Father Hewko Defense of Archbishop Lefebvre Transcript

      In the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Ghost. Amen.

      We begin this season of the Church, Septuagesima, and it begins right off the bat with St. Paul. St. Paul who would have traveled much through Greece, he's speaking to the Corinthians, they all knew the Olympic Games, they were very acquainted with the sports of the time. Wrestling was popular and all kinds of track and field competitions. So, St. Paul and St. John Chrysostom and many of the Fathers of the Church will draw the examples from the sports domain and St. Paul right off the bat here, the Church puts this right. You got a trophy to win and you got a fight to obtain it and to obtain that trophy look at the athletes, they trained, they discipline their body, they have a certain diet, especially wrestlers they have to cut weight and they have to enter into this whole disciplined mentality and face all kinds of adversity and trials and competitions and lose much to win the big trophy.

      So it is with us. We have to fight continually, discipline our soul and the basic disciplines are the ten commandments. The introit of the Mass also pulls us with the breviary of Mother Church, the breviary of the priests takes us right back to Genesis Chapter 1, the very beginning. “In the beginning God created heaven and earth,” and then, Adam and Eve on the sixth day and then, what's the state of the Adam and Eve after the fall, after they're disobedience to God? It's well expressed in Psalm 17, the introit here, “The grounds of death surround me and the sorrows of Hell encompass me.” This is Adam and Eve right after they fell and driven out of the Garden of Paradise. “And in my affliction, I called upon the Lord and He heard my voice from His holy temple.”

     What is this Holy Temple? It is His body. Christ said, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will rebuild.” He was not talking about the structure of the building, He was talking about His temple which is the body where God dwell, in the sacred body of our Lord which will be hung up on the cross and pour out all His blood for the love of us. That was foretold to Adam and Eve, there will be a Redeemer and there will be a Woman who will be exalted to crush the head of the serpent.

      “The groans of death surround me and the sorrows of Hell encompass me.” Adam and Eve did penance for 930 years and man lived a long time before Noah's Flood. An average man's life was five, six, seven hundred years old and we know about Methuselah. Methuselah is an interesting great character of the Old Testament because he lived 969 years, that means he knew Adam and Eve as a boy, he met them and probably talked to them a lot. I'm sure everyone turned to Adam and Eve for wisdom and he had the fullest of wisdom, Adam had all knowledge of all science and that's why it's logical to conclude, I say this often, but it's very logical to conclude because there's evidence of this, that the state of mankind before the flood was far more technologically advanced than our cell phones and our airplanes. They had something far more advanced, far more sophisticated and just for an example they find these huge rocks, megaliths they’re called, cut with machinery that we can't even imagine how they cut it. We don't even have anything close to cutting angles and depth and precision the way they find these huge gigantic rocks that were cut by a civilization before the flood.
  
      Adam and Eve, they lived a long time so all their descendants, all their children and grandchildren and great-great-great grandchildren they lived to see and one of these was Methuselah and he knew Adam and Eve and he lived long enough, he's the longest living human being in the history of the world, he lived also to see Noah. He knew Noah and he died shortly before the flood. So, Methuselah will be interesting to talk to once we get to heaven because he knew all the human history and he lived, he's the connection between Adam and Eve and the flood, that first age of the human race. But how well he understood, how well all these saints of the Old Testament understood “the groans of deaths surround me and the sorrows of Hell encompass me.”

      Why? Because from sin we have four effects. Briefly, in our intellect we have ignorance, so study becomes a pain in the neck, boys especially, hate to go through school. But we have to study, we have to learn and even if you're out of school and out of college, our whole life we got to be studying, we got to be reading the spiritual books that inflame in us the love of God, that steer us in the true correct doctrine. That's why I encourage you men, don't fear to pick up the great Encyclicals of the Popes, they're not that difficult and I mean the popes up to Pius XII. Their encyclicals are clear. Read the encyclical on liberty by Pope Leo XIII because everybody talks about freedom, independence and liberty. Well, let's get this thing straight and see what is true liberty and what is false liberty. Leo XIII, his encyclicals are very clear, very, very pleasant to read and meditate on. You should make this kind of time for in-depth studies, in-depth listening. Now with internet you can drive and listen to conferences, sermons, talks, audio books that are very good books.

