Volume
1
I
must begin my introduction with an explanation of the title of this
book. Many of those who read it will know little or nothing about
Archbishop Lefebvre when they begin. If they are Catholics they
will have gathered from the official Catholic press that he is a
French bishop who refuses to use the new rite of Mass and has a
seminary in Switzerland where he trains priests in defiance of the
Vatican. He will have been presented to them as an anachronism,
a man completely out of step with the mainstream of contemporary
Catholic thought, a man who is unable to adapt, to update himself.
He is portrayed as little more than an historical curiosity, of
no significance in the post-conciliar Church, a man whose views
do not merit consideration. The Archbishop is often subjected to
serious misrepresentation; he is alleged to have totally rejected
the Second Vatican Council or to be linked with extreme right-wing
political movements. A sad example of this form of misrepresentation
is a pamphlet published by the Catholic Truth Society of England
and Wales in 1976. It is entitled Light on Archbishop Lefebvre
and the author is Monsignor George Leonard, at that time Chief Information
Officer of the Catholic Information Office of England and Wales.
I wrote to Mgr. Leonard pointing out that he had seriously misrepresented
the Archbishop and suggested that he should either substantiate
or withdraw his allegations. He answered in strident and emotive
terms refusing to do either. I replied to Mgr. Leonard's attack
on the Archbishop in a pamphlet entitled Archbishop Lefebvre
- The Truth. This evoked such interest that several reprints
were necessary to cope with the demand and it gained the Archbishop
much new support. In this pamphlet I explained that the only way
to refute the type of attack made by Mgr. Leonard was to present
the entire truth - to write an apologia. The early Christian
apologists wrote their "apologies" to gain a fair hearing
for Christianity and dispel popular myths and slanders. It is in
this sense that the word "apologia" is used in
my title, i. e. as "a reasoned explanation" and not an
"apology" in the sense of contemporary usage.
The
classic apologia of modern times is the Apologia Pro Vita
Sua of Cardinal Newman. Newman had been seriously misrepresented
by Charles Kingsley who refused to provide the unqualified public
apology which was requested. Newman's reply proved to be one of
the greatest autobiographies in the English language and almost
certainly the greatest prose work outside the realm of fiction to
appear in English during the nineteenth century - and ironically
our thanks for it must be directed to an implacable opponent of
Newman and Catholicism.
My
own Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre may be devoid of literary
merit but it is certainly not without historic interest and those
who appreciate its publication must direct their thanks to Mgr.
Leonard without whom it would never have been written.
Incidentally,
my pamphlet replying to Mgr. Leonard proved so popular that the
publisher followed it up with others and thus began the Augustine
Pamphlet Series which now has sales running into tens of thousands
and includes works by theologians of international repute.
Although
this book certainly would not have been written had it not been
for Mgr. Leonard it could not have been written had it not been
for Jean Madiran, the Editor of Itinéraires. Itinéraires
is certainly the most valuable Catholic review appearing in the
world today. It contains documentation that would not otherwise
be published together with commentaries and articles by some of
France's most outstanding Catholic intellectuals; men, alas, who
have no counterpart in the English-speaking world. The debt my book
owes to Itinéraires is incalculable. It provides the
source for most of the original documents included together with
the articles by Jean Madiran and Louis Salleron which I have had
translated. Some of the material in my commentaries on the documents
also originates with Itinéraires. A detailed list
of sources for all the material in the Apologia will be provided
in Volume II.
The
scope of the Apologia is limited. It deals principally with
the relations between the Archbishop and the Vatican. It does not
deal with the activities of the Society of Saint Pius X in any individual
country. I am certainly not committed to the view that every action
and every opinion of the Archbishop, still less of every priest
in the Society, #4, rue Garanciere, 75006, Paris, France is
necessarily wise and prudent. I mention this because the reader
who is not familiar with the "Econe affair" may consider
that my attitude to the Archbishop and the Society is too uncritical
and therefore unobjective. My book is objective but it is not impartial.
It is objective because I have presented all the relevant documents
both for and against Mgr. Lefebvre, something his opponents have
never done. It is partial because I believe the evidence proves
him to be right and I state this. However, the reader is quite at
liberty to ignore my commentary and use the documentation to reach
a different conclusion. Clearly, the value of the book derives from
the documentation and not the commentary.
I
am convinced that the Apologia will be of enduring historical
value because I am convinced that the Archbishop will occupy a major
position in the history of post-conciliar Catholicism. The most
evident trend in mainstream Christianity since the Second World
War has been the tendency to replace the religion of God made Man
with the religion of man made God. Although Christians still profess
theoretical concern for the life to come their efforts are increasingly
taken up with building a paradise on earth. The logical outcome
of this attitude will be the discarding of the supernatural element
of Christianity as irrelevant. Since the Second Vatican Council
this movement has gained considerable momentum within the Catholic
Church, both officially and unofficially, and, during the pontificate
of Pope Paul VI, appeared to be sweeping all before it. No one was
more aware of this than Pope Paul VI himself who made frequent pronouncements
condemning this tendency and stressing the primacy of the spiritual.
But in practice, Pope Paul VI did little or nothing to halt the
erosion of the traditional faith. He reprimanded Modernists but
permitted them to use official Church structures to destroy the
faith, yet took the most drastic steps to stamp out the Society
of St. Pius X. At the time this introduction is being written, June
1979, there are signs of hope that Pope John Paul II will be prepared
not simply to speak but to act in defense of the faith. This is
something we should pray for daily. It hardly needs stating that
the criticism of the Holy See contained in this first volume of
the Apologia applies only to the pontificate of Pope Paul
VI. Not one word in the book should be construed as reflecting unfavorably
upon the present Holy Father. It is my hope that in the second volume
I will be able to give the details of an agreement between the Pope
and the Archbishop. This is also something for which we should pray.
