Is Viganò the Next Lefebvre?

[00:00:16] So Archbishop Vigano is starting a new seminary which is raising comparisons to the founder of the Society of St. Pius X, Archbishop Marcel Lefev. [00:00:28] Are these comparisons fair or are there differences between them? I'm going to talk about that today on Crisis Point. Hello, I'm Eric Samitz, your host and editor in chief of Crisis magazine. And I did remember the last name of the founder of SSPX, Lefev. I just had that dramatic pause for. Absolutely no, you can. I just want to encourage people to smash that, like, button, subscribe to the channel, let other people know about the channel. I really appreciate that. Also, follow us on social media and subscribe to our email newsletter. And right now we're having our twice a year fundraiser. Please go to crisismagazine.com. We're going to have a pop up asking you for money. We don't have that run all year long. We only have it run for a few weeks twice a year, and it's running right now. So please go to crisismagazine.com and please donate. I will say, I got an email from a monk friend who I will remain nameless where he is, and he was saying he can't give any money. Of course he can't. But he prays for us every day. And I told him, and I meant this honestly, that is the best donation you can give. So we do appreciate your prayers and we ask them and beg them from you. Okay, so today the title of this episode is, is Vegano the next Lefev? [00:01:50] And I like this question because it's very Vatican IIish, because it's ambiguous. [00:01:57] Because you could answer this question multiple ways and mean different and come to different conclusions. You could say, yes, he's just like Lefev, and that's awesome. [00:02:07] Or, yes, he's just like Lefev, and that's terrible. Or you could say, no, he's nothing like Lefev. And that's a good thing because we don't want to be like Lefev. Or, no, he's nothing like Lefev. And that's a bad thing because he should be more like Lefev. [00:02:23] That's the question. In fact, it's funny, because preparing for this and posting this on social media before we went live, I seemed to get all four of those different options from people. People were very much, yes, he's the next Lefebvrev. That's great. Or, yeah, he is. And he's in schism, just like Lefebvre was. All these different answers. No, they're nothing alike. So I want to talk about that today, because what happened was, as I mentioned already, it was announced that a couple of days ago, Archbishop Vigano announced that he would be starting a new seminary. And this, of course, immediately brought to mind Archbishop Lefebvre. And why is that? I think it's good to know a little bit of the history. If you really want to do a deep dive in the life of Archbishop Lefebvre, I really encourage you. Read this book. [00:03:13] It's a very thick book about. It's just titled Marcel Lefev, and it's his biography. And I assume it's from Angeles Press. Yes, Angeles Press. It goes into details, but the basic story of Archbishop Lefebvre is that he became a priest young age, and he was a missionary priest, French, a missionary priest to Africa, and he spent many years in Africa, and he was a member of the Holy Ghost Fathers, a religious order of the Holy Ghost Fathers. And eventually he became. And he was. I'm forgetting the title. I knew I should have wrote this down. The pope gave him a title in Africa, like an apostolic nuncio type title. When he was in Africa, when he was working as a missionary in Africa, he made him a bishop, gave him this title. And so he was like kind of one of the pope's right hand men in Africa. This is before Vatican II, of course. He became the superior general of the Holy Ghost Fathers, and it was under. And as this is, that he was apostolic delegate of French Africa. Of course. Thank you, Kennedy, apostolic delegate of French Kanda. So that's what he was. Oh, and Kenny also reminds me, there's another book as well on Lefev. And boy, Kenny, just go ahead and put in the comments the name of it, because I've already forgot, and I will definitely mention it. So anyway, like I said, he was the superior general of the Holy Ghost fathers. He attended Vatican II. Obviously, he was a bishop. So obviously he's part of Vatican II, and he was part of a very small group that resisted many of the changes that happened at Vatican II. Okay, so Kennedy's book just last right here, SSPX, the Defense misspelled. He spells it like the Canadians do, which is obviously a misspelling. So, defense of SSPX. So that's Kennedy Hall's book. Okay, so he was obviously part of the small conservative group of fathers that were resisting many of the changes of Vatican two. And then after Vatican two, basically he retired, and this is in the late 60s, so if he had died at that moment, there is a decent chance that there would be a. [00:05:37] I wouldn't be shocked if there was a movement for his canonization within the church. That would have occurred if, let's say, he just died in the late 60s because of his great work as a missionary, bringing many souls to Jesus Christ, establishing the church in Africa, his leadership of the Holy Ghost Fathers. I mean, maybe not. I mean, those things are sometimes political on who actually