A Canonical Recognition?


A Canonical Recognition?

When Archbishop Lefebvre founded the Society of Saint Pius X in 1970, he had obtained its canonical erection as a “pious union” from Bishop Charrière of Fribourg, Switzerland. The Archbishop’s work remained canonically recognized for five years.

However, on November 21st, 1974, after a canonical visit of Ecône by two envoys from Rome, Archbishop Lefebvre published a declaration manifesting his refusal “to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.”

From that point forward, the dividing line between the two “churches” was drawn. Shortly after, the “Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies” was given the name of the “conciliar church” by Bishop Benelli [letter addressed to the Archbishop on behalf of Pope Paul VI]. It has kept this name ever since.

The canonical “suppression” of the SSPX was decreed by Bishop Mamie, on May 6th, 1975. Archbishop Lefebvre rightly stated that it was “irregular, and in any case, unjust.”

This “suppression” was therefore considered as null and void by Archbishop Lefebvre and all those who follow the rules of the Catholic Church, whereas it was deemed valid by the representatives of the conciliar church.

Recently, however, there has been more and more talk of a “canonical recognition” of the SSPX from the present authorities in the Vatican. Can such recognition be accepted?

Per se, canonical regularity in the Catholic Church is something that is good, and even necessary. Archbishop Lefebvre sought this regularity in 1970, and obtained it. Nevertheless, today, if a canonical recognition were to be accorded, it would be in the framework of the new Code of Canon Law. It is in this framework that the Pope has granted jurisdiction for marriages celebrated by priests of the SSPX.

That reason alone would suffice in order to refuse this recognition:

“We cannot content ourselves with particular guidelines for the Society; we refuse this new Code of Canon Law because it is contrary to the common good of the entire Church, [which is what] we want to protect.” [Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, Courrier de Rome n° 499, May 2017]

We may add that under present circumstances, there are other disadvantages. Just to name a few:

— It would make us enter into the conciliar pluralism, with Tradition being recognized on an equal footing with the Charismatic movements, the Focolari, Opus Dei, etc. This would put Truth on a par with error, at least in the public opinion.

— It would bring into our chapels faithful who are determined to remain conciliar, modernist and liberal, along with all that this implies regarding their lifestyle (because bad ideas lead to bad morals).

— It would necessarily reduce any attacks against the errors professed by the authorities under which we would then directly find ourselves. It’s rather easy for all to see that the superiors of the SSPX have already diminished their criticisms of the present errors coming from Rome (Year of Luther, Amoris Laetitia, etc.).

—Lastly, such a canonical recognition would place us directly under the authority of superiors who are themselves under Freemasonic influence. Indeed, various studies published in Le Sel de la Terre have shown that the conciliar church is an instrument in the hands of Freemasonry to force Catholics to work toward the establishment of the New World Order, willingly or not. (See the editorial n° 101, summer 2017.) Providence permitted Archbishop Lefebvre and those who followed him to be exempt from this Freemasonic influence: it would now be a grave imprudence to subject ourselves to it voluntarily. Freemasonry was born exactly three centuries ago (June 24th, 1717). After having destroyed all the Christian states (with the revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries), and subjugating the Church (with the plan of the Alta Vendita, accomplished by Vatican II), will Freemasonry succeed in spreading its influence over the work of Archbishop Lefebvre? This would certainly be its apparent triumph on earth.

Consequently, a “canonical solution” can only be foreseen in the case of a Rome that has converted doctrinally. Moreover, this conversion will have to be proven by concrete efforts to work for the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ, while fighting against the adversaries of this reign.


A Luciferian Religion

Last June 24th marked the 300th anniversary of the foundation of Freemasonry. This sect constitutes a sort of “Counter-Church” offering worship to Satan (See especially the book by Jean-Claude Lozac’hmeur, Les Origines occultists de la Francmaçonnerie). Msgr. Henri Delassus, author of the monumental work, The Anti-Christian Conspiracy — The Masonic Temple Wanting to Build Itself upon the Ruins of the Catholic Church (1910), made a remarkable analysis of the progression of this Luciferian cult as a preparation of the reign of the Antichrist:

Just as in pagan times there were secret ceremonies and an esoteric doctrine that were known only to the “initiated”, leaving to the crowd of “ordinary men” the things which they could handle, giving satisfaction to their religious instincts in a sort of naturalism, we see reborn today certain practices and dogmas that constitute a properly Luciferian religion for the “initiated”, whereas the public is little by little led to a purely naturalistic religion. […]

This is not the first time that Satanism has invaded Christianity.

In the 15th century, the Renaissance, which was the first manifestation of the anti-Christian conspiracy, was preceded by an extraordinary development of magic. It grew everywhere that Protestantism took hold, and this led to an epidemic of witchcraft that throughout the 17th century was a nightmare for Germany, England and Scotland, while the Latin countries remained practically untouched.

The Revolution, as well, was preceded by a fever of Satanism. Magnetizers, necromancies, as they were called, showed up everywhere. The corrupted nobles had themselves initiated in rites where Satan was invoked, and in the towns as well as in the cities people gave themselves up to all kinds of occult practices.

But never, since the times of paganism, has Satan been as alive and active as he is today, having been invited back into the domain from which the Cross of the Divine Redeemer had chased him away. (pp. 723-725)