; but if we put ourselves in his shoes, we can see why he did what he felt he had to do.
To think that I was expecting the part two of the documental of the Latin mass, and they just ignored Monsenor, and it’s about the history of the council, unbelievable, Monsenor Lefebvre was the true hero, and so many so-called traditional can’t not even acknowledge the real history
He was not totally excluded, but if true that it was never forbidden as Benedict XVI said (or something to this extend) therefore it could be argued that His excelency Lefevbre and the society (at the time) was only instrumental (of providence?) But in "conservative" catholic sources itvis controversial, and it is aiming to show other things than this controversy as it wants to appeal for the audience not only already seeking or attending the TLM.
I think there is so much stigma and many loess and misinterpretation of the SSPX the point is to accompany and take people to the door step, so that if you have ears to hear and eyes to see automatically you deduce the great Archbishops position as being a positive one or at least part of it .
Thanks again for this wisdom. I'm 64, went to Catholic school from k thr 12.l am a revert trad altar boy 4yrs and you are teaching me so much God bless you.and thanks for having our holy Bishop on Viva Cristo Rey Ava Maria
I believe it is time to defy the Pope and have as many TLM as possible. It is ridiculous to think that any Pope has the authority to restrict the celebration of the mass that has been said for hundreds of years. I think it is time to respectfully resist before he drives even more Catholics away.
Charles Coulombe always brings up a key phrase: “ultra vires” which means: “beyond your authority.” He jokes that it should be stamped on the forehead of every prelate so it can get drilled into their heads that there are things that are beyond the purview of their authority. Some have argued (I think incorrectly) that the pope does have the authority to do what Francis did in Traditiones Custodes. Even granting that he hypothetically does for the ske of argument, it ignores the fact that it is Not ordered towards the good of the Church or the faithful and is a needlessly cruel and punitively petty move.
Excellent explanation of such complicated and unfortunate issue about Archbishop Lefebvre and JPII for the laity. But one thing I have very clear is that we ought to worship and obey the only one God. And we are not supposed to mingle with pagans or other religions but to evangelize, not proselytize of course, as Jesus commanded. I understand Archbishop Lefebvre was just doing his duty and he was so right.🙏
Way back in the mists of time I had the opportunity to kiss the Episcopal Ring of Blessed Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on three occasions. I pray for him by name in my daily Rosary, and I pray to him that he might aid the Church he gave his life to and for! Sancte Archiepíscope Marcélle, intercéde pro nobis!
That behavior goes against the word of God- worshipping a man, making an item into an idol, and praying to anyone other than God. The catholic church has blinded so many by its heresy.
So true; not popular at Rome, especially now; but there we go. Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek. God bless. ;o)
You can't keep the faith if you don't know it and you wouldn't support Lefebvre if you knew the faith. Read Matthew's gospel chapters 16-18. If Jesus is right in these chapters then Lefebvre was a con man.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Where does any of this deal with the issue of Papal Prerogative .. note well, it was for offending against that, and that alone, that Archb Lefebvre was (finally*) punished. The point is: he was not a heretic, he was not schismatic, he did not repudiate papal jurisdiction: he acted without a prior papal permission (that happens, occasionally, you know, the Successor to Peter is Vicar of Christ not the General Manager of a company .. and that is the Faith). Should Lefebvre have acted without a papal nod? No, for that is not proper protocol; no more, no less. Should JPII have constantly deferred the request to permit episcopal consecrations? No, the request was unpopular among the In-Crowd, but neither unjustified nor uncalled for. In short, any passing pope, if he is willing, can undo the harm wrought with the gracious wave of one forgiving hand .. for ex-communication is a disciplinary treatment, not a declaration of war; it can be revoked even if only posthumously (and again, that is the Faith). God bless. ;o) * Lefebvre had indeed been irritating the Modernists for a couple of decades, and that got him severely disliked. But the Modernists were .. and are still .. the heretics involved here. Aux Bish Schneider simply points out the facts of the case - whether we like them or not.