goes through canonization process, who doesn't? But it wouldn't have shocked me if something like that had happened. However, obviously he did not pass away in the late 60s. Instead, he had a number of people come to him and they were distraught how the seminaries were starting to form men for the priesthood. It was very much taken over by modern psychology. A lot of issues with that, just a lot of problems. And he decided, okay, I'm going to start up a seminary. Now. Note when he started up and the seminary was for the formation of priests in a traditional manner. [00:06:36] And note that the seminary, the purpose of it was to form these seminarians, but then they would go off and be priest in diocese around the world. He was not setting up a religious order. He was not setting up a separate church or separate society like that. It just was like, okay, I'm going to form these men in the ways that I was formed, and I'm going to supply these priests to church. And it was approved by the local ordinary. Everything was hunky dory. There was no super controversy about this, about it starting off. [00:07:10] And then, however, this is 1970. Then, however, pretty soon in the next few years, there obviously started to be some problems, some friction with the hierarchy, with Rome, because Rome did not want these men formed in the way Lefe was forming them. And so he started getting more and more pushback, and he was working through the channels to try to make it all right with the church. But eventually, this is a very short. I'm not giving all the major details, but essentially, basically by the late 70s, he was in. [00:07:47] What's the right word? He was not in good graces with the Vatican. And actually his priest, he was not supposed to do certain things. And it was kind of like they were told to shut down the seminary. He didn't. And then eventually he formed the society. Then by 1988 is the big year, because then, after many years of asking for permission to consecrate bishops to continue his work and being denied by Rome, he went ahead and consecrated him anyway in 1988. And this, of course, led to John Paul, Pope John Paul II, excommunicating him and then he died a few years later, 1991, I think maybe 1992, a few years after 1988. And he had ordained four men. I'm sorry? He had consecrated four men to the episcopacy at that time. And I believe those are the only bishops have been consecrated in the SSPX. So this is basically his very brief story. So you can see on the surface very quickly a comparison to Vegano. Vegano, having issues with the Vatican, decides to start a seminary. And a lot of people think if he's going to start a seminary, which is what Lefev did, eventually, he's going to need to consecrate bishops for the same reasons. In one sense, Lefev did. Lefev knew if he did not consecrate bishops, the work would not continue because how could you have a seminary ordaining priest if you don't have a bishop to ordain them? And so that's why he wanted to continue his work. That's why he consecrated these bishops. Well, you would think Vegano would have the same thoughts. Now, Vegano is a lot older starting this off than Lefebvre was, but at the same time, you would think he'd have the same type of idea. So people I saw immediately, I mean, as soon as I heard about the story, immediately people were comparing him. And in fact, vigue himself, in his announcement of the formation of it, calls to mind Lefebvrev. He mentions Lefev a couple times. He says the providential work of Archbishop Marcel Lefevre, beginning with the immediate post conciliar period, had the indisputable merit, on the one hand, of denouncing the estrangement from the immutable lex credendi, and on the other, of understanding the threat to which the priesthood was exposed with the introduction of the reform liturgy and with it the disturbing changes to the right of conferring holy orders. Then later he says that he announces the seminary being started. He says this passage follows in some way the initiative of the venerable Archbishop Lafev, but it differs from it in its italian and roman flavor and also in consideration of the different ecclesial context today compared to the situation of the 1970s. So Vigano himself is making comparisons to Lefebvre. I'm not saying he's claiming I'm the new Lefeb. [00:10:30] He sees the similarities like everybody does, and he's acknowledging them. And he's paying somewhat of a compliment to Lefev, like, I'm standing on your shoulder, so to speak. [00:10:42] And so before I note what I think about this. So is vegano the next Lefev? Now that I've kind of given a very brief history of Lefev, I want to just state I've stated this before publicly, but some people might not have heard. What's my opinion of Archbishop Lefev in the Society of St. Pius X? First of all, before I even state that, I would encourage you watch the episode where I interviewed James Vogel on the podcast. I think it was back in February of 2023, I interviewed him, and he is a spokesperson for the SSPX in America, and he goes through it. A lot of the questions people have about the SSPX there. Also Kennedy Hall. I interviewed one of my first podcast when we started the podcast up in 2021, I interviewed him. So