Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre On the Apostasy of Vatican II & Conciliar Church
Archbishop Lefebvre about the Pope and the destruction of the Church
“…we do not belong to this religion. We do not accept this new religion. We belong to the old religion, the Catholic religion, not to this universal religion as it is called today. It is no longer the Catholic religion…” (Sermon, June 29, 1976)
We have been suspended a divinis by the Conciliar Church and from the Conciliar Church, to which we have no wish to belong.” (July 29 1976, Reflections on the Suspension a divinis)
“The Church which affirms such errors is both schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is therefore not Catholic.” (July 29, 1976, Reflections on the Suspension a divinis)
“To
whatever extent pope, bishops, priests or faithful adhere to this new
Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.” (July 29, 1976, Reflections on the Suspension a divinis)
“I
should be very happy to be excommunicated from this Conciliar Church…
It is a Church that I do not recognize. I belong to the Catholic
Church.” (Interview July 30 1976, published in Minute, no. 747)
“This
Council represents, in our view and in the view of the Roman
authorities, a new Church which they call the Conciliar Church.” (Le Figaro, August 4, 1976)
“To
whatever extent the pope departed from…tradition he would become
schismatic, he would breach with the Church. Theologians such as Saint
Bellarmine, Cajetan, Cardinal Journet and many others have studied this
possibility. So it is not something inconceivable.” (Le Figaro, August 4, 1976)
“Heresy,
schism, ipso facto excommunication, invalidity of election are so many
reasons why a pope might in fact never have been pope or might no longer
be one. In this, obviously very exceptional case, the Church would be
in a situation similar to that which prevails after the death of a
Pontiff.” (Le Figaro, August 4, 1976)
“We
believe we can affirm, purely by internal and external criticism of
Vatican II, i.e. by analyzing the texts and studying the Council’s ins
and outs, that by turning its back on tradition and breaking with the
Church of the past, it is a schismatic council.” (Le Figaro, August 4, 1976)
“…a
grave problem confronts the conscience and the faith of all Catholics
since the beginning of Paul VI’s pontificate: how can a pope who is
truly successor of Peter, to whom the assistance of the Holy Ghost has
been promised, preside over the most radical and far-reaching
destruction of the Church ever known, in so short a time, beyond what
any heresiarch has ever achieved? This question must one day be
answered…” (Le Figaro, August 4, 1976)
“It is not we who are in schism but the Conciliar Church.” (Homily preached at Lille, August 29, 1976)
“This
union which liberal Catholics want between the Church and the
Revolution is an adulterous union – adulterous. This adulterous union
can only beget bastards. Where are these bastards? They are [the new]
rites. The [new] rite of Mass is a bastard rite. The sacraments are
bastard sacraments. We no longer know whether they are sacraments that
give grace. We no longer know if this Mass gives us the Body and the
Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. (…) The priests emerging from the
seminaries are bastard priests.” (Homily preached at Lille, August 29, 1976, before a crowd of some 12,000.)
1977
“The
question is therefore definitive: is Paul VI, has Paul VI ever been,
the successor of Peter? If the reply is negative: Paul VI has never
been, or no longer is, pope, our attitude will be that of sede vacante
periods, which would simplify the problem. Some theologians say that
this is the case, relying on the statements of theologians of the past,
approved by the Church, who have studied the problem of the heretical
pope, the schismatic pope or the pope who in practice abandons his
charge of supreme Pastor. It is not impossible that this hypothesis will
one day be confirmed by the Church.” (Ecône, February 24, 1977, Answers to Various Burning Questions)
“If
we think that this reformed liturgy is heretical and invalid, whether
because of modifications made in the matter and form or because of the
reformers’ intention inscribed in the new rite in opposition to the
intention of the catholic Church, evidently we cannot participate in
these reformed rites because we should be taking part in a sacrilegious
act. This opinion is founded on serious reasons…” (Ecône, February 24, 1977, Answers to Various Burning Questions)
(Homily, Ecône, September 18, 1977)
1978
“That
is why I beseech Your Eminence to …do everything in your power to get
us a Pope, a true Pope, successor of Peter, in line with his
predecessors, the firm and watchful guardian of the deposit of faith.
The…eighty-year-old cardinals have a strict right to present themselves
at the Conclave, and their enforced absence will necessarily raise the
question of the validity of the election” (Letter to an unnamed cardinal, August 8, 1978.)