@@TheLeonhamm You don't seem to have all the facts. In the 1970s the sspx started legitimately with papal permission, so they knew that this was a thing. Lefebvre should have known this anyway bec he was a bishop right. This is before JP2 was a pope, this was during the reign of St. Paul VI. Ok, so he wanted to ordain priests without letting Rome know in 1976. The reasoning behind this bec back in the day St. Thomas the apostle traveled to India ordaining priests without being able to ask St. Peter for permission. But this is not true, in those days permission would have been given before they left. However, the sspx cannot use this reasoning because they got caught before the ordinations and they were told by the authority of Christ given to the church not to ordain these men. They ignored the vicar of Christ the King and ordained priests anyway. According to canon law, this means all the priests of the SSPX are suspended and therefore they are all performing black masses. The consecrations led to excommunications, but when pope Benedict lifted them he clearly stated that all the priests of the SSPX are still suspended. (This is all without taking into consideration that Lefebvre knew some of the priest he ordained had previouly been kicked out of seminary for being sex offenders). In the gospel of Matthew chapter 16, Jesus Christ the Davidic king (Luke 1:32), gives the keys of David (Is 22:22; Rev 3:7), to Peter and Jesus says this position is protected from binding the church to error and whatever the pope binds on earth will be bound in heaven. Jesus goes on to say if you do not obey His authority given to the pope you will go to hell in chapter 18, verse 17. So based on the words of Jesus there was no need for Lefebvre to do any of this. Lefebvre's gospel of traditionalism is different to the gospel of Jesus. According to Jesus, the pope does not have to give Lefebvre anything but Lefebvre is obliged to obey the pope. Traditionalism is the smoke of satan we were warned about by the pope of Vatican 2 St. Paul VI.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Of course, I may not have all the facts, so I'll do my best to deal carefully with the points you make: 1) The SSPX began legitimately enough, in late1970 CE, Pope St Paul VI's reflection on the crack that allowed the smoke of Satan to enter into the life of the Church came in early 1972 CE - it was aimed at doubt, uncertainty, problems, unrest, dissatisfaction and conflict, however, John Cardinal Wright, Prefect to the Congregation of the Clergy, was positive about the new Society and encouraged applications to the seminary at Econe even in 1973 CE. The first real 'problem' began to arise in 1974 CE, leading to a Canonical Visitation (by two very liberal priests). 2) Lefebvre had played the liberal card against the liberals (well if not wisely), by obstructing curial requirements and disobeying papal commands - exposing the Modernists' very successful tactics to public view. It was a serious offence, for sure, but no action was taken against the liberal liberals (Modernists), an action did proceed against Lefebvre, an astonishingly rapid suspension, as he expected. 3) The actual offence incurring automatic ex-communication - for a grave offence - here, was a breach of protocol, in that of Canon 751, a 'withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him' this is one of personal affront to the Vicar of Christ, so any pope can removal that penalty, for any reason, without losing authority or due regard. 4) No, the SSPX are not performing the Black Mass, in fact, Pope Francis gave them the facility to offer the Holy Sacrifice universally, e.g. at the Nuptial Mass, et al. The Society, however, is still in dubious canonical status (a serious problem) .. for it recognises the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, but he has not, yet, granted them full faculties. 5) The Pope's authority, in jurisdiction and power, is great .. but it is not unlimited; so, no, rightly refusing to obey an unjust law or an immoral command does not lead to hell - only to a possible temporal penalty (as with the ex-communication, which is, by the way, a disciplinary treatment not damnation to infamy); some great Saints have died with the stigma of ex-communication attached to them, cf, Joan of Arc (the penalty was removed posthumously). 6) The Pope is obliged, believe it or not, to defend the Faith, that is to receive, accept, and hand on Sacred Tradition, intact; he owed that much not only to Lefebvre but to us all; in so far as any pope has failed to do this, he has to that extent abandoned the divinely instituted office given to St Peter (e.g. in strengthening the brethren). P.S. We own no more and no less than submissive obedience to our pastors, not blind obedience; the former refers to docility (teachability = a willingness to learn), and the latter requires the rejection of moral reason, which is contrary to the Faith; thus, Lefebvre did wrong (he offended the pope) and paid for it; that discussions to end the irregular canonical status of the SSPX have continued indicates that Rome admits, if without prejudice against itself, that it too mishandled some of the case made against him and the Society; these are the facts, so far as I can ascertain them; a good canon lawyer will soon keep us right. God bless. ;o)