if you can find that one about the SSPX, that's a good one as well. But my own opinion is this. Okay, I've never attended. [00:11:36] Never. I don't know any priest of the SSPX. At least I might have met one or two, maybe. I can't remember ever meeting any. Obviously, I know people in the SSPX. I know Kennedy. I know James, some other people. I know people who have attended or sent their kids to SSPX school, stuff like that. So my own opinion, I like to summarize it in basically one sentence, and that is, I think Lefev was wrong to consecrate the bishops. And I also think that one day he'll be canonized to saint. [00:12:09] And I know that sounds kind of like I'm trying to sit on the fence here, be in the middle, but I really do think those two extremes are somewhat represent at least my own views of Lefev. And that is, I do think he was a saintly man. I do think that what he did, he was doing for what he felt was the good the church. I think a lot of stuff he did do was good. I think we wouldn't have the traditional. I shouldn't say we wouldn't have traditional latin mass without him. I think that's not the right way to say it. I think the right way to say it is he was used as the instrument, God used him as the instrument to keep the latin mass alive. I think that's probably a better way to put it. I also do think, though, that he should not have consecrated the bishops. I think that was an act that went too far. I think if I was alive then, I would have thought that, and think that to this day, I understand it. And now we just live in a reality where he did. And I think it's silly then to relitigate that and have huge debates over it. And if somebody else tells me, hey, I think it was a good idea, I'm like, okay, now let's just talk about today. So that's where I stand with Lefev. So the question is, do I think Vigano is the next Lefevre? And my answer is no, I do not. And I think that's, I guess I would say a bad thing in the sense that I wish he was more like Lefev, to be honest. And I think there's some very fundamental differences between Archbishop Viganot and what his endeavors and archbishop Lefev. And let me kind of just start talking about some of these. The first one is, note my history of Lefav. When he started the seminary, it had hierarchical approval. It was not an attempt to separate in any way from the greater church. In fact, if you look at the history that was always basically forced upon Lefev, and that's one of the other differences I would say, is, if you look at Lefev, he tried very hard to be reconciled to the Vatican, to he. Although I don't think he should have consecrated the bishops. You can't say he did it. [00:14:17] What's the word? You can't say he did it rashly. It's not like he just woke up one morning and was like, you know what? I think it'd be a good idea to consecrate some bishops, Vatican be damned. That wasn't the attitude. It was years in the works and years of trying to negotiate with the Vatican. And it's not like the Vatican ever told him, no, absolutely not. You never can. They kept telling him, kind of stringing him along, like, yes, you can, but not yet. [00:14:45] Well, if he hears that, then he obviously believes it's okay to do at some point. They just haven't given him the green light yet. It's not like they ever said to him, no, this would be a act you can never ever do. They always kept saying, no, you can do it, but not yet. And so you see, there's this attempt to work with the church very much. I don't see that in vegano. He has no desire to reconcile himself to Rome. And in fact, that comes to the major difference between the two. Vegano has come out. And I know there's going to be vegano defenders who are going to get all like, no, that's not what he said. That's not what he means. Whatever. But ultimately, Vegano does not think Jorge Bergoglio is the pope is a valid pope, and he skirts it a little bit. But just recently he basically had a whole, there was a whole article at Lifesite news about this. In his words, what he was saying, where he was basically saying that because Bergoglio was, his intention in becoming pope was basically to overthrow the church. It was like a fraud. He engaged in fraud. That means it wasn't a valid election. And he uses language in such a way that you could almost be like, well, he's not saying that's necessarily true. He's just saying that's a possibility. But no, he's basically telling everybody that he is not the pope, that Francis is not Bergolia, whatever is not the pope. That is fundamentally different than Archbishop Lafav and the SSPX, because this is not some new thing. In the 1980s, there were members of the SSPX in the seminary who came to believe that John Paul II was not the valid pope and they were kicked out. In fact, the story I've heard is that the SSPX in their seminary, they say a prayer, the traditional prayer for popes. [00:16:45] And some of these men would not say that prayer because they did not believe J. P. Two was actually the pope. So what's the purpose of that prayer? And because of that, that's essentially what estranged them and they were kicked out. And so therefore, if you are. [00:17:02] Lefebvre had the opportunity to reject the validity of the current pope at