      We have to be hungry in our mind to fill our mind with truth, the light of truth. Because look how the devil attacks the mind with advertisements and all the internet trash to fill minds with emptiness and garbage. God can't fill a glass that's filled with mud, He wants to fill it with the pure crystal water, crystal clear water of His grace and His wisdom. Spiritual reading and listening combats ignorance and we suffer from ignorance because of Original Sin.

      In our will we suffer malice. We have malice in our will. Now, yesterday we supplied the ceremonies for a new little born baby, right now this little born baby is an angel in God's sight because her soul is filled with the sanctifying grace, there is no sin in her. But Original Sin is going to start showing up, the parents will discover this very soon, especially when more brothers and sisters come, they start fighting ‘it's mine,’ ‘no it's mine.’ You got a war on your hands. Why is this? Because there's malice in the will, there's malice. It's in all of us, that tendency towards evil in that overwhelming tendency towards selfishness and self-centeredness and Christ shows us how to combat that by selflessness. Look to the good of your neighbor and do good to them and treat others as if you would treat yourself, the way you treat others. So, malice in the will combatted by constantly forging our will, forging like the blacksmiths have to forge a piece of metal that’s red-hot. That's how we have to be forged in God's hands to conform to God's will and it's always a fight, it's always a struggle, in all of us, because we are again inclined towards evil.

      In the irascible passions, that's the fighting passions, that's the passions of the battlefield, the passions of perseverance and difficult times. There's weakness in us, there's weakness, we’re prone to be weak, we're prone to make excuses and this is where we need to turn to the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary for strength in the face of difficult trials. God gives us all difficult trials, He sees us all as athletes of the field to obtain that trophy of heaven and we got to grow stronger and this means self-discipline, self-denial and that's why Septuagesima, that’s what it’s all about. Preparing for getting ready for Lent, the big competition of Lent, forty days of training and we're not in Lent yet, we're not in the fast time yet, but the Church is already setting our mind, start getting ready to do battle, to root out violently all the sins in us and evil inclinations and occasions of sin, do battle, get ready for war. So, weakness.

      Then the last, of course, concupiscence passions. These are the passions of pleasure, the pleasure in the all the passions. The pleasure of seeing a beautiful sunrise, the pleasure of a good meal, the pleasure of good friends, the pleasure that pertains to the sacredness of marriage and procreation of children. These are all gifts of God, that God wants to be used for His glory. But because of Original Sin, man can twist these things, twist the body to offend God instead of glorify Him, twist even a good meal and a good glass of wine or beer to abuse and get drunk like an animal. We can all do this. So, this weakness in us and this inclination to misuse pleasure, we need grace to straighten us out, we need grace and that's why we must pray.

      If we don't pray, if I don't pray, I will go to hell, I know that. That goes for all of us. Padre Pio said this often, if you pray, you're going to go to heaven. If you don't pray, you're going to go to hell. It's really that simple. So, none of us have excuses and God will give us the grace if we ask Him. He is a greater father than any good earthly father and He loves us more than any father and mother could. Look at the goodness Our Lord Himself says Himself, look at the Sun, God gives the Sun to shine on the good and the bad. The bad farmers and the good farmers, the ones knew obey His commandments, the ones who don't obey His commandments, He gives the sunlight for their crops of the field. God also gives the rain for the good and the bad. So, if God will be so generous to everybody with natural gifts, the air, the rain and sun, if He's so generous with the way He does nature.

      Another example given by Saint John Chrysostom, when you plant an apple seed, what do you get later? An apple tree. But out of that one seed, what do you get? You got billions of apples every harvest season, thousands of apples. So, in the natural order God is so generous. One seed of corn, apricot, watermelon, you name it, you get an abundance in return. God is so generous at the natural level. So, how much more He is more generous what pertains to the salvation of your soul. So, when you pray to Him, He hears you and He does give more in abundance. We don't often see it and feel it because God, He's a wise businessman, He knows when to give the harvest, He knows when to give the benefits and He knows when to answer our prayers, that is best. But we've got to keep persevering in asking Him and praying to Him.

      So, the effects of Original Sin in us. Let's get ready mentally for the coming time of Lent, to be generous with God, to really make war against the sins that grow in the fields of our soul and to discipline our life. Spiritual reading, self-control, directing all our actions to the glory of God, living in that cheerfulness of giving towards God and the love of God and the love of our neighbor.
 