@@TheLeonhamm You can't say Lefebvre was justified in disobedience to the pope because other liberal priests were also disobedient and not punished. Do you really think this excuse worked when he stood before Jesus, the judge who sees all? From the moment he disobeyed the pope every mass he said profaned the body of Christ. If Lefebvre was an educated bishop, then I have to call his actions satanic. You missed the point with Pope Francis. Pope Francis allowed them to say confessions and marriages under certain circumstances for a period of time. A lot of parishioners missed the point that he did not give them permission to say Sunday mass or even give a simple blessing. So their masses are black. I grew up in the SSPX, and I was one of the first students at the Tynong school. If you were in their system you would know the reason why Pope Francis has allowed their marriages to be sacramental. Marriages outside the church are natural institutions, but the church has elevated marriage to a sacrement. So marriages outside the church can be annulled. This is what was happening in the SSPX, many people involved with the SSPX got married, it would not work out so they would appeal to the Catholic Church to get an annulment. They would not accept Rome's authority on any other issue and it does seem like there is an abuse of the situation. This was being spoken about back in 1990s. As I clearly pointed out, Jesus Himself said the pope will never bind error on the Catholic Church and then Jesus says if you disobey the pope you will go to hell. Therefore, Lefebvre cannot claim he was disobeying an unjust law. He is not the savior of the church. You act like ex-communication is no big deal, he is not allowed to say mass, he is profaning the body of Christ. This is the worst sin anyone can commit. This is literally satanic and he would have known being a bishop. Saints who were ex-communicated worked towards coming back to the church, but not Lefebvre. Lefebvre's job is not to save the church, the Holy Spirit was alread in control. His job was to fulfill the will of the pope and spread the faith. As I keep quoting to you, Jesus Himself say if you do not obey the pope you will go to hell (Matt 18:17). Lefebvre's gospel is different to the gospel of Jesus, again this makes him satanic. The fact that you would say, "The Pope is obliged, believe it or not, to defend the Faith, that is to receive, accept, and hand on Sacred Tradition, intact; he owed that much not only to Lefebvre but to us all; in so far as any pope has failed to do this." This is not the gospel of Jesus, it is the opposite. Have you even read the bible? This is the smoke of satan. This is the reason why traditionalist believe the fake news stories like Pachamama because the faith has not been passed down in the traditional Catholic movement. If the traditions and the faith were passed down by men like Lefebvre, then his followers would have seen throw all this. Even you don't know the faith. You are just beleving what they tell you without question. If their canon lawyers were right they would not be ex-communicated. The only people who believe the sspx are those who don't know the faith.
The only truth of late that came out of a Catholic religious was the preaching given out by the SSPX chief in England (the heart of Protestantism & Apostasy).unimaginable to come out from the mouth of the present Pontiff .
They have been brainwashed and conditioned for such a long time to think that +Lefebvre was a very bad man. The high prelates who oversaw this conditioning have a lot to answer for; they have led the faithful astray.
The most big saints were closed inside their monasteries, St. Benedict didn’t even allow a single woman to enter his monastery, how about that? Maybe that’s exactly what we need for our salvation today, safe oases for catholic families and clergy amidst a desert created through freemasonic takeover of the schools, science, social and also religious life.
@@christianvoice77 Sure, that's right, but The first monks in Egypt for example, sometimes have lived also outside into society's for, living and preaching the gospel, it's a question of different charisma and vocations. Surely the world needs today both, how always
JMJ+ Truth is not always easy to accept. JPII was wrong in many of his actions, dictates, and motives behind his decisions. We base are assessments on what we see and hear. He was a favorite of mine for many years, but then, one looks at the facts and must accept the things that he did. I believe Archbishop Lefebvre was correct. People forget how many times he tried to get Rome to simply schedule a date after they had approved the Ordination of new Bishops and Priests. Their behavior was shameful and manipulative in a very negative manner.
JESUS AMAZING GRACE: There is only ONE God with three parts, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Humans have three parts, the body, soul and spirit. ONE person three parts. The Bible says that we are all sinners. As it is written: There is none righteous no not one. Romans 3:10 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23 But we are all as an unclean thing and all our righteousness are as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6 For the wages of sin is death. Romans 6:23(the word “death” in this verse means eternal separation, from God in hell). Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.Isaiah 1:18 Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures and that He was buried and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures.1CORINTHIANS 15:3-8 In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins. Colossians 1:14 For by grace ye are saved, through faith; and not of yourselves it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. Galatians 2:21 Your trust in Jesus and what He did for you on the cross, is what saves you from hell. The moment you trust in Jesus and only Jesus, you are saved. After people get saved they get baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Lefebvre did not get in trouble for his opinions on Vatican 2 or saying the Latin mass, he got in trouble for trying to ordain priests in secret. When he got caught he was ordered not to go ahead with the ordinations and he disobeyed. Jesus said if you disobey the authority of the pope you will go to hell (Matt 18:17).
@@Mikemanify So you are saying Jesus was wrong and we don't have to obey the pope? The pope's authority is the same as Jesus' authority. You are aware that Lefebvre was part of Vatican 2, so why did he not bring up his objections then?
