EINSICHTROMISCH- KA THOLISCHEZEITSCHRIFT credo ut inteüigam

Special-number / numero special MÖNCHEN May / mai 1984

Freuadcskreii e. V der UNA VOCE-Gwppe Maria, • München I, tWadi 4M • Po*idieckkoe4o, München, Ne 2M700-W5;ppWien, Ne 2314763; SduffhauKn, Nr. I2-736O; Bayeriiche VemmbMik, Mtocben. Nr. 7323M9

Redaktion dieter Nummer Dr. Eberhard Heller

CATHOLIC RESISTANCE AGAINST MODERNISM ANDTHE QUESTION OF EPISCOPAL POWER IN THE CHURCH

byAlvaro Ramirez Arandigoyen

(extract from: FIDELIDAD A LA SANTA IGLESIA Nr.XVIII, Aug. 1983; transi, by G. Resch)

Buenos Aires, 3oth of April, 1983His ExcellencyMgr. Moisés CannonaIglesia de la Divina Providencia

A C A P U L C O / Grò. - MEXICO

Your Excellency,

(...) Following the above-mentioned, I am getting now to another subject, of a strictdoctrinal character, which should for once be duly clarified.

Before I wrote to you, my interest, concerning this question, induced me to acorrespondance with Mgr. Guerard des Lauriers and other important persons of the Catho-lic Resistance. The answers I received contained reflections, enlightening several of nyquestions, but I must still say, that they scarcely touch the essential complex of que-stions of the episcopal powers and their importance in the framework of the Church.

The matter is the following: the opinion of certain cercles of Resistance is thatthe administered consecrations by Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc are schismatic, because they arenot performed according to the valid ecclesiastical rules, e.g. the dispositions of theaffirmed Canon Law by Benedict XV. It requires for the election of a bishop the appoint-ment by the Roman Pontiff, and lays down the measure, if the rules are not being followed(We assume, that the new Canon Law, decreed by counter-Pope John Paul II, is not beingconsidered here.)

To be able to give an answer to the question, there should - to my opinion - bethree points to be clarified:

1. the nature of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff;2. the nature of the episcopal power in the Church;3. the attitude, as it is required in the religious position in the world.

Each one of these three points will be explained in succession, as, in my opinion, theCatholic centres of Resistance should work on more considered and thorough studies, asit is of importance that these matters should be reflected in depth and be taken up se-riously. Notice, that in several oriental Churches, united with Rome, the nomination ofthe bishop is done by the Patriarch and not by the Roman Pontiff, or by one or the other.But, on the other hand, the election of the Bishop of Rome does not depend on the Bishopof Rome, i.e. that a Pope cannot nominate his follower while he is alive.

1. THE NATURE OF POWER OF JURISDICTION OF THE ROMAN POPE

In the Catholic Church we must distinguish two kinds of power or authority: potestas or-dinis (power to consecrate) and potestas jurisdictionis (power of jurisdiction). The pow-er of consecration entitles to the celebration of the Holy Mysteries, to administer thesacraments, which conforms to the priesthood,- and in an absolute fullness to the bishops.The power of jurisdiction is the power to govern the Church (to define judgment), whilstthe Bishop of Rome is entitled to the universal right of judgement, the local right ofjudgement belongs to the bishops - in union with the Roman Pontiff.

The power of consecration follows unchangeable divine laws. But the power of ju-risdiction follows human laws; in conscience they oblige under sin, but they are change-able, according to the decisions of the Church.

The Council of Trent teaches that the power of consecration is given by the sacra-ment of- consecration by means of a specific rythe, and the power of jurisdiction by autho-risation of the Roman Pontiff. According to the Roman Pontifical, the candidate, questi- joned by the bishop, has to answer the consecrating bishop if the required Apostolic man-date is at hand.

In view of these considerations we must realise that the primacy of the Pope -

- the Bishop of Rome - who possesses the universal power of jurisdiction as well as theinfallibility, is a privilege, which, by tradition, is being recognised and defined forthe Bishop of Rome as follower of St. Peter and the Vicar of Christ. But in the strictsacramental sense of the Church, as administrator of the Holy Mysteries, the Bishop ofRome possesses no greater power of office than the other bishops, as followers of theApostles.

Concerning the procedures of the election, they have changed during the courseof time, as the (purely) ecclesiastical human and changeable laws were altered too. Thefinally codified form of the election by St. Pius X was the result of a long develop-ment, of which, at the beginning, it was up to the people and the clergy (of Rome) toelect their bishop. We must also remember the role that worldly authorities played onsuch occasions. That is how, for instance, it was due to the right of veto of the empe-ror of the Holy Roman Empire, which was used for the last time in 19o3, that the empe-ror Franz Joseph - using this right - prevented the freemason Rampolla, already electedby the bishops, to take the Chair of St. Peter.

It is therefore clear that the Bishop of Rome is entitled to the universal juris-diction for the election of all bishops of the local jurisdiction. But this election isin no way essential for the episcopal power of consecration in the sacramental sense.Meanwhile the bishop, who consecrates new bishops without required apostolic mandate,commits an illegal act of consecration, illegal consecrations and an extremely gravesin, which, by canonical right, is punished with excommunication. But this illegalitydoes not affect in any way the internal value and the sacramental validity, as the bi- x

shop has the distinguishing feature of a sacramental authority of power, a mysterious,all valid and absolute power, which is neither less than the one belonging to the Bishopof Rome, it does not proceed from him, nor can it be essentially been brought aboutthrough him.

2. THE NATURE OF THE EPISCOPAL POWER IN THE CHURCH

It has now become clear that the episcopal consecration in the Church contains the ab-solute fullness and absolute perfection of the power of consecration. It follows there-fore that the conflicts, concerning the carried out episcopal consecrations by Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc can refer only to the question of legality. According to the sane teaching,no one can be mistaken that the sacraments, administered by Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc are va-lid, that means, that the newly consecrated bishops have received, through the appro-priate rythe the fullness of the priesterhood, which have elevated them to the rang offollowers of the Apostles. It is perforce so, as the power of consecration as such doesnot depend on the power of jurisdiction. What is of interest here is only the fact tofind out if the carried out consecrations of Mgr. Thuc are illegal, (and in this casethey are schismatic, because there were no canonical mandates) or if they are still le-gal considering the present situation in the Church. We have to proceed from the basicassumption that the Chair of St. Peter is jurisdically vacant, in fact occupied by anumber of anti-'Popes', who support the heresy of the Second Vatican Council. It is un-derstandible that those, who do not accept this basic assumption, consider the consecra-tions of Mgr. Thuc as schismatic, because, in their opinion, there existe a Pope, whoseuniversal jurisdiction has not been respected.

The clarification of this conflict is of the greatest importance concerning those,who consider the Chair of St. Peter to be vacant, but still think that the consecrationsof Mgr. Thuc are schismatic, because there was no mandate of a Pope. They think thatnothing can be done concerning the consecrations of bishops as long as there is no Pope.

It is important to have a solution concerning the dispute, because we all knowthat the Holy See is not only vacant just now - because of the death of a Pope or an-other accidental circumstance - but because we stand in a very specific situation, inwhich the vacancy arises out of the heresy and there is no sensible reason to suppose,that the historical facts would soon and easily solve themselves.

Except for the fact of the concrete consecrations by Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc and bythe disturbances which they brought about, it is absolutely essential to ascertain thefollowing doctrinairy question: Is it permissible in a situation like ours that a Catho-lic bishop consecrates by circumvention of the canonical regulations?

I think that in a way the catechism gives us already the answer. We all know thd:in a situation of difficult and urgent need a sacrament can be administered without con-sideration of the normal circumstances of laid down rules. The spirit and the grace

give right to exist to the law and not the other way round. This is a profound evangelicprinciple and constitutes one of the most important criterious between Christianity andJudaism. I only mention some of the more important facts, which belong to the elementaryteaching:- In a case of serious danger of death baptism can be administered by every man, or ifnot available, by a woman, as long as the substantial ritual form is being used. (Pou-ring out water on the head of the person to be baptised, pronouncing at the same timethe words: "I baptise you in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Ghost.")And this is fully valid and in no way illegal.

- Also any priest can and must - in danger of death - absolve from sin and administerExtreme Unction, even if he does not possess the canonical right for the normal case,even if he is transferred back to laity or has been excommunicated by the Church; be-cause his priesterly power is eternal and inviolable and does not depend on the human-ecclesiastical laws, which govern the Church. In this sense the administration of thesesacraments are not forbidden but rather commanded.

- A similar criterion is valid for marriage in those cases, in-which it is not possiblefor an outstanding long time to visit a priest. Under this condition, and consideringthe fact, that in this sacrament the administers are identical with those who are tobe married, the will of marriage can be accepted as legal, because union in marriageand the procreation in the world are of divine order, and cannot be abolished by theunenforceability of ecclesiastical laws of human nature. Here too it is the clear caseof not being illicit.

IF THE SHEEP FALLS INTO THE WELL ON A SUNDAY, YOU MUST RESCUE IT. BECAUSE THE HUMAN BE-ING DOES NOT EXIST FOR THE LAW, BUT THE LAW FOR THE HUMAN BEING!

The same applies to the sacrament of consecration. All traditionalists accept withouthesitation that Mgr. Lefebvre took the opportunity and decided to ordain priests withouthaving the papal licence to act this way; because, facing the modernistic crisis and thecomplete failure of the hierarchy, there arose the necessity which demands the continu-ation of the Catholic priesthood.

Why shouldn't the same arguments apply at the same time - and even with greaterimpetuosity - where the episcopate is concerned? Here the necessity is extremly moregrave and not to be ignored, as it is the survival of the Church herself which is invol-ved. If the transmission of the episcopal dignity comes to an end, i.e. the apostolic-hierarchical system ends, the life of the Church on earth finishes.

The argumentation: wait and pray, God will 'save' His Church as by a miracle,seems to us, and this must be clearly stated, pharisaical, messianic and judaistic. Apartfrom this, it is a strange way of the tradition, as according to the Catholic faith, thetradition assures the continuation of the Church. The true miracle of this time lies in •the sacrament, that imparts the divine grace. This is the case at the fullness of thepriesthood and the apostolic succession.

What matters in the first place, is to get the clear knowledge about the true na-ture of the episcopal power in the Church. Our Lord Jesus Christ established His monar-chic constituted Church with Peter as the Head. But the power of St. Peter consists ingoverning the universal Church (potestas iurisdictionis) and in the papal infallibility.One may in no way confuse the fullness of power of St. Peter with a kind of sacred powerof a higher nature as the one of the bishops, who perpetuate the apostolic tradition,which means the Church herself. The Pope is therefore, in the strict sacramental senseanother bishop, just the Bishop of Rome, endowed in his office of bishop with the privi-lege of the universal jurisdiction and the doctrinarian infallibility, if ex cathedrahe makes decisions concerning matters of faith and morals. This is how things have to belooked at.

The denial or depreciation of these truths derives from the extentions of the po-pery in the last ecclesiastical centuries, which go back to the heretic doctrines of theJew Lainez (superior of the Jesuits) at the Council of Trent, where the Popéis supposedto be everything in the Church and represents inclusively the Church. Though the Councilof Trent did not accept these errors, they have still developed gradually in the courseof the last centuries and become the source of the feebleminded mentality of some 'tra-ditionalists ', who sift the mosquito and let pass the camel.