1986
“…these
recent acts of the Pope and bishops, with protestants, Animists and Jews, are
they not an active participation in non-catholic worship as explained by Canon
Naz on Canon 1258§1? In which case I cannot see how it is possible to say that
the pope is not suspect of heresy, and if he continues, he is a heretic, a
public heretic. That is the teaching of the Church.” (Talk, March 30 and April
18, 1986, text published in The Angelus, July 1986)
Click Here To Read Sermon.
“You
know, for some time, many people, the sedevacantists, have been saying,
‘there is no more pope’. But I think that for me it was not yet the
time to say that, because it was not sure, it was not evident…” (Talk, March 30 and April 18, 1986, text published in The Angelus, July 1986)
“I
don’t know if the time has come to say that the pope is a heretic (…)
Perhaps after this famous meeting of Assisi, perhaps we must say that
the pope is a heretic, is apostate. Now I don’t wish yet to say it
formally and solemnly, but it seems at first sight that it is impossible
for a pope to be formally and publicly heretical. (…) So it is possible
we may be obliged to believe this pope is not pope.” (Talk, March 30 and April 18, 1986, text published in The Angelus, July 1986)
“It is possible we may be obliged to believe
this pope is not pope. For twenty years Mgr de Castro Mayer and I preferred to
wait…I think we are waiting for the famous meeting in Assisi, if God allows
it.” (Talk, March 30 and April 18, 1986, published in The Angelus, July 1986)
“Now some priests (even some priests in the Society) say that we Catholics need not worry about what is happening in the Vatican;
we have the true sacraments, the true Mass, the true doctrine, so why
worry about whether the pope is heretic or an impostor or whatever; it
is of no importance to us. But I think that is not true. If any man is
important in the Church it is the pope.” (Talk, March 30 and April 18, 1986, text published in The Angelus, July 1986)
“We consider as null…all the post-conciliar reforms, and all the acts of Rome accomplished in this impiety."
(Joint Declaration with Bishop de Castro Mayer following Assisi, December 2, 1986)
1987
“The
See of Peter and the posts of authority in Rome being occupied by
antichrists, the destruction of the Kingdom of Our Lord is being rapidly
carried out even within His Mystical Body here below (…) This is what
has brought down upon our heads persecution by the Rome of the
antichrists.” (Letter to the future bishops, 29 August 1987)
“It
is impossible for Rome to remain indefinitely outside Tradition. It’s
impossible… For the moment they are in rupture with their predecessors.
This is impossible. They are no longer in the Catholic Church.” (Retreat Conference, September 4, 1987, Ecône)
“Rome
has lost the Faith, my dear friends. Rome is in apostasy. These are
not words in the air. It is the truth. Rome is in apostasy… They have
left the Church… This is sure, sure, sure.” (Retreat Conference, September 4, 1987, Ecône)
1988
“So
we are [to be] excommunicated by Modernists, by people who have been
condemned by previous popes. So what can that really do? We are
condemned by men who are themselves condemned…” (Press conference, Ecône, June 15 1988)
“To
be publicly associated with the sanction [of excommunication] would be a
mark of honour and a sign of orthodoxy before the faithful, who have a
strict right to know that the priests they approach are not in communion
with a counterfeit Church…” (Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin, July 6, 1988, signed by 24 SSPX superiors, doubtless with Archbishop Lefebvre’s approval)
“We have
never wished to belong to this system that calls itself the Conciliar Church.
To be excommunicated by a decree of your eminence…would be the irrefutable
proof that we do not. We ask for nothing better than to be declared ex
communione…excluded from impious communion with infidels.” (Open Letter to
Cardinal Gantin, July 6, 1988, signed by 24 leading SSPX priests, doubtless
with Archbishop Lefebvre’s approval)
John Paul II “now continually diffuses the principles of a false religion, which has for its result a general apostasy.” (Preface to Giulio Tam’s Osservatore Romano 1990, contributed by the Archbishop just three weeks before his death)
Post-consecration
statement (Summer 1988), SSPX school Bitsche, Alsace-Lorraine: “the
archbishop stated, going even beyond even his 15th June press
conference, that those who had excommunicated him had themselves long
been excommunicated.” (Summary in the Counter-Reformation Association’s, News and Views, Candlemas 1996)