@@ramennoodles4335 the "excommunication" was not an act of the Pope but rather an observation of a self-imposed excommunication, for which he never received a trial. There is a big difference here. One is a judgment by the Pope, the other becomes a question of the application of canon law. The "excommunication" was not for ordaining priests but for consecrating bishops, and applied to all bishops involved, (2 consecrating bishops, and 4 consecrated). The consecration of a bishop for the SSPX was approved by the Pope prior to this, but the date kept getting pushed back and archbishop Lefebvre was dying, after a long time of enduring pushbacks by the Vatican he went through with the already approved plan to consecrate a bishop, but he consecrated 4 instead. This issue is much less black and white than you think, and I encourage you to look into it more. You can find the Archbishop's exchange of letters with the Holy Father online. I would encourage you to read them and really consider whether he was a schismatic in the true sense or not.
@@ryanpost8729 Will do. This is all very interesting. At the moment I hold the opinion that Archbishop Lefebvre was not wrong, but he wasn't right either.
Thanks!
Brother, learn the faith.
it's such a silly thing to think that doing what the church has been doing for hundreds of years is somehow wrong... Keeping the promises of your ordination, plus teaching as you were taught... People who think badly of Monseñor Marcel Lefevbre are people who don't want to look at simple facts, he didn't create his own jurisdiction and he kept accepting the authority of the pope, that's why the SSPX accepts Pope Francis as pope and prays for him on every mass and public adoration of the most holy eucharist. Consacrating traditional bishops for the Church and in order to continue the traditional life of the Church is not an evil but a good, a good for the faith.
I agree 100%.
@@marysisak2359 Same here. God bless Archbishop Lefebvre! 👏
Yes
Irod Jetson...when the Church or the Pope as the Supreme Pontiff promulgated a new missal, it does not mean that the previously used missal has mistakes or was wrong..but it is just that the rite has been modified according to the need of the people in this age...for example: in the case of the Missale of Pope Paul VI, to reintroduce some elements from the older tradtions or prayers that have been lost and also to give more place to the Sacred Scripture, in order to make it easier for the people of God to grasp the connection between the Old and the new Testaments, etc. So when the new way of celebrating mass has been promulgated for the whole Church, it is natural to hope that every Catholic will be using it, instead of some groups still would like to retain the older forms etc...it potentially causes confusion among the people of God. So when Pope Benedict XVI said that the prayers of the Church from the centuries cannot be suddenly considered wrong. he was right, but not in the correct context. [Not to reduce my respect for brothers and sisters who have great devotion to the Eucharist.]
@@bennyefendieI recommend you watch mass of the ages chapter 1 and 2, also recommend you to watch the series of "the crisis of the Church" of the SSPX. there is a lot of information I couldn't fit in this message so it would be better if you inform yourself more about what really happened instead of just repeating the propaganda they have been feeding us for so long. The new mass is not in any way like any old rite.
The Latin mass is special 🙏🙏
Currently reading an Open Letter to Confused Catholics by Archbishop Lefebvre. Very eye opening
Share ?
Stop wasting your time. Learn the faith and read the gospels and you will realize Lefebvre was a con man.
@@meschoooter6027 It is a book, an excellent one at that too ! I highly recommend it. I believe there’s a free pdf online check it out.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Ha ha ha …. Lefebvre advises to do that very thing also. Do you know what a con man is? Read his works- he’s NOT A “con man!”
@@swhite3883 He ran into padre Pio before the fact and Pio exposed that he was up to something and warned Lefebvre to stop. So he starts an organization where he said the 1970 Latin mass aka the Novus Ordo, but then around 72 he adopted the idea of only saying the 1962 mass aka the TLM. He was against Vatican 2 and failed to mention the fact that he was one of the bishops of Vatican 2. He was asked about his encounter with Padre Pio. He claimed a different story, but his version just so happens to be identical to the gospel account of the baptism of Jesus, he puts himself in the place of Jesus above Padre Pio. A seminarian who was kicked out for sexually assaulting other seminarians in the modern church. Lefebvre tracked him down, became close friends with him and fast-tracked him to the priesthood. Lefebvre then got in trouble for trying ordain priests in secret in the 1970s. Now that priest has left a long line of victims and is currently living in marriage to another man. When he met St Paul VI he blamed the people in the society even thought the pope quoted his sermons. He claimed to be the prophet of Our Lady of Good Success. He is a con man.
St. Marcel Lefebvre, pray for us!!!