the time, and he didn't go that route. [00:17:12] Vigano is going that route. And so that's a fundamentally different setup. Yes, it is true that the SSPX is in a irregular canonical situation. It's not an ideal situation. In fact, when I asked Mr. Vogel that on the podcast, when he admitted that, he didn't admit, he just said, well, yeah, of course that's the reality. It's not something they want as a permanent situation. [00:17:40] Vegano shows no signs of wanting to be reconciled, like I said, to the greater church, for lack of a better term. I know sometimes we have these weird terms to try to describe all this. I'm trying to use the most proper terms I can. That still makes sense. [00:17:52] There's no indication that vegano is saying, I want this to be a Seminary that's part of the greater church. No, it is starting off separated from the Vatican with no real attempt. No, like, okay, let's try to first work it out with the Vatican. No, it's like, let's be separated. And so therefore, this is where I'm going to say I was on a podcast recently, somebody else's podcast, and there was this guy, he's kind of an annoying host, I can't remember his name. But anyway, he kept on telling me he wanted me to say something controversial. And here's my primary, most controversial take in the kind of the trad world, and that is, I think if you are a full blown vicantus and you go to a mass where they do not name Pope Francis in the liturgy, then you are in schism. [00:18:43] And I know the word schism is thrown out all the time, schismatic, and I've won make fun of it. I don't use that word lightly. In fact, I try to use it literally here, because the whole point of being in schism is that you are separated. You do not acknowledge the authority of the reigning pope. [00:19:00] Now, the SSPX, they include Francis in their masses. Every single mass said by an SSPX priest, they name Francis as the pope and they name the local ordinary of wherever they happen to be. [00:19:15] And will this seminary of name, will it name Francis in their masses? I don't know. That hasn't been answered. My guess is no. If you don't think he's the pope, why would you wouldn't name him in the mass? That would be even worse in some ways because he's going to be lying almost. So therefore it's starting off in a, in schism essentially, which is not the same as the SSPX. Now I know some say the SSPX is in schism. I reject that idea. I think it is an irregular canonical situation and it's not a good situation for everybody involved, for the greater church and the SSPX. I think that I hope and pray one day everybody will be reconciled in that situation. [00:19:59] But here's another thing, because of the fact, here's something people don't get, the society is distinct. It is not completely unified, whatever the words you want to use with the greater church, yet it is held in check by, in a sense, and that's a good thing. What I mean by that is they do recognize there is an authority above them. I mean, there's cases of them going to the local bishop for permissions on this, going to the Vatican for permissions on that. They recognize that they are not kind of the head of the church, not completely free agents. I think that's probably the best way to put it. [00:20:38] And because that keeps them from going too far out in left field, too far astray. [00:20:45] However, I don't see that's probably not going to be the case. I do not think that's going to be the case of vegano seminary. There's nothing above it to keep it in check. And I think history has shown when that happens, you go very quickly into kind of nut job territory. [00:21:04] You go very quickly into a path that is a bad one. Here's a reality that Catholics always need to recognize. [00:21:15] Bad superiors are better than no superiors. [00:21:20] Bad superiors are better than no superiors. So even if you want to claim that the Vatican is corrupt and scandalous, which I claim, because I think it's just, I don't claim it, it's just obvious. It's still better to be under that authority on some level than just simply saying it has no authority. And it's just crazy, because if you do that, then there's nothing to keep you in check. There's nothing to keep you from just going off into just crazy territory. [00:21:56] And ultimately, it's kind of like if. [00:21:59] Why doesn't vegano try to join the SSPX or refer people to them? [00:22:07] Number one, he can't join them because they wouldn't let him. I'd be willing to bet all the money in the world that if he tried to, they would not because they wouldn't want anything to do with them. Now, I'm not speaking for them. I'm not claiming they've said this. I'm just saying this is my guess. [00:22:24] And likewise, I think their mission is different than vegano's. Vegano says that he is trying to, I'll make sure to get the words right, that he is resisting the heirs of Vatican II and Brigolio and things of that nature. [00:22:41] And obviously the SSPX resists a lot of the problems of Vatican that came out of Vatican II as well. [00:22:51] But I think this comes down to the difference between the debates between the recognize and resist crowd and the crowd that basically rejects Francis's pope. Because the beauty of recognize