Posted on 05/16/2026 12:25:08 PM PDT by ebb tide
One of the most interesting passages in Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s They Have Uncrowned Him is his description of the way in which the Vatican II documents were drafted. After having discussed the efforts of conservative Council Fathers to add orthodox passages to the Council documents to counterbalance liberal assertions, he wrote of the efforts of the liberals to promote their heterodox ideas:
“But the annoying thing is that the Liberals themselves practiced this system in the text of the schemas: assertion of an error or an ambiguity or a dangerous orientation then immediately after or before, an assertion in the opposite direction intended to tranquilize the conservative Council Fathers.” (p. 168)
As the SSPX is already denounced today by Rome and so-called conservative Catholics for “rejecting Vatican II,” it is entirely appropriate, and even necessary, to show how the Vatican, led by Leo XIV, is rejecting Vatican II.Tweet this quote
Those who have studied the documents of Vatican II can spot the tension between liberal and conservative positions in many of the documents because there was little real effort to harmonize the opposing viewpoints into a coherent text. But for those who have less familiarity with the Council documents, perhaps it is useful to consider what this same drafting process would look like in a hypothetical statement about basic math (rather than Catholic theology):
“Two plus two is always four. . . . At the same time, however, there is a growing awareness that two plus two is sometimes five, or other numbers.”
It should be obvious to most reasonable people that the first sentence is correct and the second sentence is incorrect; and if we were taught to think about the Council’s documents in these terms there would be far less confusion about Vatican II. Archbishop Lefebvre continued with a simple example from the Council to illustrate this:
“Thus in the Constitution on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum concilium, by writing at n. 36 #2 ‘A more extensive role can be granted to the vernacular language,’ and by entrusting to the episcopal assemblies the care of deciding whether the vernacular language will be adopted or not (cf. n. 36 #3), the drafters of the text opened the door to the suppression of Latin in the liturgy. In order to soften this intention, they took care to write at first, at n. 36 #1: ‘The use of the Latin language, except for particular law, will be kept in Latin rites.’ Reassured by this assertion, the Fathers swallowed the two others without a problem.” (p. 168)
This is a tremendously valuable explanation, which ought to be more widely appreciated, because we all know that the use of the Latin language was not kept in Latin rites. At the same time, we can understand how Archbishop Lefebvre and his fellow conservative Council Fathers would have been pacified by the statement about retaining Latin.
The real crisis is not that the SSPX rejects Vatican II’s novelties — but that Rome rejects Vatican II’s Catholic passages.Tweet this quote
It is this unholy and nonsensical dynamic at play within the Vatican II documents that explains how it is that Archbishop Lefebvre’s Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) rejects some passages that the Vatican insists upon; and, conversely, how the SSPX actually agrees with some Vatican II passages that the Vatican has contradicted through its words and deeds ever since the Council closed. And so, as the SSPX is already denounced today by Rome and so-called conservative Catholics for “rejecting Vatican II,” it is entirely appropriate, and even necessary, to show how the Vatican, led by Leo XIV, is rejecting Vatican II.
Steadfast Adherence to the Unadulterated Faith. Whereas Rome condemns the SSPX for its uncompromising refusal to accept any teachings associated with Vatican II that conflict with what the Church taught prior to the Council, Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, tells us that the SSPX is correct:
“Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit the entire holy people united with their shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the Apostles, in the common life, in the breaking of the bread and in prayers, so that holding to, practicing and professing the heritage of the faith, it becomes on the part of the bishops and faithful a single common effort. But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.” (Dei Verbum, 10)
The Need to Be Faithful Catholics. Whereas Rome promotes a laxity with respect to the Faith that is characterized by rampant cafeteria-Catholicism and public sin, even on the part of high-ranking clergy, Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith, Lumen Gentium, tells us that the SSPX is correct in insisting that we must diligently practice the Faith if we wish to save our souls:
“They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a “bodily” manner and not ‘in his heart.’ All the Church’s children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word, and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.” (Lumen Gentium, 14)
No Salvation Outside the Church. Whereas Rome’s promotion of false ecumenism tells non-Catholics that they will be saved in their false religions, Lumen Gentium confirms that the SSPX is correct in retaining the pre-Vatican II teaching that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church:
“This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” (Lumen Gentium, 14)
Prior to Vatican II, the Church never permitted truth and error to stand side-by-side in official documents.Tweet this quote
The Need to Avoid All Threats to Marriage. Whereas Rome’s (a) promotion of homosexuality, especially through the blessings of same-sex unions, and (b) indifference to the widespread use of artificial contraception, directly attack the Christian teaching about marriage, the SSPX steadfastly adheres to the teaching on this matter as set forth in the Council’s Dogmatic Constitution of the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes:
