The Our Lady of Good Success Mission wishes you all a most Blessed Easter!
Thanks to a French Canadian gentleman of the Resistance, here is a translated into English extract of a conference given by the saintly Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on April 11, 1990 in Econe, Switzerland. This extract concerns the liturgical reforms attributed to Pope John XXIII. It is clear from this conference that a true follower of Archbishop Lefebvre cannot reject the 1962 Missal and Breviary.
The audio extract (in French) of the conference regarding this subject is provided below, courtesy of the same French Canadian gentlemen.
The owner of the website Milita Jesu Christi found a gem on Bishop Williamson’s former public position on the New Mass. You may listen to the audio recording below. I do not know the date and place of this recording.
In this recording, Bishop Williamson says that the New Mass is “illicit in any case”, that it is “intrinsically evil”, and that “one may not attend a valid, illicit Mass anymore than a Satanic Mass”. Wow! What a difference this is from what the same Bishop Williamson said to the lady in the Mahopac, NY conference given on June 28, 2015, where he basically told her that it was okay to continue attending the New Mass so long as her faith was nourished by it. The words His Excellency uttered in this conference (and his later Eleison Comments) have caused strife within the Resistance between priests and faithful alike. Yet, His Excellency has not backed down from what he said at that conference.
What a shame it is that an old wound has been opened up by His Excellency on a matter that had already been settled by Archbishop Lefebvre, which is that the New Mass is bad in itself and hence it may not be attended despite the reverence with which a priest celebrates it. Therefore, the faithful followers of the Archbishop must resist Bishop Williamson or any other Resistance bishop, priest, or faithful who defend his words.
“I became aware of this desire of Rome to impose on us their ideas and their way of seeing things. Cardinal Ratzinger always said to me, “But, Monsignor, there is only one Church, you must not make a parallel Church.”
What is this Church for him? The Conciliar Church, this is clear! When he explicitly told us: “Obviously, if we grant you this protocol, some privileges, you will also have to accept what we do; and therefore, in the Church of Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet, a New Mass will also have to be said every Sunday.”…
You see clearly that he wanted to bring us back to the Conciliar Church. This is not possible because it is clear that they want to impose these innovations on us to put an end to Tradition. They grant nothing out of esteem for the traditional liturgy, but simply to deceive those whom they give it to, and to diminish our resistance, to drive a wedge in the Traditional block to destroy it.
These are their politics, their conscious tactics! They do not make mistakes and you know the pressures they exert …”
(Conference at Econe, September 9, 1988)
“The more one analyzes the documents of Vatican II, and the more one analyzes their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, the more one realizes that what is at stake is not merely superficial errors, a few mistakes, ecumenism, religious liberty, collegiality, a certain Liberalism, but rather a wholesale perversion of the mind, a whole new philosophy based on modern philosophy, on subjectivism.”
(Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, “Two Years after the Consecrations”, Address Given to Priests in Econe, Switzerland on September 6, 1990)
I think that many of those that left us to rejoin Rome, (isn’t that right,) did not rightly understand what liberalism is and how the Roman authorities at the moment, since the Council in particular, are infested with these errors. They did not understand. If they had understood, they would have fled, they would have avoided, they would have stayed with us. But they do not want to believe these errors. This is serious because by moving closer to these authorities, one is necessarily contaminated. These authorities are imbued with these principles, live with these principles – these principles of liberalism. Inevitably, they act in conformity with their ideas. And therefore, they can only have relations with us. They begin to have relations with us – relations which little by little impose these ideas on us, since they are the authorities. They are the authorities and we are the subordinates, so they impose these ideas on us. It is impossible otherwise. As long as they do not rid themselves of these errors – these errors of liberalism and modernism – there is no way we can come to an agreement with them. It is not possible. We cannot approach them because immediately we have to submit to their orientations.
(September 22, 1988)