The
reason I believe that Archbishop Lefebvre will occupy a major position
in the history of the post-conciliar Church is that he had the courage
and foresight to take practical steps to preserve the traditional
faith. Unlike many conservative Catholics he saw that it was impossible
to wage an effective battle for orthodoxy within the context of
the official reforms as these reforms were themselves oriented towards
the cult of man. The Archbishop appreciated that the liturgical
reform in particular must inevitably compromise Catholic teaching
on the priesthood and the Mass, the twin pillars upon which our
faith is built.1 The
sixteenth-century Protestant Reformers had also realized that if
they could undermine the priesthood there would be no Mass and the
Church would be destroyed. The Archbishop founded the Society of
St. Pius X with its seminary at Econe not as an act of rebellion
but to perpetuate the Catholic priesthood, and for no other purpose.
Indeed, as my book will show, the Society at first enjoyed the approbation
of the Holy See but the success of the seminary soon aroused the
animosity of powerful Liberal forces within the Church, particularly
in France. They saw it as a serious threat to their plans for replacing
the traditional faith with a new ecumenical and humanistically oriented
religion. This is the reason they brought such pressure to bear
upon Pope Paul VI. There is no doubt that the demands for the destruction
of Econe emanated principally from the French Hierarchy which, through
Cardinal Villot, the Secretary of State, was ideally placed to pressurize
the Pope.
A
number of those who have reviewed my previous books have been kind
enough to say that they are very readable. Unfortunately, the format
of Apologia is not conducive to easy reading. My principal
objective has been to provide a comprehensive fund of source material
which will be useful to those wishing to study the controversy between
the Archbishop and the Vatican. After various experiments I concluded
that the most satisfactory method was to observe strict chronological
order as far as possible. This meant that I could not assemble the
material in a manner that was always the most effective for maintaining
interest. The fact that I had to quote so many documents in full
also impedes the flow of the narrative. However, if the reader bears
in mind the fact that the events described in the book represent
not simply a confrontation of historic dimensions but a very moving
human drama, then it should never appear too dull. Mgr Lefebvre's
inner conflict must have been more dramatic than his conflict with
Pope Paul VI. No great novelist could have a more challenging theme
than that of a man whose life had been dedicated to upholding the
authority of the papacy faced with the alternative of disobeying
the Pope or complying with an order to destroy an apostolate which
he honestly believed was vital for the future of the Church. Let
no one imagine that the decision the Archbishop took was taken lightly
or was easy to make.
The
reader will find frequent suggestions that he should refer to an
event in its correct chronological sequence and to facilitate this
a chronological index has
been provided. If this page is marked it will enable the reader
to refer to any event mentioned in the book without difficulty.
As
the reader will appreciate, I could never have written a book of
this extent without considerable help - particularly as I was working
on two other books simultaneously. Some of those who gave their
help unstintingly have expressed a wish to remain anonymous, including
the individual to whom I am most indebted for help with the translations.
I must also thank Simone Macklow-Smith and my son Adrian for assistance
in this respect. I must make special mention of Norah Haines without
whose help the typescript would still be nowhere near completion.
I am indebted to David Gardner and Mary Buckalew whose competent
proof-reading will be evident to the discerning reader. Above all
I must thank Carlita Brown who set the book up single-handed and
had it ready for publication within three months. She would certainly
wish me to mention all the members of the Angelus Press who have
contributed to the publication of the Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre.
Despite
all our efforts, a book of this size is certain to contain at least
a few errors and I would appreciate it if they could be brought
to my attention for correction in any future printing or for mention
in Volume II. I can make no promise regarding the publication of
the second volume of Apologia beyond an assurance that it will appear
eventually. It will almost certainly be preceded by a book on the
treatment of the question of religious liberty in the documents
of Vatican II. The Archbishop's stand on the question of religious
liberty is less familiar to English-speaking traditionalists than
his stand on the Mass but it is no less important as it involves
the very nature of the Church. He refused to sign Dignitatis
Humanae, the Council's Declaration on Religious Liberty, because
he considered it incompatible with previous authoritative and possibly
infallible papal teaching. My book will provide all the necessary
documentation to evaluate this very serious charge which is also
examined briefly in Appendix IV to the present work.
Finally,
I would like to assure the reader that although I have written much
that is critical of the Holy See and Pope Paul VI in this book this
does not imply any lack of loyalty to the Church and the Pope. When
a subordinate is honestly convinced that his superior is pursuing
a mistaken policy he shows true loyalty by speaking out. This is
what prompted St. Paul to withstand St. Peter "to his face
because he was to be blamed" (Galatians 2:11). The first duty
of a Catholic is to uphold the faith and save his own soul. As I
show in Appendices I and II, there is ample precedent in the history
of the Church to show that conflict with the Holy See has sometimes
been necessary to achieve these ends. Archbishop Lefebvre has stated
on many occasions that all he is doing is to uphold the faith as
he received it. Those who condemn him condemn the Faith of their
Fathers.
Michael
Davies
20
June 1979
St.
Silverius, Pope and Martyr.
Si
diligis me, Simon Petre.
pasce agnos meos,
Pasce
oves meas.
Introit.
_________
1.
Let anyone who doubts this compare the new and old rites of ordination.
A detailed comparison has been made in my book The Order of Melchisedech.
Courtesy of the Angelus
Press, Regina Coeli House
2918 Tracy Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64109
|