      I'd like to conclude this sermon before we close, I just want to touch on something important, it's probably more for a moral theology class, but recently we have heard Archbishop Lefebvre attacked again. Archbishop Lefebvre attacked in the sense that questioning the validity of the priesthood and the Episcopacy of Archbishop Lefebvre. This is not a new argument, it’s one that’s been floating around for a number of years and that is, well, the one that ordained Archbishop Lefebvre, it seems he was Freemason, Cardinal Liénart, and the one that consecrated Archbishop Lefebvre, the same cardinal, was a freemason. Since the Freemasons are out to destroy the Church, he withheld his intention and it was all invalid, that's the attack. I'm going to show you briefly this is ridiculous and it's false. I'm drawing from the Angelus article back in 1978 so that you can see this is a long floating attack against Archbishop Lefebvre but it's very important because if they attack this, they're attacking the whole survival of Catholic Tradition and so let's answer this.

     Archbishop Lefebvre was ordained into the priesthood September 21st, 1929. He was consecrated a bishop September 18th, 1947, by Achille, Cardinal Liénart, the Bishop of the Diocese of Lille in France. So, we all know this article written by a priest, Father Laudenschlager. He goes through, of course, what's needed for sacrament to be valid, it must have the proper matter for a baptism, it must be water and not Coca-Cola or milk, must be water. There must be the form, that is the proper words that Christ instituted. So, for baptism, ‘I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,’ and you can't say anything more, you can't say anything less and that's the form that Christ gave. The form, the matter and the intention are required for the sacrament and this is where they're attacking Archbishop Lefebvre, is the intention of this freemason Cardinal Liénart.
 
      Now, Cardinal Liénart, was he a freemason? That's a rumor, I don't know. But there's certainly no pictures of him in the lodge, there's no pictures of him in freemasonic ceremonies, so apparently on his deathbed he admitted he was a freemason. But the Church is loaded with freemasons and it has been, it has been, even in the time of Pius X but it wouldn't necessarily make their sacraments invalid and we'll see why.

      “The intention is what's at question here. Before considering the case directly, let's look at the intention of the minister of the sacrament. First of all, what the question is not. The Church is solemnly defined and all Catholics must believe that for the valid confection of a sacrament neither faith nor the state of grace is required in the minister.” So, for example a Jew driving down the street, a doctor, he's a Jewish doctor, he comes across the car accident and there's a family that's really in a terrible state and the mother cries to him and says, ‘my baby is not baptized,’ and the baby's dying and the mother's dying and she says, ‘sir can you baptize my baby? I can't move. I was on the way to the Church to baptize my baby and there's an accident.’ So, the Jew, he doesn't believe in this but he can take water and pour water on the baby's head and say ‘I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,’ it is a valid sacrament and the baby is baptized and the Church has always taught this. All the bare minimum of that Jew was to say, I just want to do what the Church does and I don’t believe in it, I don't like it but I'm going to do what the Church does, I'll baptize him for your sake. It would be valid and this is defended by many, many popes down the history of the Church, the validity of such a sacrament.

      “Neither the faith nor the state of grace is absolutely required in the minister.” So, for example, again, the state of grace, if a priest is in mortal sin it'd be a sacrilege for him to offer Mass, in the state of mortal sin. But would that Mass be invalid? Would it be a totally invalid sacrament? No, it would be a valid sacrament. Does that mean the priest can say, ‘well since it's still valid I can live in mortal sin and say Mass’? Well, that would be a mockery of his priesthood and a mockery against God and a sacrilege for him, but not for the souls, not for the people. But the sacrament would still be valid, a priest in mortal sin is still a valid sacrament, it's still the true consecration, it does not get affected by that and that's a great thing, not to say Mass in mortal sin, but it's a great thing the objectivity of the sacraments. Because what's behind that is the Sacred Heart of Our Lord, He wants to save all souls as much as possible, He wants to save souls and that's why He makes the sacraments as easily accessible as possible. That's why, for example, it's easy to baptize anybody anytime because there's always water wherever you go that you can find water.