Please grant the FSSPX more auxiliary bishops very soon to help staunch this modernist madness!!!🙏🙏🙏
Jesus said if you disobey the pope you will go to hell (Matthew 18:17). Lefebvre tried to ordain priests in secret, but he got caught and was ordered to stop. Lefebvre then ignored the pope and ordained them anyway. You should be praying that the Lord gave him the graces of conversion at his last moments.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 You're the one who needs to watch out for Hell, calumniator. Quo Primum says that anyone who tries to restrict the Tridentine Mass will face the wrath of Almighty God and the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul. Or I guess you can go ahead and do a pedophile clown dance in front of the heathen Pachamama with Bergoglio, and dance your way straight into an eternity in the Lake of Fire. You worship the Pope and that makes you a pagan. I worship Jesus Christ, a precondition of being a Catholic.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Disobey the Pope ? John Paul II , who kissed the Quran, which categorically denies the Trinity, Divinity, Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus in public was a Satanist. Allah the god of Islam is the old Moon god Baal, who is Satan. John Paul II carried on with a secret correspondence with a married woman for 30 years, even after becoming Pope. He is in Hell.
Archbishop Lefebvre is a Saint and is in Heaven.
Ref. Secret letters of John Paul II.
101 Heresies of John Paul II.
Both from Internet.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Maybe, but Bishop Anthenatis gives a good explaination of what happened. I was formally against SSPXers & how this all happened with Archbishop Lefevre but now am not so sure 🙏
@@goldenarrow3 This is easy to figure out once you know what to do. Go back and review Lefebvre's claims and reasons for why he did what he did, keeping in mind he is a trained bishop, he was part of Vatican 2 and he claimed to be saving the church and that he was the prophet of the Marian apparitions of Our Lady of Good Success.
Then compare all this to what Jesus said in Matthew's gospel chapters 16-18. Jesus' gospel is different to Lefebvre. Lefebvre sets himself up as the savior of the church. Even his encounter with Padre Pio, he steals the gospel's account of the Baptism of Jesus putting Himself in place of Jesus and Pio in the place of John. I have gone over this many time and I personally believe Lefebvre must have been a lunatic or satanic.
Traditionalism is a clever trick from the devil, when you first look at it, it makes sense and is holy keeping the traditions of the church. But it does not match the words of Jesus in the gospels.
I thank God that Bishop LeFevre took a strong stance in trying to save the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. He was courageous in taking a stand, when no one else did. There are many who say he was wrong in what he did. Of course, there will always be naysayers; but if we put ourselves in his shoes, we can see why he did what he felt he had to do.
To think that I was expecting the part two of the documental of the Latin mass, and they just ignored Monsenor, and it’s about the history of the council, unbelievable, Monsenor Lefebvre was the true hero, and so many so-called traditional can’t not even acknowledge the real history
Agree
It would have been a risky move
He was not totally excluded, but if true that it was never forbidden as Benedict XVI said (or something to this extend) therefore it could be argued that His excelency Lefevbre and the society (at the time) was only instrumental (of providence?) But in "conservative" catholic sources itvis controversial, and it is aiming to show other things than this controversy as it wants to appeal for the audience not only already seeking or attending the TLM.
Yes. Very disappointing & sad.
I think there is so much stigma and many loess and misinterpretation of the SSPX the point is to accompany and take people to the door step, so that if you have ears to hear and eyes to see automatically you deduce the great Archbishops position as being a positive one or at least part of it .
So many prelates with egg on their faces. Archbishop Lefebvre, pray for us!🌹
Thanks again for this wisdom. I'm 64, went to Catholic school from k thr 12.l am a revert trad altar boy 4yrs and you are teaching me so much God bless you.and thanks for having our holy Bishop on Viva Cristo Rey Ava Maria
I'm 65 and if it weren't for the Eucharist I wouldn't be Catholic: ugly churches, terrible music, bland rituals. Sad.
I believe it is time to defy the Pope and have as many TLM as possible. It is ridiculous to think that any Pope has the authority to restrict the celebration of the mass that has been said for hundreds of years. I think it is time to respectfully resist before he drives even more Catholics away.
Francis must be defied and challenged .He is the Antichrist.
Charles Coulombe always brings up a key phrase: “ultra vires” which means: “beyond your authority.” He jokes that it should be stamped on the forehead of every prelate so it can get drilled into their heads that there are things that are beyond the purview of their authority. Some have argued (I think incorrectly) that the pope does have the authority to do what Francis did in Traditiones Custodes. Even granting that he hypothetically does for the ske of argument, it ignores the fact that it is Not ordered towards the good of the Church or the faithful and is a needlessly cruel and punitively petty move.
Yes
@@Tracy77751 Defy the Pope? To be precise, defy the Antipope.