What then are the bishops in the Church? The answer is given again by the cate-chism. But many do not see clear. The bishops are the successors of the Apostles. Their

existence is determined by the apostolic nature of the Church, and t h e y are partof her existence. It is of this apostolic nature, transmitted through the episcopal con-secration, that depends the survival of the Church, of a Church, who is in her profoun-dest sense a sacrament. This means, that the Church is the true divine presence in theworld, the presence of the divine grace, which she bestows through the sacraments.

These subjects must be thoroughly studied and appropriately considered by theCatholic resistance, where it is of importance to I Lght against the modernistic heresy,and also because of the possible intention of attai king it in its whole dimensions. Tothis also belongs the false papolatristic traditionalism.

5. THE ATTITUDE TO BE TAKEN IN THE ACTUAL RELIGIOUS POSITION IN THE WORLD

Admitted the fact that the present situation of the Church is, as we have introductoryexplained it in our quoted manifestation, with a vacant Holy See, occupied with a num-ber of anti-'Popes' and an universal episcopate in heretic unity with the Second Vati-can Council - what actually means that these bishop thrones are also vacant -, we be-lieve that then, in a few years, the Roman, hierarchical and visible Church will havedisappeared on earth, swalloped up by the heresy.

This danger can and must be avoided by a full exertion of the potestas ordinisby the Catholic bishops, who are in the world as long as they live in it. If this iswhat obviously and in principle Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc is supposed to have done, thereshould never be an argument concerning this fact under the point of view of the Catho-lic faitïï

We do not know if Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc is such a 'saint' as Mgr. Lefebvre. We alsoignore if the movement, caused by the consecrations administred by him, will branch offin new extravagant ways or in sectarian hallucinations, as happened in Palmar. I formyself hope and trust that it will not happen and base my trust on the development, asYou, Excellency (Cannona), show forth by your personal engagement.

In any way it cannot be doubtful for anyone that a Catholic bishop has to makeuse of his power of office in the present situation. Growth and decadence of the eccle-siastical life in the world are both related to the light and the darkness of the apo-stolic light.

One is very much mistaken, if one wants to narrow the subject on holiness in thesense of a subjective, ethic attitude in the sense of 'devotio moderna'. What is ofinterest above this, is the objective holiness of the Church, which communicates it-self only in a sacramental way by means of the fully exercised episcopal powers.

A curve of the Church's decadence of the latest centuries proves that it alwaysoccurs when the bishops cease to execise their power of authority. The holy episcopalpowers, received from the Apostles and carried on through tradition, are of divine right.And here we ask the question which forces itself to be solved, regarding the Roman andApostolic Church in our historical hour of the present crisis and worldwide apostasy:there is no doubt, that the Roman Pontiff, bishop of Rome, is competent - through holytradition - to appoint the bishops sees according to his own right of universal juris-diction. This is undisputable and must not be violated.

But: Do the bishops, as successors of the Apostles, loose their episcopal powerto resume the continuation of the Church in the case of a longer vacancy of theHoly See? Do they loose the potestas generandi (the power of spiritual creation,of spiritual testimony; note of the editor) to found new local parishes, a power,possessed by the Apostles, which they applied in fullness in the old Church. Wasthis an outstanding power, belonging to the Apostles and only to them, and onlyunder the reservation of the primate of St. Peter, and which later on died out?(In this case the bishops would be a kind of reduced successors of the Apostles.Would then the Jew Lainez not be right?)

The potestas ordinis as well as the potestas generandi are of divine right. And in anormal government of the Church, as we knew it up to Pius XII, all this is orderly set-tled, harmonised and controlled by the Canon Law, even if without doubt, the bishopsof those times, as heirs of the modern revolution and as a modern people, had lostnearly totally the deep realisation of the apostolic nature of their status. This alsoexplains the sad role, played be the so-called 'traditional' bishops at the Second Va-tican Council: Obsessed by papism, they took refuge under the leadership of the anti-'Pope' Montini, who promised them deceitfully to save the true doctrine at the rightmoment. The result was, that the bishops - successors of the Apostles - did not exer-cise their power and threw the Church into the darkness of the modern heresy.

- o -

It is an elementary truth, which cannot be proclaimed loud enough, that the holy,catholic, visible and hierarchical Church is not founded solely on Peter, but Petera n d the Apostles, united in the community of faith in Jesus Christ. According tothe divine right it is therefore a duty in conscience for a bishop, who has still re-mained faithful in the world, under the threat of loosing his salvation, to exercisehis apostolic powers without restrainment, fully und wholly, so to contine the Churchof Christ.

The bishop, who acts this way, as well as the new bishops, consecrated by him,would certainly not be authorised to elect the Bishop of Rome, because this right be-longs to the local church in Rome, which ist, today illegally usurped by a heresy. Theyalso are not authorised to occupy the usurped bishoprics held by the heretics of thewhole world, but in agreement with tradition, they may found new churches and providethem with the necessary powers of office.*)

Further they can, in agreement with the clear catholic and orthodox tradition,meet for synods or local councils to condemn heresies and to govern the Church the waythe Apostles used to do - until such time that the See of Peter has been reconqueredfor the true Church. Nothing is in the way to elect also a patriarch.

What these bishops should not do, under any circumstances, is to elect a new Pope,also not to found any kind of sect and also not to adopt an universal jurisdiction byfounding a modern religious order, which would not be in accordance with the apostolicintention, (as Lefebvre does).

What they should do, is just this: to act the way the Apostles did - and nothingelse.

Your Excellency (Carmona) , with these short comments I allow myself to give youan idea to ponder about - to the well-being of the faith and the holy Church. The tra-dition of the Church is very rich in institutions, laws and customs, which can be re-stored to life nowadays with full legitimacy in this age of the catacombe, to which weare condemned. It is important to respect right into the last consequences the unchan-geable divine right, and also to understand to adjust and to actualise appropriatelythe ecclesiastical-human right, so that it may be put into the service of the faith.

Nowadays - as ever - we are more convinced that the gates of hell will not pre-vail against the Church. Even if she is reduced to a ninimum of her visibility, herpresence in the world will still remain until the end of time.

If we do not doubt this and follow humbly the principles of tradition, free fromsectarianism, messianism, and a mania of miracles, the grace of the Holiest will in-flame in us the Living Spirit through His Son Jesus Christ, and the Church will nevercome to an end.

May the Holy Mather of God, Mary - Queen of Heaven and also our Sovereign - prayfor us that our faith may not falter.

I ask for your prayer

In Jesus and Mary

(sig.:) Alvaro Ramirez Arandigoyen

Adress:

Editionis Fidelidad, Casilla de Correo 4224 C Central,1ooo - Buenos Aires, Argentine.

*) Note of the editor: Here it has been tried for the first time to define the duties,powers and rights of the bishops, consecrated by Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc. This subjectwill also occupy us in future. It will be brought forword in controversy, to be ableto pick out the sound arguments. In the meantime Mgr. M.L. Guêrard des Lauriers haspublished an explanation, which refers also to this subject and its first part hasbeen published already in the SAKA-INFORMATIONS of January 1984, the second part hasnow followed in the February-issue. We shall also try to find authors, who can giveus an information about the election of a Pope as such, about its possible realisa-tion under today's circumstances. Then the suggestions made by Mr. Ramirez wouldhave to be reconsidered.

DE LA RESISTANCE CATHOLIQUE A L'OCCUPATION MODERNISTEET DES POUVOIRS DE LEVEQUE ACTUELLEMENT

parAlvaro Ramirez Arandigoyen

(Extrait de: FIDELIDAD A LA SANTA IGLESIA n° XVIII)

A Son Ex e. Mgr Moïse CarmonaEglise de la Divine Providence - Ì

ACAPULCO (Grò.) , MEXIQUEBuenos Aires, 1 e 30 Avril 1983

Ex e e l l enee,

( » . . . ) J ' en viens maintenant à un au t re su je t , s tr ictement doc t r ina l , etq u ' i l convient de comprendre une bonne fois«

Avant de vous é c r i r e , mon i n t é r ê t pour ce t t e question m'a conduità un échange de l e t t r e s avec Mgr Guérard des Lauriers et avec d 'au t resprotagonis tes de la r é s i s t ance cathol ique. Les réponses que j ' a i obtenuescontiennent des ré f lex ions qui m'ont éc la i r é sur divers problèmes, mais 'qui, essentiellement, ne fontqu 'aborder le vaste sujet , t r è s complexe, des ipouvoirs de l ' évêque , et l eu r portée dan s 1 ' iigl i s e •

Voici comment se présente aujourd'hui le problème : suivant l ' o p i -nion de cer ta ins réseaux de r é s i s t ance l e s sacres conférés par Ilgr Thucsont schismatiques, parce-cm' i l s ne remplissent pas l e s conditions habi-tuellement p r e s c r i t e s par l 'Eg l i se> ce l l e s qui sont normalement énoncéesdans le CIC de Benoît XV. Ce Code exige pour la promotion à l ' ép i scopa t ,que le choix so i t exprimé par le Pontife Romain et indique l e s péna l i t é sencourues par l e s contrevenants aux d ispos i t ions p resc r i t es« II est bienentendu q u ' i l r e saura i t ê t r e question du nouveau "Droit Canon" promulguépar 1* antipape J - P d l .

A mon sens, pour bien t r a i t e r ce t t e question il faut bien entendrel e s données suivantes :•t) Nature du pouvoir de j u r id i c t i on du Pontife Romain. l

2) Nature du pouvoir de l ' évêque dans l ' E g l i s e . t i !3) Leur in te r - re la t ion .Cette dernière donnée est dépendante de la situation actuel le .

Chacun de ces t ro i s points ne peut, i c i , être t r a i t é que brièvementC'est pourquoi l e s réseaux de résistance doivent y réfléchir plus- longue-ment, les étudier plus à fond.- Il s 'agi t à cette occasion de faire untravail sérieux, exhaustif.

1) NATURE DU POUVOIR DE JURIDICTION DU PAPE

Dans l ' E g l i s e cathol ique on d is t ingue deux sor tes de pouvoir : Potestaaordinis (transmission des ordres) et Fotestas juridictionis( établisse-ment du droit)

Le pouvoir d'ordonner s'étend à tous les pouvoirs du prêtre quireçoivent leur couronnement dans la puissance episcopale : célébrationdes saints mystères, dispensation des sacrements. I

Le pouvoir de juridiction permet de gouverner l 'Eglise (de direle droit) . La juridiction universelle est l'apanage de l'évêque de Rome,les évêques ont conjointement au pape le pouvoir de juridiction au plan ¡local.Le pouvoir d'ordre dépend de lois divines intouchables* Le pouvoir dejuridiction,, par contre, est dans le domaine des lois humaines - quiobligent en conscience sous peine de péché - mais ne dépend que de 1''Egli-se.