      “Therefore, both sinful and heretical, schismatical and apostate priests or bishops can validly confect sacraments. Although, if they do it's sinful and illicit.” And then, that's the very important point. For schismatics it’s illicit, they don't have the right to say Mass and give sacraments by the Church, because they stole the apostolic succession, they stole the ordination, they stole the consecration from the Catholic Church and they don't have the right to use it. That's why it's forbidden for us Catholics to go participate in a valid Greek Orthodox Mass, it's valid, our Lord is there but you cannot participate in that because it's illicit, it is not blessed by Mother Church. That's why, for example, if any Catholic goes to be ordained or consecrated by the schismatics, that's an automatic suspension by the Church, it's a punishment by the Church. Is it a valid sacrament? Most likely, if it's an apostolic succession. But it’s illicit, it's not legitimate in God's eyes nor the Church's eyes. That's why we can't have anything to do with that and for someone to be rehabilitated to be a Catholic bishop or priest, who has done this, they must be rehabilitated by the proper authorities of the Catholic Church.

      So, let's continue with this study of the intention, it's not that long so bear with me. But it is important to defend this because of all the bishops God was not well pleased but with Archbishop Lefebvre He was pleased, because he did what all the bishops should have done. So, when Archbishop Lefebvre is attacked, we need to defend him.

      “The question therefore is not whether or not Cardinal Liénart as a freemason could validly administer a sacrament at all but whether he did in this case. Secondly, let us formulate more precisely the question of the required intention.” So, let's get more specific about this intention, what does it really mean? “We shall distinguish the external intention by which the minister wishes to accomplish properly the external ceremonies and rites of the sacrament, but inwardly wishes not to confect the sacrament and the internal intention by which the minister truly and interiorly wishes to do what the Church does. The question is, does the external intention suffice? That is, will a sacrament be valid if the priest or bishop properly performs all the necessary external rites and ceremonies with the proper matter and form, if within himself he wishes not to confect the sacrament?” Then he's going to now draw the authorities, the Council of Trent, Pope Leo XII, St. Thomas Aquinas. “The Church has defined that the priest or bishop must have the intention of doing what the Church does. Council of Trent Session 7 Canon 11.” That is the bare minimum, the priest or bishop, he just must do what the Church does.

      “Therefore, at least the external intention of doing what the Church does and thus of accomplishing the ceremony properly is required. The central question then will be how are we to recognize the presence of this internal intention required in the priest or bishop for the valid confection of a sacrament?” So, how do you know if, in the case of Cardinal Liénart, how do you know if he really conducted a true sacrament? Pope Leo XIII answers clearly and with solemn authority, he says, “Concerning the mind or intention, in as much as it in itself, something internal the Church does not pass judgment but insofar as it is externally manifested, she is bound to judge of it. Now if in order to effect and confer a sacrament, a person has seriously and correctly used the do matter and form, he is for that very reason presumed to have intended to do what the Church does.” If a priest has water and he says the words and pours it while saying the words, the Church says it's valid because he's doing externally what's needed for the sacrament, this is the point. “It is on this principle that the doctrine is solidly founded, solidly founded, which holds as a true sacrament. That which is confirmed by the ministry of a heretic or of a non baptized person as long as it is conferred in the Catholic Rite.” That's r-i-t-e.

      “St. Thomas Aquinas, Prince of Theologians, says the same thing. The words uttered by the minister,” this is…(unsure of spelling)…Question 64 Article 8, he says, “The words uttered by the minister,” the priest or bishop, “the intention of the Church is expressed and this suffices for the validity of the sacrament, except the contrary be expressed exteriorly.” Notice that, ‘exteriorly’. So, if a priest at baptism says, ‘I don't intend to baptize’ and he goes through with and he expresses it externally or withholds pouring water or changes the form, it's not valid but you can tell externally it's not valid. This is the point of St. Thomas. “Unless the contrary be expressed exteriorly on the part of the priest or bishop.” So, if the priest or bishop just does the normal Rite of the Church, the external ceremonies of the Church correctly, according to the Roman Missal or the Roman Ritual of Tradition, it's valid, it's valid.

      Now, another question, which I won't go into here, is when they change the Roman Missal and change the Roman Ritual in the New Rite, that is objectively changing the matter, form and intention. That's why Archbishop Lefebvre says the sacraments of the New Rite of Vatican II are at least doubtful, at least doubtful, because they've changed many of the form and in some cases the matter such as the holy oils which has to be olive oil. In the New Code of Canon Law, they allow other oils. Palm oil, coconut oil, Crisco etc.