Excellent explanation of such complicated and unfortunate issue about Archbishop Lefebvre and JPII for the laity. But one thing I have very clear is that we ought to worship and obey the only one God. And we are not supposed to mingle with pagans or other religions but to evangelize, not proselytize of course, as Jesus commanded. I understand Archbishop Lefebvre was just doing his duty and he was so right.🙏
thank you 🙏
Way back in the mists of time I had the opportunity to kiss the Episcopal Ring of Blessed Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on three occasions. I pray for him by name in my daily Rosary, and I pray to him that he might aid the Church he gave his life to and for!
Sancte Archiepíscope Marcélle, intercéde pro nobis!
That behavior goes against the word of God- worshipping a man, making an item into an idol, and praying to anyone other than God. The catholic church has blinded so many by its heresy.
@@timothystjohn1674 Be at peace, Brother! I will pray for you. As a matter of fact, I just did!
@@timothystjohn1674 You are wrong!
Never dreamed an entire race of people needed millstones, but here we are. Here we are. 🇮🇱🦈
Please clarify the flag…..
@@swhite3883She is antisemeti c i guess
So true; not popular at Rome, especially now; but there we go.
Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek.
God bless. ;o)
You can't keep the faith if you don't know it and you wouldn't support Lefebvre if you knew the faith. Read Matthew's gospel chapters 16-18. If Jesus is right in these chapters then Lefebvre was a con man.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Where does any of this deal with the issue of Papal Prerogative .. note well, it was for offending against that, and that alone, that Archb Lefebvre was (finally*) punished. The point is: he was not a heretic, he was not schismatic, he did not repudiate papal jurisdiction: he acted without a prior papal permission (that happens, occasionally, you know, the Successor to Peter is Vicar of Christ not the General Manager of a company .. and that is the Faith).
Should Lefebvre have acted without a papal nod? No, for that is not proper protocol; no more, no less. Should JPII have constantly deferred the request to permit episcopal consecrations? No, the request was unpopular among the In-Crowd, but neither unjustified nor uncalled for.
In short, any passing pope, if he is willing, can undo the harm wrought with the gracious wave of one forgiving hand .. for ex-communication is a disciplinary treatment, not a declaration of war; it can be revoked even if only posthumously (and again, that is the Faith).
God bless. ;o)
* Lefebvre had indeed been irritating the Modernists for a couple of decades, and that got him severely disliked. But the Modernists were .. and are still .. the heretics involved here. Aux Bish Schneider simply points out the facts of the case - whether we like them or not.
@@TheLeonhamm You don't seem to have all the facts. In the 1970s the sspx started legitimately with papal permission, so they knew that this was a thing. Lefebvre should have known this anyway bec he was a bishop right. This is before JP2 was a pope, this was during the reign of St. Paul VI. Ok, so he wanted to ordain priests without letting Rome know in 1976. The reasoning behind this bec back in the day St. Thomas the apostle traveled to India ordaining priests without being able to ask St. Peter for permission. But this is not true, in those days permission would have been given before they left. However, the sspx cannot use this reasoning because they got caught before the ordinations and they were told by the authority of Christ given to the church not to ordain these men. They ignored the vicar of Christ the King and ordained priests anyway. According to canon law, this means all the priests of the SSPX are suspended and therefore they are all performing black masses. The consecrations led to excommunications, but when pope Benedict lifted them he clearly stated that all the priests of the SSPX are still suspended. (This is all without taking into consideration that Lefebvre knew some of the priest he ordained had previouly been kicked out of seminary for being sex offenders).
In the gospel of Matthew chapter 16, Jesus Christ the Davidic king (Luke 1:32), gives the keys of David (Is 22:22; Rev 3:7), to Peter and Jesus says this position is protected from binding the church to error and whatever the pope binds on earth will be bound in heaven. Jesus goes on to say if you do not obey His authority given to the pope you will go to hell in chapter 18, verse 17. So based on the words of Jesus there was no need for Lefebvre to do any of this. Lefebvre's gospel of traditionalism is different to the gospel of Jesus. According to Jesus, the pope does not have to give Lefebvre anything but Lefebvre is obliged to obey the pope. Traditionalism is the smoke of satan we were warned about by the pope of Vatican 2 St. Paul VI.
@@themoderncatholicwarrior7216 Of course, I may not have all the facts, so I'll do my best to deal carefully with the points you make: 1) The SSPX began legitimately enough, in late1970 CE, Pope St Paul VI's reflection on the crack that allowed the smoke of Satan to enter into the life of the Church came in early 1972 CE - it was aimed at doubt, uncertainty, problems, unrest, dissatisfaction and conflict, however, John Cardinal Wright, Prefect to the Congregation of the Clergy, was positive about the new Society and encouraged applications to the seminary at Econe even in 1973 CE. The first real 'problem' began to arise in 1974 CE, leading to a Canonical Visitation (by two very liberal priests).