Le concile de Trente enseigne que le pouvoir d'ordre est trans-mis, par le sacrement propre à 1 'ordination, au chrétien promu au premierrang du clergé; que le pouvoir d'ordre diffère donc du pouvoir de juri- 11diction qui est délégué par lePontife Romain. Selon le Pontificale roma- "num,l 'ordinand doit répondre positivement à l'évêque consécrateur qui

lu i demande si la Lettre Apostolique exigée est bien présente-D'après ces considérations il nous faut garder à l ' espr i t que

la primauté du pape, évêque de Rome, qui inclut la juridiction universelletout corame l ' i n f a i l l i b i l i t é doctrinale, est le privilège oue lui recon-naît la Tradition parce- que le successeur de St Pierre sur 3e SiègeRomain est comme lu i le Vicaire de N.S- J»C. Mais au sens strictementsacramentel, ainsi que l'entend 1'Eglise, qui est chargée de la perpétu-ation du ministère sacré, l'évêqueAde Rome n'a, de par sa fonction, aucunpouvoir de plus que les autres évêques : i l s sont tous successeurs desapôtres«

L'élection du pape a suivi le cours de l 'h i s to i re , ses modalitésont changé comme d'ailleurs les lois purement humaines de l 'Eglise. Lesmodalités du choix canonisées par Pie X, résultent d'un lent développe-ment ; au début le peuple et les clercs de Rome choisissaient leur ëvêque«Nous devons aussi nous rappeler le rôle que jouait le pouvoir séculier."Pensons, par ex,au droit de veto que possédait le Souverain du SaintBnpire .Romain Germanique« C'est grâce à ce droit-que l'empereur François-Joseph exirça pour la dernière fois en 1903 «que le franc-maçon Rampollafut écarté alors du Siège de Pierre, bien qu'il a i t été élu pape»

Ceci est également évidents jouit du droit de déléguer aux ordi-naires locaux, et donc de les choisir, celui qui possède le pouvoir lejuridiction universelle. Mais ce choix n'est en aucune manière implinuédans la transmission du pouvoir d'ordre en son sens sacramentel- II n'em-pêche qu'un évêque qui ordonne d'autres évêques sans le Mandat Apostoli-que requis, consacre dans l ' i l l é g a l i t é ; les ordinations sont il]égaleset sont un péché grave que le droit canon sanctionne par l'excommunicationdu consécrateivr(_et des consacrés«-) Mais ce vice legalen'affecte pas lavaleur intrinsèque et la validité du sacrement. ïh effet ce qui caracté-rise le pouvoir ép -iscopal c'est la capacité mystérieuse,totalement vali-de, absolue,, d'administrer les sacrements, capacité qui n'est pas inférieu-re à celle de 1'évêque de Rome, qui n'a pas en lui son origine et dontla nature est indépendante des pouvoirs du pape.

'Nature des pouvoirs d'un évêque dans lDe ce qui vient d'être élucidé il apparaît que la promotion episcopaleassure à 1»ordinand la plénitude et la perfection du pouvoir d'ordre» II 's*ensuit évidemment que les contestations des sacres- conférés par MgrThuc ne peut porter que sur leur légal i té . D'après la saine doctrine les

¡sacres en question sont valides. Le r i t e approprié a donné aux nouveauxévêques la plénitude des pouvoirs sacerdotaux? qui en ont fait les sucera-seurs des apôtres» II en est nécessairement ainsi puiqu'intrinsèquementle poteatas ordinis n'est pas subordonné au potestas juridictionis»

Ce qui "est en jeu ic i c'est uniquement la légitimité des sacresconférés par Mgr Thuc . Us l 'ont été sans mandat papal r la situationdans laquelle se débat l 'Eglise just i f ie- t -el l e qu'on passe ° u ^e?

Il nous faut assurément partir d'un préliminaire fondamental,le fait que le St Siège est, en droit, vacant,,et phys i a*f f ^ ^ f Pgjune série d'antéchrists qui propagent l 'hérésie dite de ™*^aS " * ™doit donc comprendre que ceux qui rejettent lea. sacres de Mgr Thuc, etles appellent schismatiques, refusent ce préliminaire.Mais il y a aussi ceux qui tiennent le St Siège pour vacant, mais consi-dèrent cependant que les promotions conférées par Mgr Thuc sont schi3ma-tiques, parce-que faites en l'absence de la l e t t r e dimissoriale (Mandatum)d'un pape. Pour eux tout sacre est prohibé, tant qii'il n'y a pas de pape.

La solution de cette difficulté est très importante, car laChaire de St Pierre n'est pas seulement momentanément vacante, coitine aprèsle décès d'unpape ou par suite d'autres circonstances accidentelles« Enfait , nous sommes au contraire dans une situation sans précédent, danslaquelle la vacance a pour cause l 'hérésie , et il n'y a aucun motif rai- iscnnable d'espérer que cette conjoncture historique prenne fin dans l'avennir sans difficulté.

Il est indispensable que nous nous élevions du cas particu-l i e r de Mgr Thuc et des remous qu'il crée, jusqu'au cas général a étudier!au vu de la conjoncture,la doctrine catholique permet-elle qu'un éveauepasse outre aux prescriptions canoniques et procède à des ordinationsepiscopales ?

A mon avis, la réponse se trouve déjà, en un certain sens,dans l e catéchisme«

.flous savons tous au ' en cas rie nécessité un sacrement pexix-être administré en dépit des régies établies pour des circonstances nor-males. Ce sont l 'Espr i t et la Grâce qui donnent vie à la l e t t r e de la Loi,et non vioe-versa. C'est un principe ém.J.némcnt évangélique, qui consti-tue un cr i tère fondamental pour distinguer christianisme de judaïsme.Voici les principaux cas d'urgence que l 'on trouve dans les manuels élé-mentaires»- En cas de danger de mort, tout homme, ou à défaut, toute femme peut ad-ministrer le Baptême, pourvu que la forme sacramentelle soit respectée.(Verser de l 'eau sur la te te du sujet en disant : " Je te Baptise au Nomdu Père, du f i l s et du Saint-Esprit".) Cela est tout à fait valider etde plus absolument légitime.

- Une personne en danger de mort peut aussi recevoir l 'absolution de sespéchés et l'Extrême Onction, d 'un prêtre auelconque, même s ' i l n'a paslicence de le faire normalement, même s ' i l a été réduit à l ' é t a t laïque,ou s ' i l est excommunié, car se? pouvoirs sacerdotaux sont éternels et nedépendent pas de lo i s ecclésiastiques «thumaines» Administrer en cas denécessité n 'es t alors pas i l l i c i t e , bien au contraire c'est un devoir.- Il y a 1 e cas d'un mariage pour lequel on ne peut trouver an Prêtrependant une période de temps extraordinairement longue. Ceci étant certainet étant donné que les futurs époux sont eux-mêmes 1 esministres de leurmariage, Ì eur volonté d'union suffit à la rendre légitime. En effet 1 'u-nion matrimoniale et la multiplication sur terre sont un commandementdivin qui ne doit pas être annulé par l ' impossibi l i té de suivre des règle-ments de nature humaine^décrétés par l 'Eg l i se . Ici aussi le sacrementest tenu pour l i c i t e .

Il FAUT SAUVER DU PUITS L'ANE QUI YEST TOMBE LE DIMANCHEL HOMME N EST PAS FAIT POUR LA LOI MAIS LA LOI POUR L HOMME.II en va de même pour le sacrement d ' o rd ina t ion . Tous l e s t r a d i t i o n n i s t e sacceptent sans r é f l é c h i r oue Mgr Lefebvre a i t s a i s i l ' occas ion et se soi tlancé à consacrer des p r ê t r e s , sans r e spec te r l ' i n t e r d i c t i o n papale, cardevant la marée moderniste et l ' a p o s t a s i e de la h i é r a r ch i e s ' e s t affirméele p é r i l qui exige que l ' o n fasse tout pour la survie du sacerdoce catho-l i q u e .

Pour quel le ra ison l e s mêmes arguments ne s e r a i e n t - i l s pasencore plus forts lorsqu'il s'agit de In survie de l'épiscopat? Ici lepéril est infiniment plus pressant et plus grave et il faut y faire facecar il s'agit de Ja survie de l 'Eglise elle-même. En effet s ' i l ny a plusd'évêque pour transmettre le potestas ordinis,c'est la fin de la hiérar-

apostolique et donc de l 'Eglise militante. Les évêques perpétuent l'EgliseL'évêque de Rome est l'un d'entr'eux, assisté du privilège de 1 ' infai l l i - 'bil i té pontificale et assumant le pouvoir de juridiction universelle.

Nier ou minimiser cette vérité c'est succomber à la papolâ-tr ie qui s'est développéei durant les siècles récents, et qui remonte auxenseignements hérétiques du juif Lainez (Général de la compagnie de Jésun)répandus au concile de Trente. Selon Lainez le pape est le tout de l 'Egli-se et il représente l 'Eglise en microcosme. Il est vrai que le concilede Trente n'a pas adhéré à ces erreurs ; elles se sont pourtant répanduesavec de plus en plus de force jusques à notre époque. Ce sont les respon-sables de la mièvrerie de tant de traditionnistes, qui filtrent le mouche-ron et laissent passer l.e chameau.

Précisons' donc ce que les évêques sont dans l'Eglise» Raressont ceux qui le voient clairement malgré les lumières du catéchisme quinous dit qu'ils sont 1 es .succesáeurs des apôtres« L'Eglise est de natureapostolique, i l s en sont la partie essentielle. Cette nature est perpétuéepar le sacrement d'ordination qui conditionne la survie de l'Eglise, quiest elle-même un sacrement si l'on va juqu'au fond du mystère. Ceci yeutdire qu'elle rend Diçu présent en ce monde en lui communiquant sa Grâcepar le canal des sacrements

RELATIONS ET CONDUITE EXIGEES PAR LA CONJECTURE ACTUELLE.

Nous pensons, a i n s i que nous 1 'avons i nc lu s dans nos prolégomènes, que

I

la situation présente a deux anomalies : 1) La Chaire de St Pierre estvacante, 2) Bile est occupée par une série d'imposteurs en (communion avec

-.l'ensemble du • clergé apostat. La hiérarchie universelle a basculé dans1 'hérésie proclamée par Vatican I I . En clair cela signifie que les siègesépiscopaux sont du même coup vides et occupés» que dans quelques annéesla hiérarchie romaine et l 'Eglise visible auront disparu de la surface dela terre, englou-ffies dans 1 'hérésie.

Ce danger ne peut être conjuré que si les évêques catho-liques - au cas où il en resterait malgré tout actuellement,- exercent

pleinement le "potestas ordinis". Apparemment c'est ce que Mgr Thuc avoulu faire» S'il en est bien ainsi la foi catholique indique que l 'exerctce de ce pouvoir ne saurait constituer un sujet de polémique»

Nous ne savons pas si Mgr Thuc est un "saint"de la trempede Mgr Lefebvre. Nous ne savons pao ,non plus, si dans la lignée aposto-lique ainsi perpétuée il y aura des déviations sectaires, hallucinatoirescomme cela s 'est produit à Palmar cíe Troya. Personnellement j 'espère avecconfiance qu'il n'en sera pas ainsi, et je fonde cette confiance sur vousMgr Cannona qui incarnez le développement futur de cette lignée. Il nepeut plus désormais faire de doute : un évêque catholique a rempli ledevoir de sa charge. Croissance et déclin de l 'Eglise suivent la lumièreou 1'obscurcissemen-fc du soleil apostolique.

