Br. Thomas Aquinas OSB
Two currents are manifested today within Tradition. Some want an agreement. Others do not.
- You need to enter the Church.
- Who's already inside, do not need to enter.
- But we need the legality - the first one answer.
- That's how Barroux, Campos and many others have fallen - the second one reply.
- But we will not fall; it is not possible that God allows such thing to happen.
- “Wherefore he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall." - warns St. Paul (I Cor 10, 12).
The same causes produce the same effects. If Benedict XVI beatified whom excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, if Benedict XVI celebrated the silver jubilee of the meeting in Assisi, if Benedict argues that the Second Vatican Council is consistent with Tradition, then the evils we witnessed during the pontificate of John Paul II will also be repeated in Benedict XVI’s pontificate.
As long as liberal Rome dominates eternal Rome, as long as the biggest disaster in the history of the Church since her foundation, i.e., the Second Vatican Council, is the privileged reference of Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope, there is no solution.
- But Rome is changing - the defenders of the agreement insist.
- Changing in what?
- Rome freed the Mass and removed the excommunications - the first ones answer.
- But what is the good of releasing the Mass if Rome leaves the two Masses to coexist? We read in the Old Testament Abraham expelled the slave Agar and his son Ishmael, in order that Isaac would not stay with the son of the slave, as St. Paul says: "He who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born after the Spirit", and St. Paul adds, "so also it is now" (Gal. V, 29). Abraham did this, reluctantly, in consideration of Sarah’s request, and God agreed with Sara, because the one that is free should not be equated to the slave. Hagar is the new Mass. She has no rights. She must be suppressed. (Blog Emphasis)
As for the lifting of the excommunications, what is the good of removing them if they beatify the one who brought them up? Despite of certain juridical benefit of these two facts, the "liberation" of the Mass (that was never abrogated) and the "raising" of the excommunications (that was never valid), the spiritual benefit of each one of them remained compromised by the contradictory context in which they were done. It is either John Paul II who has the truth on his side,or Archbishop Lefebvre. It is not possible to exalt John Paul II and withdraw --if they really withdrew-- the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre. Both cannot be right at the same time. This is pure modernism. As for the Mass, that is the same thing. If both are allowed, the result is the contradiction. It is a principle of dissolution. It is a principle of corruption of the Catholic faith. (Blog Emphasis)
- But -say the agreement seekers - Rome cannot end this crisis all at once. Human things are not solved at one stroke. In order to bring order out of chaos now, a long time will be needed.
- Yes, there's no doubt. But the beginning of this order will only come when the Pope would have the intention to establish this order. And here a question arises. Does Benedict XVI wish to restore the order in the Church?
- Certainly - some will say among the agreement-seekers.
- Nothing could be farther from the truth - we reply. – To restore order in the Church is not to imitate Napoleon, who structured the Revolution and, therefore, perpetuating it. To spread disorder, a little order is needed, said Corção. Benedict XVI is a man of order, but the order he wants is not brought by the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ: for him, “the Council's’ problem was to assimilate two centuries of liberal culture ." It seems this is what Benedict XVI wants to do with his hermeneutic of continuity.
- But - others insist – Benedict XVI will gradually and increasingly defend Tradition. He needs us. He wants our help to combat modernism.
- Campos also spoke that way. How Benedict XVI may want our help to fight modernism if he is indeed a modernist? He can fight certain modernists; but combating modernism, he can only do so after ceasing to be a modernist.
- But in this way a solution will never come.
- I don´t know. I just know that St. Anselm said that what God loves most in this world is the freedom of His Church. Putting Tradition under the authority of men who do not profess the integrity of the Catholic Faith is doing exactly the opposite of what God loves most.
- But in that case are you identifying Tradition with the Church?
- Perfectly, since the Church is essentially traditional and cannot stop being so. [ii]
- But then who is Benedict XVI, if he is not a traditionalist?
- He is a liberal Pope who enslaves the Church. To place ourselves under his authority without him denying his professed errors, is to put Sarah under the yoke of Hagar, and Isaac under the yoke of Ishmael. Now, we are children of the free one, not of the slave whose son is the Vatican II, the slave of two centuries of liberal culture.
- So, which is the solution?
- The conversion of the Pope.
- But how to obtain it?
- Praying and fighting. God doesn’t ask us the victory, but the combat. As St. Joan of Arc said, "The soldiers will fight and God will bring victory," by the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Here is all our hope.
[i] “From Liberalism to Apostasy. Ed.Permanência. pg. 10.
[ii] Evidently, the question is complex. The title of Ploncard d'Assac's book summarizes it in certain way: The Occupied Church. The Archbishop Lefebvre’s conference dictated in 1988 to answer to Dom Gérard's arguments, gives also a penetrating light on the question.