"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.

[Maximilian]

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?

I was reading Pope Paul's letter to Lefebvre the other day (it's in the appendix to "The Pope, the Council and The Mass). He claimed that he wanted Lefebvre working together with him within the Church to fight the "deplorable abuses" of the post-conciliar period. Sounds good, but the reality was totally different. Far from being welcomed within the Church, they were deliberately excluded. These priests who still believed the Catholic faith were refused ordination.

At the same time, Archbishop Lefebvre was being kicked out as superior of the Holy Ghost Fathers, one of the largest orders in the world. The article says that he "resigned," but the reality is that there was a coup which re-wrote the constitution of the order so they could get rid of him because he wasn't "updating" at a fast enough pace for the conciliar revolutionaries. Where was the "familial concern" of Pope Paul while this was going on? While the leader of a congregation equivalent to several dozen dioceses was being illegally eliminated, where was the concern of Pope Paul? Yet when Archbishop Lefebvre simply wanted to continue using the Mass of all times, his response was instantaneous and draconian. The reality behind the soothing words is very different from what they would pretend.

Fr. Aulagnier believes that things are different today. Maybe he is right. But this is a prudential decision upon which the consequences of being wrong are enormous.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

While the leader of a congregation equivalent to several dozen dioceses

This is an understatement. His position in French Africa was essentially equivalent to that of a Patriarch - the head of the Churches of many nations, of which he was the founder. He was not merely "another Bishop". This is why his schism is taken so seriously by Rome, as opposed to the ridiculous schisms perpetrated by the sedevacantists, who Rome considers on par with the various American and English "Old Catholic" jokers.

In better times, he would have been named a Cardinal.

Fr. Aulagnier believes that things are different today. Maybe he is right. But this is a prudential decision upon which the consequences of being wrong are enormous.

What is important is that rights of property and succession be guaraneed. With that betrayals in the future cannot be enforced on the ground. This can be done in a Prelature or Apostolic Administration. It can even be done for individual churches in dioceses. The Church "Mater Ecclesiae" in Berlin, NJ, diocese of Camden, was reconciled and canonically erected under the premise that title to the property would remain in the hands of the people. Since the people are in theory free to leave and kick out the Priest and Bishop at any time, they are now happy to stay and be in unity.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

a pretty large organization of very traditionally minded sedevacants

Hardly so - they ordain women.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

There is the better question often posed - if men like Weakland and Mahoney and Kung are IN, how can Lefebvre be OUT?

[ultima ratio]

Williamson is a problem. I am glad he is in Argentina so that the damage he does is limited. But I disagree on other points. The authority SSPX asserts regarding annulments is a supplied jurisdiction made necessary because of the invalidity of so many annulments granted by various diocesan tribunals. There is a need to sort these matters out before the couples involved can proceed with other marriages.

I disagree the consecrations were grave breaches of discipline. This Pontiff is routinely disobeyed by prelates--in matters of far greater importance. He put his authority on the line to punish the Archbishop precisely because it was Tradition Lefebvre was defending. And therein lies the problem. Does any Pontiff actually have the right to posit an action designed to destroy Catholic Tradition or does he not supercede his own authority when he attempts to do so?

Aquinas and Bellarmine both argue that no Pontiff may command what would harm the Church, insisting that disobedience in the face of such a command would be legitimate. After all, Lefebvre was being put between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand his Catholic faith seemed threatened by revolutionary forces, on the other his fealty to the Pontiff was being tested. In the end, against a background of auto-destructive violence, he sided with Tradition against the Pope. He saw how much devastation was being caused by the progressivists and he remembered the warnings against modernism by preconciliar popes. But it was a difficult decision just the same, especially for a traditionalist.

Yes, the leftists have plausible deniability as you say, but the Pope does not ever press them and avoids confrontation with them. He does not hesitate to confront traditionalists, however--as he did only a few years back with the FSSP when he fired their duly elected Father General along with several priest-theologians of their seminary whom he felt were insufficiently attuned to conciliar thought. This belies the portrait of him as a passive, gentle, saintly man who exists in too rarified a spiritual atmosphere to get down and dirty with subordinates. He gets down and dirty quite a bit with those who espouse Catholic traditionalism.

[american colleen]

Are you sure? It was "The Apostles of Infinate Love of The Order of The Magnificat of the Mother of God" --- they have a website and I also grabbed some liturature from the religious goods store where I spotted them.

They almost appear like they are living in a time warp.

[wideawake]

The authority SSPX asserts regarding annulments is a supplied jurisdiction made necessary because of the invalidity of so many annulments granted by various diocesan tribunals.

Putting aside the difficulty that "supplied jurisdiction" claimed in one's own favor is a very complex and dangerous issue in itself, the fact is the SSPX has absolutely no jurisdiction, supplied or otherwise, to stand in judgment over the validity of annulments granted by ordinaries in their own dioceses. Never in the history of the Church has such a usurpation of the local ordinary's authority ever been countenanced.