On se trompe lourdement si 1 'on veut restreindre le sujetde la sainteté à une dévotion moderne personnelle et subjective. Ce quiapparaît avoir le plus d'importance c'est la sainteté objective de l 'Egli-se, qui se répand par le seul canal des sacrements dont la source est leplein exercice que les évêques font de leur pouvoir. Lo courbe du déclinde I7Eglise au cours dés siècles derniers montre qu'il s'amplifie lorsqueles évêques ne s'acquittent pas de leur ministère.

Arrivés à ce point nous nous posons la question qui estimpliquée dans la solution de la crise qui emporte l 'Eglise : les évêquessurvivants ont- i ls le droit de sup^pléer le pape pour donner des t i tulaireaux sièges épiscopaux vacants ? Evidemment non, puisque seul l'évequede Roméale pouvoir de juridiction universelle. Mais, dans ce cas histo-rique de vacance prolongée , les successeurs des apôtres perdent-ilsle pouvoir d'ordre, c'est à dire de perpétuer l 'Eglise?

Est-ce qu'i ls perdent le "potestas generandi", la puissance d'engendrerà la Vie Eternelle, en fondant de nouvelles communautés locales de l 'Egli-se ? Ce pouvoir les apotres l 'avaient pleinement dans l 'Eglise d'antan;i l s l 'exerçaient complètement. Etait-ce un pouvoir exceptionnel qui s'estensuite éteint ? Eux aussi respectaient le primat de Pierre, c'est bienvrai- Alors, pourquoi les évêques seraient-ils une version dégénérée desapôtres auxquels i l s succèdent ? Le "potestas ordinis" et le " ffotestasgenerami! » sont pareillement d'institution divine. Quand 1 «Eglise availencore le chef de son gouvernement, comme ce fut le cas jusqua Pl e AU*TOUT ETAIT EN ORDRE, harmonisé, contrôlé suivant le droitcanonique« Pour-tant les évêques de ce temps là , héri t iers de la Révolution moderne, a-vaient presqu'entièrement perdu la pleine conscience de la nature aposto-lique de leur rang. C'est aussi une des explications du t r i s te role queles évêques traditionnistes ont joué durant Vatican II r frappés Je l e -pidémie de papÔlatrie, i l s se sont réfugiés sous les ailes de 1 antechri^tMontini, qui le.3 a perfidement rassurés en leur promettant que, l e moniertvenu, il ré tabl i ra i t la bonne doctrine. C'est assurément une vérité élé-mentaire, qu'i l faut proclamer bien haut, à savoir que l 'Eglise visibleest une hiérarchie qui n 'est pas fondée sur Pierre seul, mais aussi surles apôtres unis par la même foi en N.3. J.C. -

! II en résulte que si un évêque a malgré tout gardé la foi catholique, il' a un devoir auquel il ne peut se soustraire sans mettre son ame en poràlm-ortel, celui d'exercer tous ses pouvoirs, sans restriction aucune, afirde continuer l'Eglise. . . , ,

L'évêque qui se conduit ainsi, et les évêques qu'il ordonne,n'ontpaB.il est vrai, qualité pour élire î'évêque de Rome, car ce droit appar-tient à l ' ég l i se locale, laquelle est illicitement occupée par les héré-tiques« Us ne sont pan non plus habilités à occuper les sieges épisco-paux usurpés par les hérétiques du monde entier ; pourtant, en accord avecla Tradition, il est de. leur compétence de fonder de nouvelles églisesen leur assurant tous lus soutients sacerdotaux nécessaires«*

De plus les évêques catholiques résistants > en accord avec la traditionla plus authentique, ont la latitude de se réunir en synodes ou en concilelocal, afin de condamner les hérésies et de gouverner l 'Eglise, commele faisaient les apôtres eux-mêmes« Cela ne dépend que d'eux, aussi long-temps que la Chaire de Pierre n'est pas reconquise. Rien de sérieux nes'oppose à ce qu'i ls élisent un patriarche-

Ces évêques n'ont pas, par contre, le droit d'élire le pape, de s'a-tribu er une quelconque autorité universelle comme la juridiction permet-tant la fondation d'un nouvel ordre religieux (ce que fait Lefebvre) •Ce qu'ils ont à faire c'est ce que faisaient les apôtres, et rien d'autre.Cher et eminent évêaue ( Carmona) je me permets par ces brèves considéra-tions de vous inviter à r,éf]¿chir dans l ' in térê t de la vraie Foi et poui

le bien de 1 'EgliseLa tradition est riche en lois , institutions et coutumes que nous pouvonsremettre en usage, en toute légitimité aujourd'hui, dans les catacombesretrouvées. Il est essent ie l le se conformer au droit divin jusqu'en seodernières conséquences, de même qu'il convient de bien appliquer à lasituation présente les lois ecclesiastico- humaines. Aujour d'hui, comme toujours* nous gardons la conviction que les portes de l^enfer ne prévau>dront pas contre l 'Eglise. Sa visibi l i té est réduite au minimum, maiselle restera présente jusqu'à la fin des temps.si sans céder au doute,nous nous en remettons humblement aux principes de la Tradition, sansfaire une secte, sans attendre le Miracle-..

Traduction, par André Corrihons, du texte, légèrementabrégé, de la l e t t r e à Mgr Carmona, signée :•

Alvaro Ramirez Arandigoyen.

* Remarque de la RédactionCeci est une première tentat'ive de définir les pouvoirs, les droits etles devoirs des évêques ordonnés par Mgr Thuc. Ce sujet continuera denous occuper, et sera étudié dans la controverse de manière à ne retenirque les points de vue soutenant toute critique catholique. Entre-tempesMgr Guérarrï des lauriers a publié une prise de position qui t rai te ausside ce problème, et dont la première partie a paru dans " SAKA-informati-onen" de janvier 1984. Nous allons étudier et pu-'blier cette déclarationégalement dans EINSICHT : nous nous efforcerons de trouver des auteursqui peuvent apporter des renseignements sur le choix du pape en tant quepape, sur les modalités de ce choix dans les circonstances présentes.Les points de vue avancés par M. Ramirez seront ainsi mis à l'épreuve»

*# *#

QUEST-CE QUE LE LEFEBVRISME?

Les contradiictions de Mgr Lef ebvre font qu'à un moment oua un autre de ses sincérités successives ou opposées, il apparaîtavoir partie liée avec le Grand Menteur. Certains, comme nos amismexicains, se demandent s ' i l n'est pas un agent de la subversionqui s'est infiltré parmi les catholiques résistants, pour en fairedes "trados" prêts au ralliement. En somme il ferait, sur un autreplan, le travail d'un de Gaulle appelé sous le prétexte de sauver1 Algérie afin de mieux la livrer aux communistes, après avoir bbrisé la résistance française.

L'hypothèse alternative, c'est qu'il est victime d'une utopiequ il a répandue, à savoir qu'un pape peut travailler à démolir1 Eglise- Dans ce cas, il serait mené par le bout du nez parSa Noirceur qu'il appelle "Sa Sainteté" et qui occupe le SiègeApostolique. Obnubilé par la cathedra Pétris, il serait le jouetde fallacieuses promesses. Pour des lendemains qui chantent,1'antéchrist lui ferait accepter de donner comme gage (entr'autres)la lutte que le prélatsuspendu mène contre les "durs". Il espëre==rait avoir gain de cause lorsque les catholiques seraient mispar lui hors de combat. Et c'est pourquoi il les traque partoutavec constance, vigueur et hypocrisie.

Jean Perchicot

MGR. LEFEBVRE EST IL ÉVÊQUE OU SIMPLE LAÏC?

parEberhard Heller

(trad, par André Corrihons)

Depuis l 'allocution prononcée le 27.5-1976 par Mgr L. à Montréal (Canada),au cours de laquelle il déclara que lui K|rceU L. avait été ordonné prê-tre , puis évêque par le franc-maçon Afchiîle) LjLéñartJ, une controverse estnée et sejpoursuit en public comme eñ privé 7 la question est de savoir

jue deLscopal

. . - _w — — „„ quelques références au pro-blème ainsi posé, nous n'avons jusqu'ici pas pris publiquement position,car, à notre^avis les éléments de réflexion dont nous disposons ne con-duisent pas à une conclusion assurée : la démonstration que nous conce-vons ne tranche cette question de validité ni dans un sens, ni dans l 'au-t r e . Notre combat contre le lefebvrisme n'est d'ailleurs nullement en jeucar des arguments irréfutables en montrent la nécessité: par ex- l ' ob l i -gation faite aux membres de la "Fraternité" d'accepter le N.O.M. commevalide et de reconnaître comme papes légitimes des hérétiques tels queMontini, Luciani, Wojtyla - le tout sous peine d'expulsion -. Ces preuvesnous assurent que Mgr L» et son organisation ne constituent qu'un groupede contestation traditionniste à 1 'intérieur de la secte ap-ostate, quele lefebvrisme n'a rien à voir avec la véritable résistance catholique :au contraire il la détruit systématiquement partout où il le peut.

Entre-temps une série de "prêtres" a rompu avec Ecône : ces exclusexercent leur "sacerdoce" comme pasteurs de différents centres de messe.Ce fait nous oblige à a t t i rer l 'attention générale sur le problème dontdépend leur appartenance au clergé-

Voici d'abord un extrait de l'alloeutionn prononcée par M.L. àMontréal, car ces phrases ont déclenché la controverse aux quatre coinsdu monde :

"Le St Père ( Montini ) a été éduqué dans un milieu moderniste - - .Il n 'est donc pas surprenant que ce pape ai t réagi d'une manière oui

diffère de celle de Pie IX, Pie X ou Léon XIII . En conséquence il a r l -gné sur le concile un esprit qui a inhibé toute résistance au modernisme,dont l'emprise s'exerça par l 'action d'un groupe de cardinaux à la têteduquel le card. A.L. dirigeait la manoeuvre avec une certaine autori té . . .

Et voici qu'il ya deux mois la revue traditionniste CHIESA VIVA apublié au dos de sa couverture - je l ' a i vu de mes propres yeux -une photo du card. A.L. accompagnée de ses états de service en tantque franc-maçon, comportant la date du jour de son init iation, legrade qui fut sien, ìa date à laquelle il fut élevé au 20e puis att?0e degré, le nom des loges par lesquelles il est passé, avec celuides vil les correspondantes- Depuis lors» cela fait environ deux mois,cette publication n'a, à ma connaissance, déclenché aucune réaction,provooué aucun démenti. Malheureusement, je dois vous dire que lecard. "Achille L. a été mon évêque, que c'est lu i qui m'a ordonnéprêtre, qie c'est lui qui m'a sacré évêque . . . Heureusement ces ordi-nations sont valides ;;? malgré tout ces nouvelles m'ont renuplid'amertume. ( Citation d'après le texte de la traduction en allemanddu Dr Hugues Kellner*)- de Rochester, E.U. - dans sa Lettre n° 72de jui l le t 1977 ; les données de la carrière maçonnique d'Achille L.se trouvent dans le n° 51 du périodique CHIESA VIVA de mars 1976,adresse : C.V., Editrice Civiltà, Via Galileo Galilei 121, I - 2500

Comme le Dr Kellner a pu le démontrer comp lémentairement, Mgr L. avaiteu connaissance avant mai 1970 de l 'aff i l iat ion d'A.L. à la f-niaçonnerie-

*) M.Hugues Maria Kellner PhD324o Iroquois Rd.Caledonia, N.Y.14423 / U.S.A.