and resist, and I know there's the progressive Catholics, many conservative Catholics would say it's fundamentally, you can't do that. I'm not going to address those arguments. I've done that before. But the beauty of recognize and resist is that recognized part does put you under an authority. [00:23:20] Now, you might resist aspects of it. And here's where we get in a whole debate about what does obedience mean? What is the virtue of obedience? What is our duties to obedience, depending on our state in life? And I've been pretty clear over the years that I think most people misunderstand the virtue of obedience today, they think it means complete submission of everything. And that's not it. Not according to teaching St. Thomas Aquinas or the tradition of the church. Obedience includes basically that you obey your lawful superior in their sphere of authority. [00:23:54] That's it. Anything outside of that, you're not under an obligation to obey. And so the recognize and resist says, yes, we recognize that these are superiors. They do have an authority. I mean, like I said, like, for example, the SSPX, they will go to the Vatican in some situations to get authority to do things, and they get granted. That's the crazy thing for people who think they're in schism. [00:24:16] And so I think that the idea, though, is that we need to remain in the church. And by that I mean recognize that Jorge Borgolio is the pope, a very bad pope, a very scandalous one, a very corrupt one. [00:24:33] There was an article, I think it was yesterday, by Henry Seer in one Peter five, about some more, the author of dictator pope, about some more scandals involving Pope Francis. [00:24:48] All those things we can say, but we still recognize that there is an authority. And the reason we do this, there's a couple of reasons we do this. First of all, because it's not a spiritual dead end. I mean, there's other reasons. But like, yes, Francis is bad now, but if we reject that Francis is the pope, then the next pope isn't going to be, unless there's some miraculous thing that Vicantas want, that isn't the way God works. That would somehow make it so we know the next pope is legit. The next pope is following in the line of Francis, in the sense of he's succeeding him, not succeeding from him, succeeding him, which means we then have another pope, and maybe he'll be great, maybe he won't be great. But the point is, we're keeping ourselves under an authority. On some level, there does not seem to be any check, in other words, with vegano. I also think, honestly, I saw somebody in the comments say this, that to use the vernacular, Veno has jumped a shark. I am very grateful for what he did in 2018 in his revelations about McCarrick. I'm very grateful that he made that very clear, what's happened. But since then, to be honest, I don't really see what he's done that's helped help the traditional movement or helped the church in general, because what he's basically done is gotten more and more into politics, conspiracy theories. And I'm one who has been called a conspiracy theorist, and I'm one who would say that a lot of conspiracy theories are actually conspiracy facts, but at the same time, he just goes, everything is deep. State deep is his whole mo of living in secrecy. How is that being a bold disciple of Jesus Christ? Yes. Okay, maybe he's in danger. Guess what? [00:26:36] That's what prophets happen to him. If you're really a prophet, you don't mind being killed, if that's what it takes. But he's been kept in secrecy. And like I said, he's gone on some weird tangents, political tangents. I mean, he got so involved in promoting Donald Trump and american politics when he's an Italian. Yes, I know he was a papal nuncio here, but it just was some crazy. The. He's calling Moscow the third Rome, and there's a lot of theological meaning to that. That is basically eastern orthodoxy, russian orthodoxy. And he knows that. Yeah. He still was saying that, to put it bluntly. I don't think he's trustworthy. I don't think vigue is trustworthy. It doesn't mean I think everything he's ever done is terrible. It just means that I think his actions and what he's said and done over the past few years make it where he is not trustworthy. What it seems like is he relishes the resistance. One of the things about recognizing resist is, I think it's true for most people that. Who would kind of be called that? I never like to call myself that because I think it's kind of weird. But who are called in that group? We don't like the second part. [00:27:52] We don't like the resistance. We don't like resisting the lawful pope. We only do it because we have to, because it is legitimate in certain circumstances, but it's not like we want to do it. St. Paul didn't want to correct St. Peter, St. Irenaeus, St. Polycarp didn't want to correct the pope. [00:28:14] Victorious. I can't remember the name of the pope back then. St. Catherine of Siena didn't want to tell the know you're wrong to. [00:28:23] It's not. But it doesn't seem like that's the case with a lot. Once people go off the contus route, like viguenou, like Father Altman, it's like they relish the resistance. And I don't think that's a catholic attitude to have. We shouldn't relish