“For God, the Lord of life, has conferred on men the surpassing ministry of safeguarding life in a manner which is worthy of man. Therefore, from the moment of its conception, life must be guarded with the greatest care, while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes. The sexual characteristics of man and the human faculty of reproduction wonderfully exceed the dispositions of lower forms of life. Hence, the acts themselves which are proper to conjugal love and which are exercised in accord with genuine human dignity must be honored with great reverence. Hence, when there is question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspects of any procedure do not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives, but must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his acts, preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love. Such a goal cannot be achieved unless the virtue of conjugal chastity is sincerely practiced. Relying on these principles, sons of the Church may not undertake methods of birth control which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law.” (Gaudium et Spes, 51)
The Need for Priests to Shun Wantonness and Lust. Whereas Rome’s powerful advocacy for homosexuality has necessarily encouraged an overwhelming proliferation of homosexuality among the clergy, the SSPX adheres to the teaching of Vatican II’s Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests, Presbyterorum Ordinis:
“Priests act especially in the person of Christ as ministers of holy things, particularly in the Sacrifice of the Mass, the sacrifice of Christ who gave himself for the sanctification of men. Hence, they are asked to take example from that with which they deal, and inasmuch as they celebrate the mystery of the Lord’s death, they should keep their bodies free of wantonness and lusts.” (Presbyterorum Ordinis, 13)
“This sacred synod also exhorts all priests who, in following the example of Christ, freely receive sacred celibacy as a grace of God, that they magnanimously and wholeheartedly adhere to it, and that persevering faithfully in it, they may acknowledge this outstanding gift of the Father which is so openly praised and extolled by the Lord. Let them keep before their eyes the great mysteries signified by it and fulfilled in it. Insofar as perfect continence is thought by many men to be impossible in our times, to that extent priests should all the more humbly and steadfastly pray with the Church for that grace of fidelity, which is never denied those who seek it, and use all the supernatural and natural aids available.” (Presbyterorum Ordinis, 16)
The same Vatican that grants liberty to doctrinal dissenters refuses liberty to Traditional Catholics.Tweet this quote
The Proper Ecumenical Dispositions. Finally, whereas Rome today proposes to condemn the SSPX for its rejection of the novelties of Vatican II, the Council’s Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, not only confirms that the SSPX is correct in seeking to convert souls to the Catholic Faith but also offers a striking condemnation of Rome’s refusal to grant Traditional Catholics the same religious liberty it grants to those who show complete disregard for Catholic orthodoxy:
“Catholics, in their ecumenical work, must assuredly be concerned for their separated brethren, praying for them, keeping them informed about the Church, making the first approaches toward them. But their primary duty is to make a careful and honest appraisal of whatever needs to be done or renewed in the Catholic household itself, in order that its life may bear witness more clearly and faithfully to the teachings and institutions which have come to it from Christ through the Apostles. For although the Catholic Church has been endowed with all divinely revealed truth and with all means of grace, yet its members fail to live by them with all the fervor that they should, so that the radiance of the Church’s image is less clear in the eyes of our separated brethren and of the world at large, and the growth of God’s kingdom is delayed. . . . All in the Church must preserve unity in essentials. But let all, according to the gifts they have received, enjoy a proper freedom, in their various forms of spiritual life and discipline, in their different liturgical rites, and even in their theological elaborations of revealed truth. In all things let charity prevail. If they are true to this course of action, they will be giving ever better expression to the authentic catholicity and apostolicity of the Church.” (Unitatis Redintegratio, 4)
Recalling Archbishop Lefebvre’s explanation about how the Council documents were drafted, we can see that the liberal Council Fathers allowed these orthodox passages only to counterbalance the liberal passages that have been emphasized by Rome for the past sixty years. Prior to Vatican II, the Church never permitted error to exist side-by-side with truth within the Church’s official documents. Therefore, deliberately putting truth and error side by side at Vatican II constituted one of the gravest imaginable offenses against God, an offense which has predictably set in motion the crisis that gets worse through the years as Catholics lose sight of the need to reject error.
Despite this horrific reality, it is nonetheless the case that Leo XIV’s Vatican actively opposes more of what the Council taught than does the SSPX. If anyone should be condemned for a rejection of Vatican II, it is certainly those in Rome who push the most liberal passages of the Council’s documents at the expense of the orthodox passages that Archbishop Lefebvre and his fellow conservative Council Fathers were able to insert. As Rome plans to excommunicate the SSPX for consecrating bishops, we should recall that the real battle for the past sixty years has always been about stifling or eliminating the voices who could remind the Church and world that even Vatican II condemns the heterodoxy that pollutes the Vatican today. May God grant Leo XIV and Cardinal Fernández the graces necessary to redirect their efforts towards properly Catholic ends: if they could remove the anti-Vatican II beams from their own eyes, they would see that the mote they imagine to be in the SSPX’s eye is really just the reflection of Vatican II’s Catholic passages. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.