Curri cul-am vitae d'Achille Liénart1907; 1912 r

Ordination sacerdotale- Réception dans la loge du "Grand"Orient de France" à Cambrai;, affiliationultérieure aux loges de Lille,Valenciennes et Paris-1919 :

nomination :"Visiteur"(18e degré)1928 / : 1924 : h

consécration episcopale» élévation au 30e degré»

Pour corser le tout A.L. assistai t à des messes noires-

Ccrriculua v. de Marcel Lefebvre

Fé le 28.11-1905 à Tourcoing, diocèse de Lille- ,ELeve au séminaire de Lil le , dans lequel A.L- enseignait en qualité deprofesseur avant qu'il ne fût élevé au 1er rang du clergé»Ordonné prêtre le 21*9-1929 par A.L- DEVENU EVEQUE entretemps» (apparemmentSacré évêque le 18.9.1947 toujours par A.L»Seconde source relatant 1 'appartenance d'A.L. à la franc-maçonnerie :André, Henri, Jean, marquis de la Franquerie r "L'infail l ibil i té pontifi-cale", 1970, p. 80 f- On peut se procurer le l ivre chez r Jean Auguy, édi-teur de la "Pensée française", Chiré-en-Nontreuil, 86190 Vouillé»L'auteur relate aussi que A.L. était un Iuciférien» Le marquis étaitchambellan secret du pape, et très au courant des infiltrations maçonni-ques au Vatican, en particulier des menées de Ramprolla, secrétaire d'Etatsous Léon XIII.cardinal et franc-maçon»Vite après la divulgation des fai ts , des doutes se firent entendre con-cernant la validité des sacres de A.L. et K.L»- I ls se sont rapidementporté sur la question de savoir si A.L. maçon luciférien de haut gradeavait l ' intention apostolique de l 'Eglise lorsqu'il reçut en 1928 1'one-

Dans cette optique il a été raisonné de la manière suiva^noe : mêmeLiénart, simple prêtre, n ra pu conférer l'épiscopat à M.L., les deuxco- consécrateurs étaient certainement en état de le faire. Ces considdé-rations seraient pertinentes, si M.L. avait été prêtre à ce moment La .C'est une condition nécessaire à la validité du;sacre» Or si A.L. n 'é ta i tpas évêque, M.L- n 'é ta i t pas prêtre»La auestion de l ' intention réelle d'Achille Liénart lorsqu'il se présentaà l'ordination au 1er rang, a'été-jugée des deux manieres contradictoirespossibles dans les cercles de la résistance catholique ' - , . _ . . - . . oT1- Le Dr Hugues Marie Kellner (E.U.) a essayé d'établir l ' invalidité enarguant de fraudes maçonniques dans le Codez Iuns Canonici de 1917,

îï2 SAI SüsSil'Pf fO.;Î:l l ? ? ^ é ? a tenté d* détruire cette démonstration.

(Lettre du 14.6*79) , -,*** + *GTn-ria Ripstra. dans "Trento" a penché pour la validité»

I S Eiîelï 1 «ï misî en doute au début de 1980. (Il est le,rédacteur¡e " iakît Informationen"- la SAEA est l'association des résistants

Ä ? f f f l ^ ^ très sérieusemente ^ r o ^ ! Syd^feu/^cîfcuiaire du 27.4.1983) a pris position

f l^c f l ' î r ^ t ' qû 'A .L . aurait assumé l'intention de partir «, -.mission apostolique, catholique et romaine, afin d'être réellement ointpar le Saint-Esprit et pouvoir nuire ultérieurement à l 'Eglise lorsqu'ilserait devenu authentiquement é'êque.. De même, dans les messes noiresle prêtre luciférien consacre le pain et le vin dans l 'intention durenouvellement de la transubstantiation afin de pouvoir profaner hideusement le Corps et le S ang destinés à la Rédemption.t II s'entoure, ce

prêtre dévoyé,de toutes les précautions nécessaires à la validité de s~amesse". (C'est du inoins ce qu'il croit - note du trad»)

Fous ayons souvent discuté de ce problème, ici à Munich, avec OthonKatzer(t), prêtre et Dr en théologie ? nous l'avons examiné à fond, (pen-dant plus de huit-heures) : l'appartenance à la franc-maçonnerie ne suf-i i t pas a prouver que le récipiendaire excommunié ne reçoit pas les donsdu Saint-Esprit, signifiés par l'ordination . L'ordination est simplemententachée d'irrégularité» le Codex Iuris Canonici interdit dans ce cas1 usage des pouvoirs frauduleusement acquis. la fréouentation de^messes"noires ne suffit pas davantage à trancher pour l ' invalidité du sacrementconféré au luciférien. la légalisation de l'hérésie et la destruction

compte de la situation eminente d'A.L. dans la maçonnerie, alors lesdoutes sur l'intention réelle de Liénart se trouvent fondés.On peut aussi en conclure qu'il a assumé la bonne intention dans ledessein de nuire à 1'Eglise,ainsi que nous l'avons écrit ci-dessus» Maisil n'y a plus aucun moyen de contrôler cette éventualité.Ainsi nous sommes conduits à opiner qu'on ne peut trancher la questionposée. Pour le faire il faut se livrer à des spéculations sur la moraleet la Psychologie d'A.L., puisque Liénart étant mort on ne peut plusl'interroger sur sa position et ses di^siu ositions en 1928. Le pourrions-nous que nous n'en serions pas plus avancés, car 1) A.L. pourrait- ilse rapjveler précisément son état d'esprit antérieur, 2) et dans ce casvoudrait-il nous dire la vérité ?Le tutiorisme est la règle pour la dispensation des sacrements : on doitassurer la certitude de leur validité. Si celle-ci se ré^yèle douteuse,l'Eglise prescrit deles administrer de nouveau sub conditionne; même HgrGuérard des Lauriers - alors simple religieux - a conseillé a ceux de sesdiciples qui avaient été "ordonnés" par "Mgr" L., et qui l'avaient quittépour cause de divergences doctrinales » de se faire ordonner sous condi-tion, étant donnés les circonstances et le principe : nous faisons nôtre:cette recommandation, car elle nous apparaît bien fondée.

Is MGR, LEFEBVRE A VALIDLY CONSECRATED BISHOP?

byEberhard Heller

(transi, by Gladys Resch)

Since the adress of Mgr. Lefebvre on May 27th, 1976 in Montréal / Canada, in which heconfirmed that the freemason Achille Liénart had ordained him bishop, the debate, ifthe administered consecrations were valid, i.e. if he himself is a validly consecra-ted bishop, does not come to an end, neither publicly nor privately. Apart from occa-sional indications concerning this problem, we have so far not given any official com-mentary concerning this subject, as the present informations are, in our opinion, in-sufficient for a conclusive evidence for the validity of the consecrations We think thatan evidence can neither be carried on positively or negatively. For our battle againstthe Lefebvreism sound arguments (for instance the obliging acknowledgement of the in-valid 'N.O.M.' for the members of the Fraternity - commanded by Lefebvre under threatof dismissal -, the obliging acknowledgement of the heretics Montini, Luciani and Woj-tyla as legitimate Popes) have been sufficient to show that Mgr. Lefebvre with his or-ganisation is only a traditional group of rebels, inside the apostate 'Church'-ograni-sation, which has definitly nothing to do with the true Catholic resistance, but on thecontrary destroy it according to plan, wherever it is possible.

In the meantime quite a number of priests have left the Fraternity and work asclergymen in the different Mass-Centres (or try to do so). This circumstance leads us

to point out the problems connected with their ordinations.Here we bring extracts of a speach, given by Mgr. Lefebvre an May 27, 1976 in Mon-

treal, which has started the world-wide debate:"The Holy Father (= Montini) was educated in a modernistic enviroment... There-

fore it is not surprising that the Pope did not react as St. Pius X would have done, asPope Pius IX would have reacted or Leo XIII. As a consequence there was such an atmos-phere at the Council, that there was no resistance against the modernistic influence,which was mainly supported by a group of cardinals, ordered and to a certain extent di-rected by cardinal Liénart... Now, I saw it with my own eyes, two months ago, the tra-ditional periodical CHIESA VIVA published in Rome, at the back of the cover, the photo-graphy of cardinal Liénart with all his freemason supplements: The day and date of hisinitiation into the freemasonry, the grade to which he belonged, then the date of hisadvancement to the 2oth grade and the 3oth grade of the freemasonary, his affiliationto such and such a lodge in such and such town. Since this publication became official,two or three months have gone by, and I heard of no repercussion and no contradiction.Unfortunately I must tell you now that this cardinal Liénart is my bishop, it is HE whohas ordained me, it is he who has consecrated me bishop. It's not my fault... Luckily,the consecrations are valid... Nevertheless it was very painful for me to learn aboutthis." (Quoted from the German translation by Mr. Hugo Maria Kellner, Ph.D. / U.S.A.,letter No.72 of July 1977; the informations concerning Liénart, membership to the free-masonary are to be found in No.51 of the periodical CHIESA VIVA, of March 1976; adress:C.V., Editrice Civiltà, Via Galileo Galilei 121, I - 251oo BRESCIA.)

As Mr. Kellner was also able to prove, Mgr. Lefebvre knew already before May 197oof Liénart's membership to the freemasonary.

Regarding the concerned persons:Achille Liénart: Marcel Lefebvre:

19o7 ordination 1912 entry into the free- Born on 29th Nov. 19o5 in Tourcoing / Dio-mason lodge at Cambrai; cese of Lille; student at the seminary of(then association with Lille, where Liénart taught as professorlodges in Lille, Valen- before his own consecration;ciennes, Paris) 21st Sept. 1929 ordination by Liénart, con-1919 nomination to "Vi- secrated in the meantime;sitor" (18th grade) 18th Sept. 1947 consecration to a bishop1 924 promotion to the by Liénart.3oth grade.

1928 consecrationto a bishopBesides Liénart assisted at black Masses.

Source for the membership of Liénart to the freemasonry.2

André Henri Jean Marquis de la Franquerie: "L'infaillibilité pontificale" 197o, pg.8o f. The book is obtainable at: Jean Auguy, Editeur "Diffusion de la Pensée Française,Chiré-en-Montreuil, F - 8619o - Vouillé.

The author also proves that Liénart was a satanist. The Marquis was secret camer-lingo and had a good knowledge of the freemason-infiltration into the Vatican, mainlythe activities of Rampolla, who was under Leo XIII undersecretary of state, cardinaland freemason.