resisting. We should do it only because we're obligated to do it. [00:28:41] And so ultimately, when you stop recognizing, you don't have a problem with the resisting. When you recognize, you understand you might have to resist in certain times. So that, I think, is a fundamental difference between vegano and Lefevre, and also vegano and most traditional Catholics, most catholics who recognize Francis as the pope, to paraphrase Lloyd Benson, you, Archbishop vegano or no archbishop Lefev. And kudos to those who get that reference. [00:29:15] So my conclusion is, and I know these are kind of strong words, I know a lot of people who are part of the audience of crisis love vegano and still love what he's doing. Okay. I'm just telling you that I personally think that we should steer clear of him. I think Catholics should steer clear of him. [00:29:33] Just because somebody opposes the bad things coming out of today's Vatican does not necessarily mean to get everything right and we should follow them. This is something I've been harping on lately. I was just recently on a podcast, one Peter five podcast, talking about the antifeminist movement. Just because they're right about what's wrong with feminism doesn't necessarily mean their solutions are always correct. [00:29:57] And likewise here, just because Archer Shabigano is, I probably agree with him on a vast majority of his views on theology, doctrine, liturgy, all those things. [00:30:12] Just because he's right about those things does not mean he necessarily has the right solution. Does not mean necessarily that you follow the direction he gets. Some people said you shouldn't criticize vegano because he's an ally. But I look at like, okay, I'm not saying I wouldn't criticize him if he does something right, but to me, an ally, there has to be certain boundaries of who an ally is. Like, for example, my allies aren't just anybody who says they're catholic, because otherwise Father James Martin would be in that crowd. And he's obviously not an ally. He's an enemy. He's an enemy of the faith. And I don't think vegano is an enemy of the faith. But at the same time, he goes where I'm not willing to go because I don't think it is the right. I don't think that's where God wants us to go. And that is questioning and even denying the validity of the papacy of Pope Francis. And also a lot of his things about his politics, stuff like that. I don't think his analysis is right and stuff like that. But I would just kind of be like, whatever on that. [00:31:15] There has to be some. He's not. I don't really consider him an ally, but at the same time, I think it's okay to criticize allies constructive criticism is okay as long as we recognize that we're still allies. I mean, like, for example, Peter Kwesnetski and I, we disagree on certain things. [00:31:32] I don't mind saying that. I don't think he didn't mind saying it about me. We're allies, so it's not like you can never say something critical about an ally. But I think ultimately we have to recognize he's not somebody that we should hitch our wagon to, so to speak. And this is something that I'll kind of end with this. [00:31:53] This is the most important point, I think, for us as Catholics today in this time of confusion, is that we are not ultimately behind any personality. [00:32:06] We're not like the personality of Pope Francis, the personality of Archbishop Vigano, Father Altman, Taylor Marshall, Pierre Kwazineski, Bishop Strickland, Bishop Schneider, or even like somebody like me. That's not what this is about. We do not follow a cult of personality. What we do is we follow the deposit of faith. We follow the catholic faith as it's been handed on to us for 2000 years. [00:32:40] And when we do that, we will end up agreeing with and even following certain people because they're following the faith. So, for example, my favorite bishop, Archbishop Athena she Schneider, you could say I follow him, but only because he follows the catholic faith. He's faithful to it. Bishop Strickland, Bishop Joseph Strickland, the same. [00:33:05] They and both of them, if you notice, are very strongly against the idea of a cult of personality behind them. [00:33:16] Bishop Schneider, Bishop Strickland, they do not want somebody just being their devotees, their fanboys. They're like, no point always to the faith. And we've seen this with a lot of leaders in Catholicism. It happens outside Catholicism, but a lot of leaders in Catholicism, you get this idea of a cult of personality, and I think it's also a cult of personality is possible for the pope. Obviously, we have certain obligations to the man who holds the papacy. But it's not as a cult of personality that we just basically are mindless drones following whatever he says and does. [00:33:54] And so I would just encourage everybody, stay close to the sacraments, learn your catechism, your traditional catechism credo, Baltimore catechism, catechism, council of Trent, learn the faith, really live it out and follow that. And you're going to then listen to certain people more than others because there'll be trustworthy people who follow that. I don't think Archbishop Vegano is one of those people, so I'll leave it with that. And until next time, everybody God love.