2) Lefebvre had played the liberal card against the liberals (well if not wisely), by obstructing curial requirements and disobeying papal commands - exposing the Modernists' very successful tactics to public view. It was a serious offence, for sure, but no action was taken against the liberal liberals (Modernists), an action did proceed against Lefebvre, an astonishingly rapid suspension, as he expected.
3) The actual offence incurring automatic ex-communication - for a grave offence - here, was a breach of protocol, in that of Canon 751, a 'withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him' this is one of personal affront to the Vicar of Christ, so any pope can removal that penalty, for any reason, without losing authority or due regard.
4) No, the SSPX are not performing the Black Mass, in fact, Pope Francis gave them the facility to offer the Holy Sacrifice universally, e.g. at the Nuptial Mass, et al. The Society, however, is still in dubious canonical status (a serious problem) .. for it recognises the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, but he has not, yet, granted them full faculties.
5) The Pope's authority, in jurisdiction and power, is great .. but it is not unlimited; so, no, rightly refusing to obey an unjust law or an immoral command does not lead to hell - only to a possible temporal penalty (as with the ex-communication, which is, by the way, a disciplinary treatment not damnation to infamy); some great Saints have died with the stigma of ex-communication attached to them, cf, Joan of Arc (the penalty was removed posthumously).
6) The Pope is obliged, believe it or not, to defend the Faith, that is to receive, accept, and hand on Sacred Tradition, intact; he owed that much not only to Lefebvre but to us all; in so far as any pope has failed to do this, he has to that extent abandoned the divinely instituted office given to St Peter (e.g. in strengthening the brethren).
P.S. We own no more and no less than submissive obedience to our pastors, not blind obedience; the former refers to docility (teachability = a willingness to learn), and the latter requires the rejection of moral reason, which is contrary to the Faith; thus, Lefebvre did wrong (he offended the pope) and paid for it; that discussions to end the irregular canonical status of the SSPX have continued indicates that Rome admits, if without prejudice against itself, that it too mishandled some of the case made against him and the Society; these are the facts, so far as I can ascertain them; a good canon lawyer will soon keep us right.
God bless. ;o)
@@TheLeonhamm You can't say Lefebvre was justified in disobedience to the pope because other liberal priests were also disobedient and not punished. Do you really think this excuse worked when he stood before Jesus, the judge who sees all? From the moment he disobeyed the pope every mass he said profaned the body of Christ. If Lefebvre was an educated bishop, then I have to call his actions satanic.
You missed the point with Pope Francis. Pope Francis allowed them to say confessions and marriages under certain circumstances for a period of time. A lot of parishioners missed the point that he did not give them permission to say Sunday mass or even give a simple blessing. So their masses are black. I grew up in the SSPX, and I was one of the first students at the Tynong school. If you were in their system you would know the reason why Pope Francis has allowed their marriages to be sacramental. Marriages outside the church are natural institutions, but the church has elevated marriage to a sacrement. So marriages outside the church can be annulled. This is what was happening in the SSPX, many people involved with the SSPX got married, it would not work out so they would appeal to the Catholic Church to get an annulment. They would not accept Rome's authority on any other issue and it does seem like there is an abuse of the situation. This was being spoken about back in 1990s.
As I clearly pointed out, Jesus Himself said the pope will never bind error on the Catholic Church and then Jesus says if you disobey the pope you will go to hell. Therefore, Lefebvre cannot claim he was disobeying an unjust law. He is not the savior of the church. You act like ex-communication is no big deal, he is not allowed to say mass, he is profaning the body of Christ. This is the worst sin anyone can commit. This is literally satanic and he would have known being a bishop. Saints who were ex-communicated worked towards coming back to the church, but not Lefebvre.
Lefebvre's job is not to save the church, the Holy Spirit was alread in control. His job was to fulfill the will of the pope and spread the faith. As I keep quoting to you, Jesus Himself say if you do not obey the pope you will go to hell (Matt 18:17). Lefebvre's gospel is different to the gospel of Jesus, again this makes him satanic. The fact that you would say, "The Pope is obliged, believe it or not, to defend the Faith, that is to receive, accept, and hand on Sacred Tradition, intact; he owed that much not only to Lefebvre but to us all; in so far as any pope has failed to do this." This is not the gospel of Jesus, it is the opposite. Have you even read the bible? This is the smoke of satan. This is the reason why traditionalist believe the fake news stories like Pachamama because the faith has not been passed down in the traditional Catholic movement. If the traditions and the faith were passed down by men like Lefebvre, then his followers would have seen throw all this. Even you don't know the faith. You are just beleving what they tell you without question. If their canon lawyers were right they would not be ex-communicated. The only people who believe the sspx are those who don't know the faith.
