"Why I Favor Our Superiors Legalizing Our Situation In The Church"

The Wanderer ^ | September 18, 2003 | Fr. Paul Aulagnier, SSPX

[Theosis]

Q. Since you are the first French priest ordained for the Priestly Society of St. Pius X, were you close to Archbishop Lefebvre? How did he inspire you?

A. Yes, I was close to Archbishop Lefebvre. I knew him well and I strongly appreciated him. He was so cordial, pleasant, a great prelate, but humble, simple, thoughtful for those who surrounded him. He had heart. It was difficult to not love him. He had a magnetic per-

Fr. Aulagnier meets with Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos and Bishop Rifan.

sonality. I knew him while during my seminary days at Santa Chiara, the French Seminary in Rome. We were in the midst of the Second Vatican Council in 1964. The seminarians followed, as much as they could, this ecclesiastical event.

The seminary professors often invited a particular conciliar father to spend the evening with us. They were of every tendency. It certainly brought some of us joy to hear Archbishop Lefebvre on the two or three occasions he was invited. Differing from the others, he spoke little about the council. Rather he spoke about the priesthood to which we desired Ordination. Like several of my fellow seminarians, I appreciated his presentation of the Catholic priesthood.

In the midst of the council, everything was changing. In a university seminary, minds react quickly, undergo influences, and seek to understand. We participated at the seminary in all the systematic changes of everything — of the common life, of the house rules, of theology, of scholastics. In the midst of this spiritual and intellectual agitation, we needed to be careful, to reflect, to inquire, and to read a lot in order to remain informed.

We painstakingly followed such journals as Nouvelles de Chrétienté, Itinéraires, and La Pensée Catholique to follow the conciliar debates. Without these journals, I do not know if I would be a priest today. Without Archbishop Lefebvre, I certainly would not be. The superiors of the French seminary would not have accepted me. My mind was not open to the proposed novelties.

Our little group of traditional seminarians quickly saw ourselves becoming the object of criticism. When many of us were refused tonsure in 1968, we turned to Archbishop Lefebvre. Having resigned as superior general of the Spiritans, Archbishop Lefebvre was now free to found a seminary in Fribourg, Switzerland. I remember when he approached Bishop Charriere of Fribourg about this project. The bishop accepted it and even encouraged him. The archbishop saw the finger of God.

I became part of the first class of nine seminarians. My diocesan bishop at the time authorized the transfer. Being the most experienced seminarian — I already had four years of seminary under my belt — gave me the opportunity to become close to Archbishop Lefebvre. During walks, he would gladly converse with us. He even confided in us spontaneously, spoke of his projects, of his priestly ideal, of his hesitations. He often shared his African memories, his memories of the council, his decision to publish his essay, "To Remain Catholic, Must We Become Protestant?"

This essay explains the whole of Archbishop Lefebvre. He hated the modern world’s revolutionary spirit that refused subjection, submission, subordination to a created order, to a divine order. Archbishop Lefebvre had been formed by the thinking of Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, and Pius XII. These were his masters. He remained faithful to them all his life. For Archbishop Lefebvre, God as Trinity is everything.

[Theosis]

Major Ping!

[sinkspur]

Why did you excerpt this?

There is no need to excerpt, unless you're posting from the Washington Post or LA Times.

Most people do not go the link before posting. Like me.

[Loyalist]

Pinging the orcs!

[Theosis]

Why did you excerpt this?

So everyone could see the nice picture of Father Aulagnier with Cardinal Hoyos and Bishop Rifan. I'm not sure how to carry it over...

[sinkspur]

OK. I'd rather read the article. Pictures of clerics don't do much for me.

[katnip]

[Theosis]

Sinkspur, I would say that in this case the picture is worth a lot more than 1000 words.

[Aliska]

There is no need to excerpt, unless you're posting from the Washington Post or LA Times.

I almost always exerpt. Sooner or later another publisher is going to squawk and make waves for copyright violation. If they want to get real mean and nasty, they can trace my screen name, subpoena the electronic records, and sue me personally. Could happen.

[ahadams2]

is there an English version of ABP Lefebvre' paper "To Remain Catholic, Must We Become Protestant?" ? If so, where might an Anglican find it?

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

How interesting that this is in the Wanderer one month before the October jubilee celebrations and possible consistory.

Very interesting.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

When many of us were refused tonsure in 1968

And these Conciliarists have the gall to complain about Priest shortages.

How many of us know MANY Orthodox men driven out of the diocesean and religious seminaries?

[american colleen]

One of the only articles on FR that I actually followed the link so I could eagerly read the rest of the article.

Heartbreaking. Hopeful.

[Aquinasfan]

How many of us know MANY Orthodox men driven out of the diocesean and religious seminaries?

I know two. The whereabouts of the third is unknown. The fourth is a priest who feels like he's operating behind enemy lines. They're all between the ages of 40-45.