      This is very important point of Pope Leo XIII and St. Thomas Aquinas. If a bishop or priest fulfills the normal external ceremonies required by the Church's Traditional Roman Ritual and missal, it's valid, it’s considered valid. “Therefore, in the Conferral of the Sacrament of Holy Orders or of any other, as long as the ordaining bishop, be he Catholic or apostate, as long as he observes externally the rite prescribed for the sacrament he must be presumed to have the right intention and the sacrament must be accepted as valid.” A very important point right here. “Let us consider momentarily a few more points on the intention required in the Minister of the sacrament. A) We shall distinguish the intention of doing what the Church does and the intention of doing what the Church intends.” I know this is moral theology right here, but enjoy the taste of it. “The Church does perform, she performs a Sacred Rite instituted by Christ and by this rite she intends to confer grace and in some sacraments the character, the minister, the priest or bishop does not at all need to intend to confer grace by the rite which he performs. It suffices that he intends to perform a Sacred Rite, so teach all theologians, including St. Alphonsus.”

      So, if the priest just says, ‘I just want to do the Rite of the Church’ and he's not even thinking much about it, it's still valid and Father Gregory has mentioned this. If a priest is up late from being on a sick call and he's really tired in the morning and he has his normal routine Mass and his mind is kind of foggy and he just goes through the ceremonies of the Mass and he's really not even paying much attention even, because he's half-asleep. Is that Mass still valid? Of course, because he's fulfilling all the external rites. Even though in his attention might be a bit foggy, he always has the intention to do what the Church does.

      “Be indeed the priest or bishop does not even have to believe that the rite which he is performing is sacred, it suffices that he intend to perform seriously a rite which Christians hold as sacred.” Thus, for example a Jew can validly baptize a Christian child even though he believes that baptism is a completely meaningless ceremony. “If he intends to perform a rite which Christians hold to be sacred. Thus, also a priest who has lost the faith in the sacraments can still confect them validly as long as he has the intention of performing seriously the rites which the faithful ask of him in which they considered sacred.”

      To take this to the extreme, and there are cases of this, if a priest who has apostatised and joins the Satanic Church and he says Mass doing what the Church does and intends to do it, it's a valid Mass and they do this. Archbishop Lefebvre mentions this in one of his sermons in 1976, how these apostate priests and even bishops, they will confect the sacrament and they know it's valid, they have no doubt Satanists, and then they take the Blessed Sacrament and treat our Lord sacrilegiously, blasphemously and do all sorts of profane and disgusting things with Our Lord in the Holy Sacrament. So, this shows you the beauty, let's just say, of the objectivity of the sacraments, it's really great and it shows the goodness of our Lord to make it almost impossible to bring about an invalid sacrament.

      Now, and take note, the Satanists do not say the New Mass nor do they use the New Roman Ritual, the New Rite of the Roman Ritual, they don't bother with that. They use the Old Mass in the Old Ritual because they know those are valid. St. Thomas teaches the same thing in his…(unsure of spelling)…Book 4. “Sometimes,” he says, “the priest or bishop intends to do what the Church does, although he considers it to be nothing, the minimum intention required in the Minister of a sacrament is than this, that he intend to perform a rite which the Church considers sacred and to accomplish seriously all the prescribed externals.” If that's there, it's valid. “Indeed, who could possibly lack this minimal attention in administering a sacrament. We have seen that the Church considers the presence of the required intention the normal case as regards sacraments administered by heretics, schismatics etc. According to the solemn teaching of the Church therefore and the conclusions of sound theology, there is absolutely no justification for any doubts on the validity of the Holy Orders of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre as history records Cardinal Liénart did not at any moment, neither before nor during or after the ceremonies, give the least indication that he did not intend to do what the Church does in conferring Holy Orders upon Marcel Lefebvre.”

      That's pretty clear. Cardinal Liénart now, when he ordained Archbishop Lefebvre, he was alone but he fulfilled all the sacraments and it's a valid sacrament, he fulfilled all the external requirements and there's tons of MC’s, altar boys, there's other older priests, they're all watching him do the ceremony and he better do it right and he does because he follows the ritual. Then with the consecration of a bishop, normally according to the (Pontificali Romanum?) there has to be three co-consecrators. So, if one says, ‘well this bishop didn't have the right intention,’ well the other two did. These co-consecrators even in the unimaginable case where two of the three bishops would lack the necessary intention, the remaining bishop would still validly consecrate the bishop and that's Pope Pius XII allocution in 1956.