St Marcel, ora pro nobis!
You could be invoking demons by doing this, only the pope has the keys of David to proclaim saints.
The only truth of late that came out of a Catholic religious was the preaching given out by the SSPX chief in England (the heart of Protestantism & Apostasy).unimaginable to come out from the mouth of the present Pontiff .
What is keeping well meaning but ignorant Catholics from seeing the light about this and so many more issues which are so blatantly obvious?
They have been brainwashed and conditioned for such a long time to think that +Lefebvre was a very bad man. The high prelates who oversaw this conditioning have a lot to answer for; they have led the faithful astray.
Be closed inside churches it's not the answer for the modernism inside our societies, we really need to go out and be salty.
The most big saints were closed inside their monasteries, St. Benedict didn’t even allow a single woman to enter his monastery, how about that? Maybe that’s exactly what we need for our salvation today, safe oases for catholic families and clergy amidst a desert created through freemasonic takeover of the schools, science, social and also religious life.
@@christianvoice77 Sure, that's right, but The first monks in Egypt for example, sometimes have lived also outside into society's for, living and preaching the gospel, it's a question of different charisma and vocations. Surely the world needs today both, how always
JMJ+ Truth is not always easy to accept. JPII was wrong in many of his actions, dictates, and motives behind his decisions. We base are assessments on what we see and hear. He was a favorite of mine for many years, but then, one looks at the facts and must accept the things that he did. I believe Archbishop Lefebvre was correct. People forget how many times he tried to get Rome to simply schedule a date after they had approved the Ordination of new Bishops and Priests. Their behavior was shameful and manipulative in a very negative manner.
JESUS AMAZING GRACE:
There is only ONE God with three parts, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Humans have three parts, the body, soul and spirit. ONE person three parts.
The Bible says that we are all sinners.
As it is written: There is none righteous no not one. Romans 3:10
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23
But we are all as an unclean thing and all our righteousness are as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6
For the wages of sin is death. Romans 6:23(the word “death” in this verse means eternal separation, from God in hell).
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.Isaiah 1:18
Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures and that He was buried and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures.1CORINTHIANS 15:3-8
In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins. Colossians 1:14
For by grace ye are saved, through faith; and not of yourselves
it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. Galatians 2:21
Your trust in Jesus and what He did for you on the cross, is what saves you from hell.
The moment you trust in Jesus and only Jesus, you are saved.
After people get saved they get baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
@JG And???? Nothing new here!!!
@@arnoeeuwigheid4499 You missed the point. The gospel of salvation is always the same.
@@jg1709 Not all the Bibles have the same contents. Sad but true!
@@arnoeeuwigheid4499 The Bible is the same.
@@jg1709 I thought so too JG, but the reality is very different. Sad but true...
Lefebvre did not get in trouble for his opinions on Vatican 2 or saying the Latin mass, he got in trouble for trying to ordain priests in secret. When he got caught he was ordered not to go ahead with the ordinations and he disobeyed. Jesus said if you disobey the authority of the pope you will go to hell (Matt 18:17).
Please learn some genuine Canon Law.
@@Mikemanify So you are saying Jesus was wrong and we don't have to obey the pope? The pope's authority is the same as Jesus' authority. You are aware that Lefebvre was part of Vatican 2, so why did he not bring up his objections then?
@@Mikemanify He was literally excommunicated for the illicit ordinations? What does that have to do with Canon Law, since he broke Canon Law?
@@ramennoodles4335 the "excommunication" was not an act of the Pope but rather an observation of a self-imposed excommunication, for which he never received a trial. There is a big difference here. One is a judgment by the Pope, the other becomes a question of the application of canon law.
The "excommunication" was not for ordaining priests but for consecrating bishops, and applied to all bishops involved, (2 consecrating bishops, and 4 consecrated). The consecration of a bishop for the SSPX was approved by the Pope prior to this, but the date kept getting pushed back and archbishop Lefebvre was dying, after a long time of enduring pushbacks by the Vatican he went through with the already approved plan to consecrate a bishop, but he consecrated 4 instead. This issue is much less black and white than you think, and I encourage you to look into it more. You can find the Archbishop's exchange of letters with the Holy Father online. I would encourage you to read them and really consider whether he was a schismatic in the true sense or not.
@@ryanpost8729 Will do. This is all very interesting. At the moment I hold the opinion that Archbishop Lefebvre was not wrong, but he wasn't right either.