I disagree the consecrations were grave breaches of discipline.

Then we need to define grave. We are talking here about meddling with the very means of the Apostolic Succession, not dispensing someone from a fast.

This Pontiff is routinely disobeyed by prelates--in matters of far greater importance.

Surely you recognize the inherent weakness of this argument. Just because someone else does something wrong and gets away with it, one is not justified in one's own transgression by theirs.

One can argue that the Holy See has been capricious in its censure - and one would have a point.

But that does not justify disobedience.

Aquinas and Bellarmine both argue that no Pontiff may command what would harm the Church, insisting that disobedience in the face of such a command would be legitimate.

You are reaching here. One could validly argue that appointing Fr. Jones over Parish X is harmful to the Church and that Fr. Smith is a much better candidate for that parish. Almost any action by any Pope could be interpreted as harmful to the Church in some way. Who is to judge? You?

The fact is that Lefebvre did something objectively wrong and disobedient, but he did it according to the dictates of his conscience.

Abp. Lefebvre would gladly have apologized and spent his life in sackcloth and ashes atoning for his disobedience in this matter if the Pope had required it as a condition for preserving the Church's liturgical and theological traditions.

Williamson is unwilling to even admit that his consecration was disobedient.

It is this attitude of Williamson's which excites a visceral repulsion for the SSPX intransigents among obedient Catholics who labor for the preservation of our cultural traditions within the canonical norms of the Church.

To the extent that individual SSPXers follow Williamson's example they will injure the Body of Christ.

[wideawake]

This group is very untraditional. They have a very weird attitude toward the theological status of their founders, a very heterodox eschatology, they "ordain" women and have a laxer position on contraception than the Vatican.

They still use the Tridentine Rite, but they resemble in many ways a certain strain of High Church Anglicans who love ritual and vestments and incense and the trappings of liturgy while ignoring doctrinal orthodoxy. The kind of people who would say the Rosary for aesthetic reasons but who would not be overly doctrinaire on the question of whether Our Lord's Virgin Birth actually happened.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Are you sure? It was "The Apostles of Infinate Love of The Order of The Magnificat of the Mother of God" --- they have a website and I also grabbed some liturature from the religious goods store where I spotted them.

These are the St. Jovites we are talking about, right?

I'm absolutely certain. These folks are worthless heretics, founded by a Priest, Michael Collin, who has made himself into a "Bishop" and also "Pope". He has been continually condemned by the Church since 1951 with decrees of degradation, suspension, excommunication, etc. Succeeding him, in a certain way, is his fellow excommunicate John of the Trinity, aka "Pope" John Gregory XVII.

From the summary of Modern Anti-Popes:

Another anti-Pope of the late twentieth century, albeit now deceased, was Michel Collin. Collin had actually been a Catholic Priest and a member of the Order of the Sacred Heart. He was dismissed from the latter and excommunicated from the Church in 1951 after declaring himself to be Pope Clement XV in 1950. Collin established himself and the headquarters of his movement at St. Jovite, Canada.

Collin predicted a world wide catastrophe would occur on February 20th 1969 and when his prophesy was disconfirmed accused his detractors of ‘quibbling over dates’.

Among Collin’s more unlikely supporters at this time were members of a Danish UFO cult called IGAP (International Get Acquianted Program), led by one H. Peterson and inspired by the famous American contactee George Adamski.

The movement started by Collin has had various names over the years including; The Apostles of Infinite Love, Order of the Mother of God, Apostles of the Latter Times, Renovated Church of God and The Order Of The Magnificat Of The Mother Of God.

Clement XV/Michel Collin seems to have retired from the Papacy naming his successor as pope and head of the St. Jovite based movement. This was Gaston Tremblay or Gregory (sometimes Jean Gregory) XVII. Tremblay who took up the Papal mantle in 1968. Collin himself died in 1974.

I encourage you to throw in the trash whatever "literature" you received from them.

How to Perceive Women Priests.

In effect, there are signs the Church cannot ignore: the penury of priests, the growing desire among women religious for access to the priesthood, whereas not so long ago they could not have even considered such a desire. It would be wrong to think that ordaining women is an unconditional gesture in favor of "women's liberation" and everything that might imply. The nuns and ladies we have ordained aspired to the priesthood for reasons on a far higher plane than any desire for "equality" or any other prideful motivation. To be able to celebrate Holy Mass, the essential function of the priest: this was their great desire! In instituting the priesthood, Our Lord wanted above all to be certain there would be souls to perpetuate the Eucharist on earth, souls that would apply the infinite merits of His Passion to the world by the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice. In the difficult times we are living in, the Church has need of humble priests, entirely dedicated to the offering of the Divine Victim. Obviously, some will be engaged in a more visible ministry, but a discreet one nonetheless. "The little ones ask for bread, and there is no one to break it for them," declared a Dominican nun, upon requesting the priesthood in the name of many other Sisters. The field of action open to women priests among families, women and children is a boundless one and presently, due to the lack of priests, a very neglected one. ...

