Cardinal  Felipe Arizmendi , Bishop Emeritus of San Cristóbal de Las Casas and responsible for the Doctrine of the Faith at the  Mexican Episcopal Conference (CEM) , offers Exaudi readers his article.

FACTS

In an indigenous community near San Cristóbal de Las Casas, served by the Salesian priests, a group of traditionalists from Tuxtla Gutiérrez were invited, without the parish’s permission, to perform baptisms, first communions, and confirmations—but not weddings—all on the same day. No catechism or prior preparation was provided, and the traditionalists were charged a considerable sum for each ceremony. These traditionalists are not directly affiliated with the Lefebvrists, but they share some similarities.

The day before, I found out and went to the community to speak with the people, along with the parish priest. I explained that those sacraments could be invalid and illicit because there was no proof that the bishop who was going to come was even a true priest. They realized the deception they were about to fall for, without being aware of it; but they told me, distressed, that they had already prepared everything for the celebration the next day: the godparents invited, the choir hired, the expenses already paid, and the food planned. Faced with this situation, I changed my schedule and offered to go personally to celebrate those sacraments for them, on the condition that they would receive the necessary catechesis afterward, which they agreed to, in agreement with the Salesian priests. We realized in time and prevented them from being deceived. This happens to many people who accept traditionalists without truly understanding their ecclesial situation.

Therefore, I will attempt to further clarify some of the Lefebvrists’ statements in their  Catholic Profession of Faith.  I will transcribe  their assertions in italics  and provide my commentary in a regular Word document.

LIGHTNING

81. The Holy Spirit was not promised to Peter’s successors so that they would manifest a new doctrine.

The Popes help us to live the perennial doctrine of the Church by applying it to the realities we experience, not by inventing new doctrines. They have not invented new tenets of faith.

82. The present Magisterium cannot substantially contradict the previous Magisterium. The living Magisterium is not a current preaching opposed to past preaching, but rather the continuous and uninterrupted preaching of the same meaning, of the same truth of faith throughout the centuries. The Pope and the bishops are not the owners of Revelation, but are its custodians and are subject to it as the disciple is to the master. They cannot change the faith, nor modify the divine constitution of the Church, nor declare good that which is contrary to the law of God.

Recent Popes have done none of what is claimed here. To assert otherwise is slanderous and offensive.

83. What belongs to the divine constitution of the Church cannot be remodeled according to the categories of the modern world or the historical-cultural context.

No recent Pope has done this. Only what belongs to the divine constitution of the Church has been applied to our context.

84. I reject the artificial opposition between the Magisterium of yesterday and that of today, as if the only living Magisterium of the Bride of Christ were only that of the present time.

There is continuity, but not perpetuation of the past, always remaining faithful to the one revealed truth. The Gospel and the service of the Successor of Peter do not change; what changes are the ways in which it is applied to current realities.

85. I reject the accusation leveled against the holy Church of having failed in charity by anathematizing heresies and excommunicating heretics.

In some cases, they were not listened to, and what was not heretical was condemned as such. The Inquisition committed acts of charity and perhaps injustice.

86. I also reject the perpetual dialogue established under the spirit of the last Council, … and dialogue on equal terms with the followers of false religions, or even with non-believers.

These dialogues are not to hide or diminish our faith, but to share it and to respect each other as people and as human beings, and together to contribute to fraternity and world peace.

87. I reject the subjectivist conception of theological pluralism, which stems from such a renunciation of the magisterial function. The uninterrupted transmission of the revealed deposit is the proximate and universal rule of truth in matters of faith and morals.

There is theological pluralism, but the magisterial function has not been relinquished; when it is necessary to correct what is not in accordance with divine Revelation, it is done. The Word of God is our supreme rule.

92. I profess that adulterous unions, unions against nature, cannot be blessed as such.

Homosexual unions are not blessed; rather, God is asked to bless each person, not as if they were married, nor as an endorsement of their lives. God is asked to help them in all things, including changing their lives.

ACTIONS

If you do not know the priest or bishop offering you a religious service, always ask your parish priest to ensure you receive a valid and lawful sacrament. Beware of fraudsters and others who may act in good faith but are not in communion with the Church!