      Bishops who are consecrated or ordained in heresy or schism, the Church, if they're Apostolically succession, the Church does recognize them as valid bishops, they can be valid bishops but they don't have the right to use their Episcopal powers. It's like a stolen sacrament and that's why it's illegitimate. “In any case though this has no relation to any question of Holy Orders Cardinal Liénart never lost his jurisdiction as Archbishop of Lille. Even if he was a freemason and thus, ipso-facto excommunicated, he retained his jurisdiction as bishop until a declaratory or condemnatory sentence by a higher authority,” which was never given, which was never given, “we must and we may presume that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre validly received the sacrament of Holy Orders. Absolutely nothing would permit or justify a conclusion to the contrary.”

      To bring this up to attack Archbishop Lefebvre in this way is complete foolishness and you just heard a long, long explanation of how the intention, the bare minimum is to do what the Church does and if any priest or bishop fulfills the bare minimum of the external rites required, it is considered valid. Absolutely valid. So, that applies to Archbishop Lefebvre.
Let me just close by a warning Archbishop Lefebvre gave and I say this with reference to the recently hot topic of Bishop Ambrose, which is one of the reasons why I had to leave Boston, Kentucky. Because it's not just a question of being valid, he may be valid, he may not but there's so much doubt and confusion and so many contradictory stories and convolution in his story, you've got to question everything and I, in no way, want to discredit the reputation of such a man or any man but, I want to tread carefully here because I'm a poor sinner myself and need your prayers and grace. But when in this case, that I'm speaking about, there is records, public records of fraud and I'm not going to go more into detail though, that suffices it to say that public records of fraud and several cases of arrests. How can you trust such a man? Who says this and says that, when he's got a record of fraud? You can't trust anything of such a man, on such important issues as bishop, Mass, validity, consecration and involvement with schismatic rites.

      Here's what Archbishop Lefebvre says, this is another reprint of an Angelus issue years ago, way many years ago. ‘A warning to traditional Catholics concerning false shepherd.’ “During his recent visit to America, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre referred several times to the report that several individuals including some claiming to be called ‘so called traditional priests,’ had attempted to have themselves consecrated bishops. Archbishop Lefebvre totally condemned their actions and warned all Catholics to have nothing to do with them, ‘they will bring ruination and scandal on the Church.’” Archbishop Lefebvre. And when he was replied, when asked his opinion of the scandal-ridden consecrations he says, ‘they will bring ruination and scandal on the Church.’ He says, ‘it is a direct result of what happens when one loses faith in God and separates himself with Rome and the Holy Father and the enemies of the Church including those who are so strongly who promote modernism will try to associate us.’ Because they're calling us schismatics already because we're disobeying the Pope. ‘They will try to associate us and other good traditional Catholics with these fanatics in hopes of trying to bring discredit upon the good as well as the evil.’ And then he mentions about the Thuc line, he says, Archbishop Lefebvre about Bishop Thuc. ‘He seems to have lost all reason.’

      I was recently informed also that in the 1970s, one of the Society Saint Pius X priests in St. Marys, he brought in two priests who were from the Antiochian schismatic sect and they were ordained in this schematic sect. But the priest thought ‘well they're valid so I'll let them say Mass on the altars at St. Marys in Kansas.’ And this was a red flashing light and alarm to the other priests and they said ‘you can't do this.’ So, they wrote to Archbishop Lefebvre, there wasn’t email in those days, they had to write a letter and the Archbishop Lefebvre immediately responded and said ‘dismiss them immediately.’ That was his action. He dismissed them and forced them out of there immediately and corrected that priest. So, this priest made a big mistake and he was a good priest but he made a big mistake and the Archbishop came down and had to whack him. So, I think this applies in the case with what we're dealing with now, may it be done and over but even if he's valid, and I have my doubts even now about that because of the fraud history, but even if he was valid it's not licit and you don't get involved with such a case, as Archbishop Lefebvre warned.

      So, dear little flock consecrate yourselves to the Virgin Mary, according to the St. Louie de Montfort prayer, and do that. Let that be one of your big goals in Lent, renew your consecration to Our Lady and love Her and be devoted to Her and really pray Her Rosary well, it is the weapon of these days. May She fortify you in this battle, strengthen you so you obtain the happiness of heaven.

      O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee. O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee. O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee. In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. Amen