Shortly after these facts had become known, there were doubts concerning the va-lidity of the consecrations of Liénart und Mgr. Lefebvre. But soon they resumed to thequestion: had the highgrade freemason and satanist Liénart the intentional dispositionin 1928 to receive the episcopal consecration validly? If one would have to answer thisquestion in the negative, the following consequences would arise: If Liénart had not re-ceived the episcopal consecration validly, the consecration administered to Lefebvrewould naturally also be invalid, the same applies then to the ordinations administeredby Mgr. Lefebvre.

In this connection the following has been argued: even if the episcopal conse-cration of Marcel Lefebvre, administered by the priest Liénart should be invalid, thetwo co-consecrators have administered the episcopal consecration validly. This argumentwould be correct, if one would know for certain that Lefebvre was previously validly or-dained priest. But as his ordination to the priesthood was also administered by Liénart,whose episcopal consecration is just questionable, one cannot agree to this argument, as

on the other hand the administration of a valid ordination to the priesthood can onlytake place if the episcopal consecration of the administrator is valid.

The question whether Liénart was in 1928 intentionally so disposed as to receivethe episcopal consecration validly, was answered in cercles of the Catholic resistancein different ways:- Mr. Hugo Maria Kellner Ph.D. / U.S.A. tried to furnish proof of the invalidity withreference of possible forgeries in canon law of 1917 (letters No. 72 and 75 from 1979).- In 1979 the late Abbé E. Robin / France falls in with this argument.- Father Guérard des Lauriers, then still priest, tried to refute the brought up argu-ments (letter dated 14th June, 1979).- Mrs. Gloria Riestra in TRENTO also accepted the consecration as valid.- Doubts on the other hand were mentioned by Mr. A. Eisele, editor of SAKA-Informationsat the beginning 198o.- Bishop Vezelis (THE SERAPH of 1983) and also the Mexican bishops have strong doubtsconcerning the validity.- Prof. B.F. Dryden / U.S.A. (circular-letter, dated 27th April, 1983) supports theirvalidity.- To presume that the consecrations were valid one could state the fact that Liénart hasdefinitely received the consecration validly, just because as a bishop he wanted to bedetrimental to the Church. (Similarly as hosts are also validly consecrated by fallen-away priests at 'Black Masses', with the intention to desecrate the Body of Christ.

We have discussed this problem in Munich repeatedly and in details (over 8 hours)with the late Rev. Fr. Otto Katzer Ph.D.: the fact of belonging to the freemasonry isnot sufficient as such to prove the invalid reception of the consecration. It makes itonly irregular. The CIC forbids in this case the practice of the illictly received pow-ers. The attendance as such at 'Black Masses' is not sufficient indication. Liénart'sheresy and the destruction of the faith at the Second Vatican Council, which is alsomentioned by Mgr. Lefebvre, give no direct indication of his mentality respectively hisintentional mental attitude in 1928, at the time of his consecration (respectively 'con-secration'). But if one adds all aggravating points and takes into consideration the ex-posed position of Liénart in the freemasonry, they do raise doubts for a proof of neces-sary intention for the valid reception. Rev. Fr. Katzer, who first vehemently refusedto be concerned with this subject, said shortly before his death, "that things do notstand in favor of Lefebvre." He meant the validity of his consecration; doubtful, be-cause of the uncertain intention of Liénart.

But it could have been possible that purposely, as mentioned before, Liénart hadthe necessary intention, because he wanted to be detrimental to the Church. This possi-bility is being accepted - only: it cannot be proved.

In our opinion there is no positive proof either for the validity or the invali-dity of the consecrations. Such a risky undertaking must necessarily end in moralttheo-logical, respectively moralpsychological speculations, as it is impossible to ask car-dinal Liénart about his attitude at that time - he is dead. If he could give an answerit would be uncertain if he would remember his former intention, and if yes, if he wouldtell us the truth.

For the administration of the sacraments the principle "tutior" should be applied,i.e. the infallible administration must be chosen. In a case of a proved dubious admini-stration, the Church orders to repeat this sacrament sub conditione.

In this present case we agree with the recommendations, given by Mgr. Guérard desLauriers OP to his pupils, who had been ordained by Mgr. Lefebvre (or: 'ordained') andhad left his organisation due to dogmatic differences. At the time Mgr. Guérard des Lau-riers was not yet consecrated Bishop, and said: Considering the circumstance of theirdoubtful ordinations by Mgr. Lefebvre, to submit to an ordination sub conditione.

INFORMATION: AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR MGR. PIERRE MARTIN NOG-DINH-THUC HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED BY VIETNAMESE PEOPLE IN ORDER FROM VIETNAMESE

'N.O.M.'-BISHOPS, - OTHER INFORMATION WILL FOLLOW NEXT TIME.

A N O I N T E D A N T I C H R I S T S

byPeter J. Andrews

The doctors of the Law warrant that a satanist or a heretio may validly be anointedinto any rank of the clergy ; that if he happens to be a bishop he may validly dis-pense the sacrament of order to his fello« traitors. There is however one condition -supposing all the others satisfied - upon which the doctors concentrate, becauseenemies of the Church apparently will hardly be able to fulfil it. But they can do so,for they can have the actual intention of performing what the Church does in the sa-crament of order í then the condition is respected ; and the doctors are satisfiedthat the catholio intention is not beyond the dissemblers1 reach. Thus they vouchsafethat, despite the "irregularity of their ordination" free-masons are legally-commis-sioned antichristian priests in Christ's Church. Can we agree with such a conclusion ?

Protestants and satanists want priesthood to be abolished so that Jesus' sacrificemay not be renewed on any altar - which they have now achieved almost completely -.We contend with natural candour that we are unable to entertain two opposite intentionsat the same time, that the stronger one will always prevail. During.the ritual ceremonythe "moles'" sacerdotal intention merely consists in an outward display ; indeed theyknow that once the rite has been completed, they will resume their fight against thecatholic mass and priests. - They cannot at the appointed time have an opportune fitof orthodoxy to forward their fraud. Nolens, malens, they do what the Devil wants themto do. This is what Jesus Himself has said : "one cannot serve two masters at the sametime, God and Mammon". Therefore we write this down against the doctors as blot numberone.

The subtle experts that nothing can deceive have a paradoxical argument that gives anadvantage to criminal satanists over benighted heretics : as they hate Christ, they•positively want to damage his Church as much as possible. They think that they mustget (or become) true clerics. Satanical priests or bishops enjoy mystical powers thatthey can use against the camp of the saints : they will be more potent against theirMaker by usurping His grace-bringing mediation, exactly as they do in "Black Masses".They are, then oareful to oonfect a valid mass, and their heinous intention warrantstheir intenïïon of operating the transubstantiation : indeed they immediately startdefiling the Saviour's crucified body once the consecration ha3 been completed. - Suchis the satanists' behaviour and creed according to our subtle theological experts whoshare the satanists1 sacramental views about transient sincerity. - This subtlety meansthat the Holy Trinity may be wilfully abused by the Devil and made subservient to thehellish plot of the free-masons ; but God cannot serve the fiends who attack and destroyHis ohurch. The subtle argument is a grievous blasphemy which we put down as blot numbertwo.

The "Acta Apostolorum" provide us with an astounding occurence : St Peter inflictingcapital, punishment upon Anania3 and his wife. He and his wife, though, had not triedto destroy the cbristian community ? they sincerely intended to join it. The troublewas that they pretended having given the whole price of their wordly goods to thedeacons, whe«tas they had kept part of the money in case they should need it later.St Peter before striking them dead with his spiritual condemnation said to Ananias î"Why did you lie to the Holy Ghost ?" (V, 3). These words explain the shockingvengeance that the Head of Christ's Churoh exacted for so small,,apparently-innocuousa fraud. The lesson cannot then fail to escape our attention, since God emphasized it'with two miraculous deaths. Today we must understand from this atrocious episode thatno "moles" howsoever dormant can deceive the Holy Ghost and be anointed into the churchas God's missionaries. Despising scriptural evidence is blot number three.

The doctors of the Law apply the same criteria to dispensers and receivers. But thereal point is this : when does a Christian enjoy the fniit of a sacrament ? - 1/henit brings him the grace it normally procures him ex opere operato. V/hat validitymeans for him is the only relevant question to which the theological experts havenever cared to answer. They have never thought of the supernatural essence of the

thing which sacraments signify and are meant to achieve. The sacraments of the dead,i. e. Baptism and Penance, are validly received when they bring (back) into divinelife, disgraoed souls that were labouring under (mortal) sins. It is true the sinners'intention is then all - important, not the darkness of "their souls : the same has beenaptly said about the dispensing ministers ; the sins they may have committed cannotinterfere with the validity of their ministering. But the other sacraments are called"sacraments of the living" because they are supposed to procure additional graces toChristians already partaking of God's life. Therefore the Church has required that thecandidates to the sacrament of order, which is the most eminent sacrament of the li-ving, should confess their sins on the eve of their consecration. Their hearts must beas pure as the hearts of the Apostles on the day of Pentecost. - On the contrary thesouls of moles are as black as the spiritual death that they choose when they concealfrom the Fathers-Confessors their being devoted to Satan. During the actual ordinationthey commit a second sacrilege when they are anointed with Chrism and pretend to recei-ve the Holy Ghost. They only receive their condemnation from Him, exactly as when theyeat their condemnation in the Euoharist : Jesus and the Holy Ghost repel their soulsand their infernal tenants still farther on the way to abysmal night.

It is absurd to maintain that these souls then spiritually marked for Hell will forever bear the stamp of the Holy Ghost which is indelible and makes them priests "inaeternum, secundum ordinem Melchisedech." Not visited by God's grace they cannot beattained by the secondary effect of bhe spiritual unction that ought to have communi-cated them the special grace apostles always require to fulfil their ministry. Lackingwhat is essential they are surely deprived of the aftermath.

The doctors1 point of view is sheer terrene legalism. They ought to deal with trade-union problems not with supernatural ones. Blot number four.

The truth of the preceding mystical process is attested as expressing both the Spiritand the Letter of sacramental laws by the Holy Ghost who has had the constitution"Cum ex Apostolatus Officio" written for us in 15SJ. It is directed at "the foxes who 'devastate the Lord's vineyard" and whom we now call "moles" because of their under-ground work. Here is an excerpt of § 6 : "If it ever appears that a bishop... beforebeing promoted... deviating from the catholic faith has fallen into any heresy, hispromotion will be void and null". This puts an end to every nonsensioal speculationabout conflicting intentions. Since a true pope wants to avoid equivocation, Paul IVhas insisted heavily : "Nothing can validate such episcopal consecrations"... "Suchmen, when raised to the rank of bishop3... or Supreme Pontiffs have not actuallyreceived any right of spiritual or Temporal government in the Church." As the infil-trated moles have never been bishops, they must not leave any poison in the Church."Every one of their deeds, words or decrees, every act of their administration isvoid and null. These have not imparted any right or power to anybody." After the im-postor, all his progeny is expelled. All the tunnels that had been burrowed are filledup again.

This irrefragable explanation cannot be despised by any Christian, however great adoctor he may be.

There have been controversies about the field of application of this most importantConstitution : this is unavoidable, since there is no papal authority to tell thetruth in all fields.