Besides the merciful and mighty intervention of the Virgin Priest, it is no doubt the ardent desires and the sufferings of so many Saints that have obtained the priesthood for women. It is now a Will of God. Churchmen who do not understand this should pray on it. If they sincerely desire to know and do what God wills, setting aside their personal feelings and views, they will not fail to receive divine light.

John Gregory XVII
Servant of the Church of Jesus Christ
Sanctuary of the Keys of Saint Peter
Saint-Jovite, June 24, 1994
Feast of Saint John the Baptist

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Ping to #31

[american colleen]

Ooohhh. I went into this beautiful little religious store and saw books and statues and holy cards that I hadn't seen in years. I was thrilled! It was weird though... we were in there maybe 15 minutes and I put down the items I was going to buy and took my kids outta there - I told them something was weird but I couldn't put my finger on it - it was a "feeling" I had. But I noticed a small pamphlet rack on my way out and grabbed a pamphlet that had a picture of a nun on it dressed the same way as the nun behind the register. When we got back to the hotel room later on, I read all about them "we have our own hierarchy" and I was so happy I hadn't spent any money in there.

When I got home a few days later, I looked them up on the web. Talk about deceptive advertising... no mention of ordaining women or the other things you mention - wasn't in their printed literature, either.

Ya just never know.

[NYer]

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

Here's a beautiful picture to liven up your discussion.

Pope John Paul II blesses faithful during an outdoor mass celebrated in Banska Bystrica, Slovakia, on Sept. 12.

[wideawake]

Thanks for the further info. Yes, I think we're all talking about the same group: the St. Jovite/Mont Tremblay/Apostles of Infinite Love cult.

[american colleen]

I encourage you to throw in the trash whatever "literature" you received from them.

Gone long ago when I was still in Quebec. Once I read that they had their own hierarchy, I was done.

Geez and the nuns were in habits, too!

Thanks for the additional info about them. The older I get the more I realize how many weirdos are in the world. I will say I did sense that while I was in their store - not sure why since they only sold devotional material. Just glad I didn't aid their "ministry" at all.

[wideawake]

You have good instincts.

Generally a group like this likes to lead potential converts down a comfortable path for a while before they bring you to a "Mass" celebrated by "Mother" Anne, or explain to you exactly how the UFOs they've documented are signs of the end times.

[american colleen]

You have good instincts.

I thank God for that... it's a little (big) gift that He has given me for years and years - one I didn't recognize it until a couple of years ago. It's saved me quite a few times.

I've probably told you before that I had plane tickets for Medjugorje back about 1987... something happened and I knew I shouldn't go there. Nothing I can explain. Same with the Jesuit and Paulist stuff here in Boston... we were dragged there as kids many times and we all (brother and sister) knew they were all out to lunch.

When I think about all the times that instinct has led me away from bad spiritual things, I feel so humbled. God is so good.

[Theosis]

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

I would check back in a week. Keep in mind his website was exclusively French until recently, when a few English translations of his writing popped up here and there. From a mutual friend of ours, I have heard that he's now making a real effort to put an English section together on his website.

I wonder what he's been able to do up in Quebec...

Basically, he was chaplain of a retirement/nursing home from what I heard. He reportedly did not have a lot of freedom, but he did have a lot of time on his hands since he no longer held the position of Superior or sat on the SSPX's general council. So he just used his spare time to do a lot of praying, writing, and rapprochement with some of the SSPX's traditionalist enemies in order to ease future reconciliation between the SSPX and Rome.

[ultima ratio]

Oh, but the Pontiff was doing something very harmful to the Church by disallowing the consecrations. Without traditional bishops to ordain seminarians, where were traditional priests supposed to come from? And without them, the traditional Mass would die. Do you think the Archbishop didn't know this--or didn't realize that the knives were out to destroy Tradition within the Catholic Church?

The Archbishop was old, in his eighties. He was the only bulwark against the complete destruction of the old Mass. His was the only seminary at that time training traditional seminarians. His was the only one using the old methods, applying the old ascetical disciplines and prescribing classical theological studies. None of this would have survived had he obeyed. And had he obeyed the living memory of the Catholic Church that had existed for the prior two thousand years would have been lost. It would have expired along with himself. So the stakes were enormous.

Had the Archbishop lived in another age, maybe you would have been right. But he saw devastation all around him. He saw the Church lurching from crisis to crisis. He saw heresy and corruptions abound. He saw new theologies challenging even the deposit of faith directly. So of course he had to make a judgment--and he did so on the State of Necessity canon which provided an exception for disobedience. And he did so with a good conscience, for the purpose of saving the Traditional Mass and Traditional Catholicism--not for reasons of malice to defy the Pope.

As for my other argument--that prelates routinely disobey this pope in matters of far greater importance--I refer to the routine subversion of Catholic dogmas. This is done openly and without any remonstrance on the part of the Pontiff. This in itself has been shocking and unprecedented.