How Archbishop Lefebvre dealt with Sedevacantists
May 10, 2018 21:33:41 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2018 21:33:41 GMT
How Archbishop Lefebvre dealt with sedevacantists -Part 1
This excerpt is from a conference on September 9, 1988; part of it is published in Fideliter 66 November/December 1988, pp. 27-31.)
Archbishop Lefebvre, 1988:
"I think that it may be necessary to take care to avoid anything that could show, by expressions that are a little too hard, our disapproval of those who are leaving us. Do not label them with epithets which can be taken a little injuriously. It does nothing. It is the contrary. You see, personally, I've always had this attitude amongst those who have left us, and God knows that there are many in the course of the history of the Society who have left us; the history of the Society is almost a history of separations, isn’t it? I have always believed, as a principle: No more relations. It's over. They are leaving us; they are going towards other pastors, other shepherds. No more relations.
They tried - those who left as sedevacantists, just as well I would say, as those who left because we weren’t “papist” enough etc. - all have tried to lead us into a polemic. I received letters from Father Guérard Deslauriers with lawsuit threats, if I did not answer. I threw them in the garbage - never replied. I never replied one word. Neither Monsignor, at any rate, the one who is called "Monsignor Munari" and the others, nor the fourteen (or thirteen) of America, nor Cantoni who left us, nor the other Italians who left us; I never replied. This is what I said to Dom Gerard: "Dom Gérard you will not hear about me anymore, I will not set foot at your place anymore. I will not write to you anymore, and when you will write to me, I will not answer you. You will not hear a word from me anymore. It is over. I consider you like those who have left us, like Fr. Bisig, like Dom Augustin, like the others who have left us. That’s it. I pray for you, but it's over. We will not have relations anymore."
“This way they can’t ever, any of them, pull out of their sleeve, I would say, a letter [saying]: This is how the Archbishop treated me; this is what he said to me. Because if one writes, the sole fact of writing makes them falsely claim: See, I agree with the Archbishop. He wrote to me again eight days ago. So then, we would almost have had to denounce them right away. But I didn’t write that. I didn’t say that I agreed; and we start another letter, and we start another polemic. It is over. We cannot play that game. We have to leave them behind. I believe that there is nothing better to make them reflect and then to bring them back to us eventually, if there are some, and there are not many who came back. But anyway, for eventually and in any case, they cannot say that we were unpleasant towards them or that we did them wrong.
No. I think it is the best method, you know, except, of course, when there are statements which are absolutely false. Then we must publish a communiqué to rectify them, like the Superior General did for the declaration of Dom Gerard. It is normal. But it is necessary to say that for the correspondence that is taking place, we could do it indefinitely. Then we come, in fact, easily and unfortunately, to say things that after we regret a little to have said, and which are not charitable.”
This excerpt is from a conference on September 9, 1988; part of it is published in Fideliter 66 November/December 1988, pp. 27-31.)
Archbishop Lefebvre, 1988:
"I think that it may be necessary to take care to avoid anything that could show, by expressions that are a little too hard, our disapproval of those who are leaving us. Do not label them with epithets which can be taken a little injuriously. It does nothing. It is the contrary. You see, personally, I've always had this attitude amongst those who have left us, and God knows that there are many in the course of the history of the Society who have left us; the history of the Society is almost a history of separations, isn’t it? I have always believed, as a principle: No more relations. It's over. They are leaving us; they are going towards other pastors, other shepherds. No more relations.
They tried - those who left as sedevacantists, just as well I would say, as those who left because we weren’t “papist” enough etc. - all have tried to lead us into a polemic. I received letters from Father Guérard Deslauriers with lawsuit threats, if I did not answer. I threw them in the garbage - never replied. I never replied one word. Neither Monsignor, at any rate, the one who is called "Monsignor Munari" and the others, nor the fourteen (or thirteen) of America, nor Cantoni who left us, nor the other Italians who left us; I never replied. This is what I said to Dom Gerard: "Dom Gérard you will not hear about me anymore, I will not set foot at your place anymore. I will not write to you anymore, and when you will write to me, I will not answer you. You will not hear a word from me anymore. It is over. I consider you like those who have left us, like Fr. Bisig, like Dom Augustin, like the others who have left us. That’s it. I pray for you, but it's over. We will not have relations anymore."
“This way they can’t ever, any of them, pull out of their sleeve, I would say, a letter [saying]: This is how the Archbishop treated me; this is what he said to me. Because if one writes, the sole fact of writing makes them falsely claim: See, I agree with the Archbishop. He wrote to me again eight days ago. So then, we would almost have had to denounce them right away. But I didn’t write that. I didn’t say that I agreed; and we start another letter, and we start another polemic. It is over. We cannot play that game. We have to leave them behind. I believe that there is nothing better to make them reflect and then to bring them back to us eventually, if there are some, and there are not many who came back. But anyway, for eventually and in any case, they cannot say that we were unpleasant towards them or that we did them wrong.
No. I think it is the best method, you know, except, of course, when there are statements which are absolutely false. Then we must publish a communiqué to rectify them, like the Superior General did for the declaration of Dom Gerard. It is normal. But it is necessary to say that for the correspondence that is taking place, we could do it indefinitely. Then we come, in fact, easily and unfortunately, to say things that after we regret a little to have said, and which are not charitable.”