* ) The dootors of the Law assert that only the CODEX IURIS CANONICI can be applied.Contrariwise some sedevacantists claim that the Bull has only juridiotional

authority. If, however, we read § 6 with unbiassed critical sense, we realise thatevery potential form of existence is denied to the consecrations of moles. They are notmerely "irregular" or "illicit". Since "nothing can validate them", they are mysticallynon existent as well.

* ) The popes of the schismatic Eastern Church, though excommunicated have alwaysbeen recognized as validly ordained in the apostolic succession. This is alleged

against Paul IV s constitution » freemasons are also excommunicated ; they howevercan be validly ordained.

Only in one case would the problem of a pope's ordination afford some similarity toAchille Idénart's. We have to imagine a very unlikely hypothesis ; we must supposethat a schismatic pope should plan infiltrating into the Roman Church in order toattack the doctrine of papal supremacy from inside his Church. To encompass this endhe would pretend to be converted. Then he would manage to be raised to episcopacy and,by means of his fraud, become a bishop in the Uniate Church. Anyhow his case wouldremain exceptional, for he would not work for a secret society. Moreover an orthodoxof the Eastern Church is no heretio -. Having, perhaps, no responsiblity in the seces-sion of his Church he may even have some connection with Jesus1 mystical Body (i.e. beunconsciously a catholic).

* ) A lady-philosopher declares that heretics only are hit by the Bull. We can butagree with her. But she goes on saying that free-masons have never been condemned

as heretics. At the same time she recognizes that they are more dangerous than Lutheror Calvin. - Common sense retorts that if mystical rejection is certain for protestants,it is all the more certain for enemies that are far more satanio, and undoubtedlysevered from God.

There are enough proofs of the masons' hellish conjuration to convince any Christianjury if assizes could be held against religious frauds. In fact masons may be dubbed he-retics for the very reason why the lady finds it impossible to put a label on theseservants of the Devil. They lie about their real religion and never utter an errorex-qualité but as a personal creed.

Achille Liénart for example never revealed he had been a free-mason since 1912. Heonly began defending modernist heresies and the cult of Man divine, when another free-mason, rosicrucian Roncalli gave the signal that he had awaited for so long a time :now Rome was to be changed. Shall we say that masons gratuitously persecute and destroythe catholic Church ? là it sensible to diagnose that, since no theologian has describeda specific masonic heresy, masons are catholics as well as anything else ? Is theirs amerely secular conjuration because, unlike normal dissenters, they pretend to adhere tothe religion with which they disagree ? (or, rather, they have pretended till they couldpreach their own credo).

i

All these questions find an answer if we realise that every "obedience" has its specialreligious affinity. So, by their multifarious errors the different "lodges" contribute'to a syncretic heresy, the worship of Man : every false ideology or doctrine, everyfalse religion is good, for, as K.W. said it builds up the "treasure" of Man. Masons,obviously, may be anything, except catholics.

It is, now, easy to understand that the secret society is the sewer that has been laidto be the confluent of all the heresies extant. The masons' treacherous warfare againstthe catholic Church is the human counterpart of the arch-liar's mystical warfare againstGod.

We must conclude that the lady-philosopher will never catch the criminal she looks for,because of her tutiorist method. That fish is too fine and sly not to pass through hernet that is too loosely-knit. We prefer the methods the police recurs to, to havebandits convicted. Our tribunal (and God's we dare say) won't discharge the secretsociety, because mafiosi will p^ad "not guilty" (lest they should be murdered). The"foxes" whom Paul IV wanted to strip of their disguise are not ordinary heretics. WeCall them "moles". They must be despoiled of their spurious spiritual unction.

* ) Another more detective-like catholic lady owns that Liénart was a heretic anda satanist, but Bhe loathes thinking that Cum ex Apostolatus Officiò prevents

us from admitting he has been a bishop. "Let us think," she says, "of all the priestsin the diocese of Lille that would have been but laymen !" And she adds : "throughLefebvre's failure, - that is a consequence of Paul IVs decree, - think of all theChristians of Senegal that would have been deprived of every sacrament, Baptismexcepted." She concludes that free-masons can be God-anointed messengers. The curiousthing in her way of arguing is that all the time she has never quailed at acknowled-ging that Rome has become the breeding-ground of apostates who have suppressed clergyand sacraments altogether I

• • LE TEMPS DE L'APOCALYPSE

parErich Becker

Traduction d'André Corrihons

Les signes qui peuvent^à jus te t i t r e ê t re i n t e rp r é t é s comme avant-cou~reurs de la fin des s i èc le s sont de deux so r t e s , et i l s se développentparal lèlement de nos jours . Il y a "le tonnerre du feu nucléai re dontla menace f a i t trembler la t e r r e " (Philbert) et l e s symptômes de l ' a g o -n i e dans l aque l l e se débat l ' E g l i s e catholique. Le signe le plus impres-sionant pour les- mondains éloignés de Dieu, c ' e s t l e feu nucléa i re , etpour l e s catholiques f i dè l e s , l 'effondrement de l ' E g l i s e . Mais, ni l ' unni l ' a u t r e ne const i tuent des tableaux que l ' o n puisse décrocher et en-l eve r de l 'environnement»La menace nuc léa i re n ' a pas- de l i m i t e s v i s i b l e s ou audib les . Elle estdevenu le spectre épouvantable qui hante l e s hommes pour lesquels c i -v i l i s a t i o n et riches-s-e s ign i f ien t amusement, passe-temps ;ceux pour quil e s maîtres-mots sont "plus de démocratie", niveau et qua l i té de v i e ."Paix et sécur i t é" i' - c ' e s t ce que, clame une humanité angoissée quij^ïépAr e pour elle-même la catastrophe finale« En même temps nous sommesapostrophés par l e s paro les du Christ sur la Parousie, l e s révé la t ionspr ivées et le chap. V de la première l e t t r e de St Paul aux Thessaloni-ciens- : l e s f rères dans la Foi doivent ê t r e informés des signes précur-seurs de la fin du temps« "Cornine un voleur dans1 la nu i t " voici que "sur-vient le jour du Seigneur". Il prendra le monde par surpr i se , pourtantses prémices sont perceptibles- pour des chrét iens a t t e n t i f s : " Regardezle f iguier . « • " (Luc, 21 - 29), et , "Alors que l e s hommes parleront dep;aix et de s écu r i t é , c ' e s t a lo r s qu'une ruine soudaine fondra sur eux."( 1 Thess. V, 3 J.Quel est la conversation du jour , son sujet inépuisable ? Quel est lemot qui s'impose dans les- "conférences au sommet" ? Qu'est-ce qui met enbranle l e s mouvements de la paix, l e s ç a c i f i s t e s , l e s marcheurs , l e smanifestants de la paix? Qui et quoi gâtent la soupe des propngandistesde la mort de Dieu, athées jad is insouciants , subitement é t r e i n t s par lapeur, au point que l eur visage en est déformé et devient la car icatured'une "face de clown" ? (Boll )'«. Les lamentations des hommes s 'enf lenten une clameur d'aboiements angoissés, de hurlements et d ' in ju res , s ' é t s -l en t en g r ibou i l l i s« Pourquoi donc ? I l s déplorent ce q u ' i l s s'imposenteux-mêmes, l eu r auto-châtiment, la colère des Dieux q u ' i l s sont devenusau f a i t e de leur o rgue i l , en cherchant à tout savoir ,à tout fa i re parpure bravades " Nous a l lons bien le savoir ! Nous a l lons voir qui com-mande à la maison. Nous parlons haut et f o r t , nous, ê t res fabuleux, nousqui sommes des Dieux à 99%«-" Mais a l o r s , pourquoi ces piaulements lamen-

- t a b l e s , ces1 bêlements p l a i n t i f s r "Paix et sécur i té ! " , qui évitent dese sen t i r coupable ? ( cf. I Thess. V, 3 ). A ce t te jo in ture il convientde c i t e r l ' a l l o c u t i o n blasphématoire de Montini à l 'occas ion du Premier' a lunissage, p lag ia t qui retourne complètement l e s termes employés parSt . Luc, de manière éhontée, af in de louer la suffisance présomptueusedes hommes ,"Honneur à l'Homme ! Honneur à sa pensée, à sa science, à sa technique,au triomphe de l ' audace humaine ! Honneur à la synthèse des a c t i v i t é ssc i en t i f iques , à la puissance o rgan isa t r i ce de l'homme dont l ' e s p r i t etl ' h a b i l e t é manuelle peuvent fabriquer l e s instruments de la conquête dumonde ! HONNEUR A L HOMME ROI DE LA TERRE ET MAINTENANT PRINCE DU CIEL !Honneur au Vivant que nous som mes, en qui se r e f l è t e l ' image de Dieuet qui, en se soumettant l ' u n i v e r s obéit au commandement bibl ique : "Mul-t ip l i ez -vous et régnez !"Sont-ce là des paroles de p-ape ? N 'es t -ce pas p lu tô t la fo l l e présomptiond'un f i l s de perd i t ion" ? ("Vous serez tous comme Dieu"- Gen» 111,5 )Montini a v a i t - i l p'erdu la raison 1 Voici une au t re de ses déclarat ionsqui appel le à l ' hybr i s« aux débordements de l'homme : "Selon son principeet sa déf in i t ion , l'Homme est gigantesque et d ivin" . Gigantonranie etpanthéisme !! Il faut sans cesse r a f r a î ch i r les- mémoires, car une foulede chrét iens vé r i t ab les continue de t e n i r pour impossible l 'occupationdu St Siège par 1 •'Ennemi, et refuse d'en cro i re l eu r s Yeux. Pourtant