[american colleen]

I know two (now @ 45 yrs old) and I know one priest who made it through and who is completely orthodox and WITHOUT a parish in an archdiocese which supposedly has a priest shortage. I expect under Bishop O this priest will soon be at the helm of a very, very orthodox parish.

[american colleen]

Looks like Fr. Aulgagnier has his own website but sadly, it is all in French except for one essay linked here.

I wonder what he's been able to do up in Quebec... the NO churches are empty and I didn't see any SSPX chapels... I did run into a schismatic group based on the apparitions of LaSalette - a pretty large organization of very traditionally minded sedevacants who formed in 1962.

[wideawake]

Fr. Aulagnier seems to be a very reasonable individual.

It seems that Williamson, an individual who has never in his life been in a normal canonical relationship with the Holy See, is dictating the SSPX position vis a vis the Holy See.

I believe that most of the original SSPXers like Fr. Aulagnier deeply long to be in a normal canonical situation and I also believe that leftist heretics within the Church did them dirt and poisoned their relationship with the Holy See.

The Williamson types seem to rejoice in their material schism and I do not believe that Williamson would ever enter into communion with the Holy See unless Rome agreed to elevate him to the Papacy.

[TradicalRC]

The gall maybe; the Gauls,no.

[ultima ratio]

You may believe "leftists" did them dirt and poisoned relations with the Holy See, but the truth is worse: the Holy See itself had rejected traditional Catholicism--and was determined to obliterate its practices, including any traces of its classical theology as well as its liturgy, its devotions, its art and architecture, its music, even its memory--and it has done this until its own bizarre innovations have come to a dead end, leading to nothing but failure on every front. Only now, after its reign of terror, is it beginning to question its own misapplied hostility to Catholic tradition.

It still is astonishing to consider, for instance, that in the midst of several decades of corruption and dissent in most North American and European seminaries, the Vatican has only seen fit to clamp down on one--the quietly devout and orthodox Econe of the SSPX. It did everything it could to shut that good seminary down, even in the face of copious reports of its decency and orthodoxy. There have been many such anomalies. Recently, Rome refused to accept the resignation of Abp. Weakland when he turned 75--despite behind-the-scenes complaints from the faithful concerning his unorthodoxy. It was only after a love letter was published by the media proving the Archbishop had carried on a gay affair with a priest and had misappropriated diocesan funds to hush him up, that the Vatican finally asked for the resignation--and did so with dispatch. But it still backs people like this to the hilt. It supports Mahony unconditionally and has even awarded the red hat to Germany's Kasper, despite that man's unorthodox public expressions of doubt about the Resurrection and the divinity of Christ.

It is only by looking at the tolerance the Vatican shows to such unorthodox individuals that the treatment of Abp. Lefebvre begins to come into perspective. This was a man, after all, who had spent his life among the poor in Africa and whose orthodoxy was beyond doubt. He wished only to preserve the Econe and protect liturgical tradition from its predators. Why such a heavy hand in dealing with him? It surely makes one wonder. This is still a Church that is weeding-out seminarians who are suspected of saying the rosary or who make secret visits to the Blessed Sacrament.

I myself can see first-hand the goodness of SSPX priests, their devotion to the faith--and how they have been persecuted. And yet they are excellent priests. Our priest must travel across three states every single Sunday to say Masses and hear confessions at various chapels. He grabs his meals on the fly--and it is this way all week for most of these men. Yet their homilies on the Gospels are thoughtful and well-prepared, their spiritual direction is solid, and their work with the kids is outstanding. And still they are being persecuted while their counterparts on the left are tolerated.

[wideawake]

I think the SSPX does many good things. It also does many suspect things, like setting itself up as an authority in annulments.

What it boils down to is this: the consecrations were a grave breach of church discipline.

I understand that the SSPX saw them as necessary and I appreciate their reasons.

The fact is that the leftists wreckers in the Church have done everything with plausible deniability and have shied away from such open and definitive breaches with the Holy See. In the case of Kasper, we have a man who has never formally published or declared his heterodoxy. He has only made suggestive statements and written things that could be interpreted into an orthodox sense. He also carefully cemented his influence in the Church in Germany until he had the majority of the German clergy and episcopate clamoring for his Cardinalate.

I agree with you that Kasper is probably a heretic.

The SSPX did not use such underhanded tactics: they simply said "you told us to do x but we need to do y, so we will do y."

The problem now is that Williamson, again an individual who has never been in a normal canonical relationship with the Holy See, has gone beyond the pragmatic action of Abp. Lefebvre.

Williamson is now demanding that the Holy See acknowledge the consecrations as licit - which they were not as a matter of objective historical fact. That is purely so Williamson can score a debating point and so that he can claim a See for himself as a licitly consecrated bishop.

Williamson's desire to be the boss and his overweening personal ambition have little to do with Abp. Lefebvre's reluctant decision to consecrate him.