quelle contribution ne faut-il pas apporter aux rhéthoriques non-catho-llques1 et à l ' i do lâ t r i e déguisée pour pouvoir jouir du t i t r e d'espritlibre ! S'il doit arriver que l 'énergie nucléaire, don de Dieu, se déchaî-ne pour notre perte, alors il sera facile de trouver les responsables-Voyons maintenant le deuxième signe, dont l 'apparition est presque insup-portable pour un catholique, l'auto-abdication de la chrétienté, 1 'auto-démolition de l 'Eglise dirigée par des papes qui n'ont de catholique quele nom» Notre unique consolation c'est de ne plus penser à leurs palinodie!et à leurs réformes pseudo-catholiques»L'église apostolique qui, jadis, s'étendait jusqu'aux extrémités de laterre et y annonçait intégralement la doctrine du Christ, en tous lieux,s'est incroyablement réduite, en un temps incroyablement court. C'est le"petit troupeau" (Luc Xlt,32) qui perpétue le culte millénaire. Ses prê-tres, qui n'ont pas voulu apostasier, continuent de renouveler, de ma-nière non sanglante, le sacrifice du Christ sur la croix. Le petit trou-peau, qui croit encore à la présence réelle sur ses autels du Corps etdu Sang de Jésus> est rejeté comme une caste de parias : "Nous sommes jus-qu'à présent comme les balayures du monde, le rebut des hommes-(1CoIV,1jjLe catholique, demeuré dans cette fidélité mystiaue, perce à jour lacomédie raffinée, et pourtant farce plutôt inane, présentée par lesColin Maillard qui jouent à découvrir "l'Esprit du Concile". Il garde desyeux pour voir» des oreil les pour entendre, sa conscience pour juger, etsan coeur pour sentir avec l'Eglise» II n'a pas jeté tout son viatiquedans le chapeau des joueurs d'orgue de barbarie qui égrènent la rengaineconciliaire de "l'aggiornamento". C'est ce type de chrétien vigilant quivoit l e s signes précurseurs de la Parousie surgir en notre époque«Le scandale de la mise au rancart du Saint Sacrifice, remplacé par"l'abomination de la désolatiori'Cétablie là où elle ne devrait pas être -que celui qui l i t comprenne !' "? (Marc XIII, 14) prend à ses yeux un reliefsaisissant» C'est le péché mortel de notre temps de l'abandon. On décou-vre à grand'peine quelques î l a t s de foi catholique. Autour de nous c'estla sarabande des bulles de savon "oecuméniques". "Quand le Fils de l'hom-me viendra, trouvera-t-il seulement la foi sur terre ?n (Luc XVIII, 8)'.Déjà en 1976 1 e dr Hugues Kellner comptait que sur mille catholiques ilen restai t au maximum trois professant la doctrine vraie, usant du réa-lisme, de la connaissance, de la sensibilité catholiques« Portant aujour-d'hui nos regards sur l'environnement, cette évaluation nous semble déjàtrop optimiste. La désertion et 1 e ralliement au "monde" s'accomplissentau grand jour, avec un cynisme sans précédent. La marche, drapeau en tête,.pour prendre ses quartiers dans le camp de l'Ennemi, a été soigneusementétudiée et programmée par le Grand état-major, ordonnée par le Haut- çom-mand'em,-ent de l'armée, exécutée par des officiers stupides et ressentiecommie un grand soulagem. ent par les sous-officiers et les hommes de trou-pe- C'est la plus grande, la plus insensée des trahisons de l 'h is to i rehumaine» On ne peut la comparer qu'à celle de Judas. Rares sont ceux quireconnaissent cette infamie pour ce qu'elle est : un raz-de-marée de ladéraison.Les hommes sont drogués par le culte de l'humanitr. Rendus Tous par cetteinjection de divinité, i l s ont abandonné le Christ • "Quand vous verrezl'abomination . . . que celui qui l i t comprenne !"Alerte générale ! Mais les pompiers dorment ! La lumière rouge clignotesans arrêt , mais le guetteur n'y voit que du vert.

Le canot de sauvetage, si pet i t , que le dr Kellner appelle "Eglise Res-capée" ne cesse d'envoyer des- S.O.S., mais on danse sur le paquebot"Esprit du Concile" qui poursuit sa croisière en zigzaguant dans lebrouillard- Dieu a donné à l'homme le l ibre choix, même celui de se dé-truire» Dieu est chassé de sa propre maison comme un intrus : voilà lepréliminaire obligatoire à la consommation des siècles- Le Christ l ' adit» C'est cela la condition préalable, et non pas la menace nucléaire-Sans refus de Dieu, pas de péril atomique !Soyons sobres et vigilants ! Le catholique fidèle échappe à l'épouvante.C'est lu i le réal is te . Il est Informé de l'eschatologie, il sait commentvient la fin. "Voyez, je vous ai annoncé tout cela". (Marc, XIII, 23)Le chrétien fidèle n'est pas saisi par la panique, l'angoisse infernale.

C'est dieu, un et trine, le Maître du temps. Le début et la fin sont danssa Main.

THE LATTER DAY CHURCH

byFrançois Lagenos

The catholic Church is to start growing again after escaping from the snares of the an-tichristian sham reformers; but who is to govern Her with Saint Peter's power in Jesusname? This is the question that is now and again put to the scattered flock looking forthe good shepherd across woods and mountains. One of the different ways pointed out tothe roving sheep is described in the last issue of FORTS DANS LA FOI*)in which FatherBarbara, a well-known French priest of Algerian extraction, gives his answer to the an-guished request of those that he has led through the wilderness.

Of course, for already three lustres we have become conversant with Lefebvre'spretended attempt at conquering the Roman citadel back from the enemies occupying for-ces. He has steafastly maintained that the sham popes were mere liberals that would al-low him to enjoy a foothold in the now well-defended, antichristian stonghold. For, hestill asserts that 'the holy Father' will enable him to prove that the rejected and de-spised apostolic Tradition is the cure for the dwindling, famished flock: he will re-ceive from K. (arol) W.(ojtyla) and the heretical (or: pseudo-)bishops some room for ex-perimenting the effects of the century-old, discarded, superseded Christian religion.

There is also the school of thought of really-tough catholics who are not so ea-sily deceived as the so-called traditionalists, and are labelled "sedisvacantists" bythe more feeble and beguiled papists'. Their motto is: "Sede vacante, nihil innovetur".So they say it is only God's responsibility to provide us with a pope. He has prophe-sied the quandary into which we fell when we welcomed Roncalli's aggiornamento, there-fore He will lead us out of it into His own sheepfold. Nobody, they argue, is empoweredto consecrate a bishop without "dimissory letters" (papal manda turn) from the pope or atleast his sure consent: and, behold! the Roman See is vacant!

Father Barbara's long-expected solution combines some features of the above-men-tioned theses with some traits of his own. His originality is that he wants The Romanclergy to elect the pope everybody is hoping for. This is quite congruent with the mostancient catholic tradition, since the college of cardinals was created in the middleagesto represent the Roman clergy. A part of it, as Father Barbara IMAGINES, will revolt a-gainst the ruling Antichrist and choose a really catholic bishop to govern the trueChurch, urbi and, ipso facto, orbi. This pope will really be heaven-sent according tothe sedisvacantists' expectation, for two further miracles will support this wondrousrebellion:

a) The college of heretics will elect a catholic-minded cardinal to takeplace on St. Peter's Chair. This will happen by God's grace and the providential blin-ding of the anti-christian majority.

b) At the very moment when the abused heretics hail him as the late Anti-christ successor, the new pseudo-pope will abjure and condemn the apostates' false doc-trine, be converted to Jesus, and publicly embrace the catholic religion. These stupen-dous happenings will allow the rebellious Roman priests to hail him as the bishop ofRome, which choice will grant him the legitimacy the pseudo-cardinals could not providehim with.

It is not indifferent to not that card. Siri (Genova) is the Pope in Fr. Barba-ras denouement. Fr. Barbara does not say that this cardinal is now the only papabileavailable. But among the bishops consecrated before Roncalli's imposture, Siri is thesole survivor that has been given a red hat by Pius XII. Does it mean that implicitlyFr. Barbara acknowledges that Roncalli is the first of the series of impostors that wehave seen on St. Peter's Chair? Anyhow, despite this decent precaution Fr. Barbara'scardinal-bishop, even after his hoped-for conversion cannot be made a pope. There is aspiritual abyss between him and the Holy See: this is obvious according to what the Ho-ly Spirit revealed in 1559 to pope Paul IV. His famous constitution "Cum ex apostola-tus officio" made plain, and explicitly for ever, that no former heretic could be elec-ted pope, even if his election had been voted by all the cardinals. If the cardinal isnow reputed to be a reluctant member of the antichristian sect, he is nevertheless a re-negade and since 1969 he has gone on distributing mock sacraments and ordaining shampriests. Therefore he has been officially the impostor's accomplice by partaking intheir sacrileges and countenancing their heresy. So it is wrong of Fr. Barbara to point

him out as a possible elect to the supreme pontificate.Fr. Barbara's unravelling of the freemasons plot appears all the more as a self-

delusion as old age generally does not turn cowards into brave men ready to face perse-cutions. Unless we be saints, the weakening of our bodies makes us look for peace andcomfort. Those that were not valiant in their hey-days are likely to prove great cow-ards when winter comes. Another point of evidence is that if some vicars or curates haveseen the Light and found enough courage to break loose from the sham hierarchy, no bi-shop, not even Mgr. Castro Meyer has done so. And it is no wonder, for they should havereacted at the first scandalous fraud: later they had to condemn others and themselvesas well. They were kept in bondage by their first errors and fits of cowardice. And,their being conscious of their guilt made them blind to evidence. Fr. Barbara himselfhas vainly travelled round the world to make a bishop repent: he knows how unlikely,from a human point of view, card. Siri's conversion will be.

From a mystical point of view this conversion, the very concept of it, soundsnonsensical. Fr. Barbara eggs us on to admit that a renegade such as card. Siri can beanother Saul of Tarsus. But Saul had not for 25 years been a dumb watch-dog; he had notsuffered sacrileges to be declared agreeable to God. As he went to Damascus to persecuteJesus, he was a sincere Jew, a mistaken but zealous Pharisee. He had never refused tobe the witness of truth. Indeed God has never promoted apostates: He will not change andhas precisely taken care to tell us so. He effectively used Paul IV as His mouth-pieceto warn us. He will not make a 'Sirian'-miracle, in Rome nowadays.

It is capital to note that Fr. Barbara's day-dreaming pictures what practicallythe whole catholic clergy and laity has been expecting since Roncalli turned Rome intothe Scarlet Woman: conquering back the sacred precincts. Wandering through our modernBabylone, every exile longs for the hallowed ground where his forefathers have worshippedGod. Fr. Barbara remarkably stages the fulfilling of that universal longing. (Concupis- .cit et deficit anima mea in atria Domini.) This is the utopia of the sedisvacantists aswell as the lure Lefebvre has kept dangling in front of the traditionalists: tomorrowthe apostate church will turn back to Jesus the Lord, the exiles will at once be backin Jerusalem! Fr. Barbara contributes to their fostering this harmful delusion. NaiveChristians are encouraged to believe that God is prone to converting a false church,'en messe'! He has never done so, even with Luther and the protestant sects. His gracehas simply saved the repentant heretics individually. Once again we must assert thatGod always remains unchanged.

All this means that the surviving Church has to fight on, in the wilderness. Fr.Barbara has been opposing Mgr. Ngo-dinh-Thuc who started the only possible resistancei.e. continuing the catholic Church by providing fresh successors to the Apostles whowere appointed to bring Jesus' sheep into His one fold. Now Fr. Barbara is compelledto follow in Lefebvre's wake and to hope for a treble miracle and God undergoing someevolution... For this marvellous victory of orthodoxy cannot affect the realm whereAntichrist Karol Wojtyla reigns unimpeded: Rome will be the Apocalyptic Babylon.

Should some Roman priests revolt, they would choose a man who could preserve theuninterrupted apostolic succession; they would also look for catholic bishops wherethey can be found now e.ginAcapulco, Houston, Rochester etc. They would consult thosewhom God's Providence has retrieved in time from the danger of condoning apostasy, andcaused to follow the archbishop of Hue. The Latter Day Church can now thrive withoutthe cowardly, ensclaved Roman clergy, whatever may happen.

*) Nr.16 of the 2nd series - last term, December of 1983.

# #*# *

DEAR READER/PLEASE HELP US TO MAKE PROPAGANDA FOR THE TRUTH, WHICH WE SPREAD OUTWITH OUR JOURNAL. PLEASE SEND US ADRESSES FROM INTERESTED FAITHFUL THATWE CAN SEND THEM SAMPLES FROM EINSICHT,