His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre Established Minor Seminary In El Paso, Texas - January 4, 1981
SOURCE
Reverend Hector L. Bolduc
In this first installment of a three-part series, Father Bolduc recounts the thrilling adventures of His Grace the Archbishop among traditional Catholics south of the border.
THE DEDICATION of the newly aquired church property in El Paso, Texas, by His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, on January 4, 1981, signaled the beginning of what will certainly be known as one of the brightest chapters in the career of the Archbishop. The El Paso property is destined to serve as a minor seminary for Mexican students, and Archbishop Lefebvre's trip to dedicate the future seminary was a stepping-stone for his entry into Mexico.
Four years ago Archbishop Lefebvre was denied entry into Mexico as a result of pressure put on the government by the Bishops of Mexico, who saw his visit as a threat. Having shirked their duties as bishops for years, the last thing they wanted was a visit from a true bishop to whom the faith-starved Catholics of Mexico could turn.
Accompanied by Father Regis Babinet (a native French priest of the Society, who is the new pastor in El Paso), myself and a lay friend, the Archbishop, with his companion from Switzerland, Mr. Rousis, stepped into Mexico at Juarez on January 6. We took a plane at the Juarez airport and flew to Mexico City. There we were joined by Father Jean-Michel Faure, rector of the seminary in Buenos Aires. The Archbishop had obtained his Mexican visa in Switzerland, and the entry was normal and without incident. After a short wait in Mexico City, we flew on to Vera Cruz. Father Manuel Esteban, who had invited the Archbishop to Mexico (and who had visited with us in Dickinson, Texas, some years back), was waiting for us at Vera Cruz with two cars. We drove to Tultopec, where we were scheduled to spend the night. On the way it became clear that we were being followed by two vehicles: the Mexican police had been advised of our arrival, and we were destined to see a lot of them during our three-week stay.
The little town of Ojitlan was the first official stop on our tour. For weeks the people there had been preparing for the visit. Fr. Esteban maneuvered the car along the narrow winding roads like an expert. The Church in Ojitlan has had a tumultuous past. The Bishop of Oaxaca had tried to "update" the Church by placing liberal, progressive priests in the local parish of St. Luke. The people had resisted, especially when the new priests ridiculed and desecrated the statues of Christ, the Blessed Virgin and the saints. The people responded by twice expelling the radical, liberal priests. Pedro Ronquilla, a spokesman for the group, defended the treatment of the liberals with a vigor reminiscent of the martyrs of old. Twice the police responded to complaints of the bishop and interfered, hauling Pedro off to jail! Twice the local populace went en masse to the jail and secured his release. The bishop in desperation assigned a group of Novus Ordo Italian priests to St. Luke. Pedro, knowing that the constitution of Mexico forbids anyone but a native Mexican from officiating at public religious services, made numerous trips to the Papal Nuncio and to the authorities in Mexico City. Because of his complaints the Italian modernists were in turn arrested and removed from Ojitlan. The Church returned to the traditionalists and has remained with them ever since.
When the car arrived at Ojitlan, it was stopped outside the town by a crowd of people who greeted the Archbishop like a conquering hero. There was confetti, fireworks, speeches, flowers and an escort of young boys and girls dressed as shepherds and saints. The Archbishop then transferred to an open car covered with red velvet and driven to the outskirts of the town, accompanied by about 2,000 people. There he walked the remainder of the way to the village church, which perches on the highest point of the village. The streets and buildings were festooned with ribbons, garlands of flowers and other signs welcoming the Archbishop.
His Grace celebrated Mass, followed by the priests of his party. Each Mass was packed and embellished by the singing of hymns, led by Pedro. After lunch, we settled down to work. The Archbishop confirmed one hundred fifty, while I baptized nineteen children. Most of the people there speak an Indian language, making it necessary to have an interpreter in administering some of the sacraments.
The following three days were the same as the first. Masses each day with huge confirmation classes in the morning and afternoon, along with many baptisms and marriages. Each morning several thousand of the faithful would arrive to attend Mass, be confirmed, baptized, or married. As they left, thousands of new arrivals would take their places—a constant flow of pilgrims coming and going.
IT DID NOT TAKE LONG for the Mexican authorities to react to our presence. A minister of the Department of the Interior, accompanied by two aids, soon arrived on the scene to object to Archbishop Lefebvre's presence. During his meeting with the Archbishop, he made known his government's objections. We would hear them often repeated on our trip: 1) the Mexican bishops were putting pressure on the government to expel Archbishop Lefebvre and his party from the country; 2) the Constitution of Mexico forbids church services by clergymen who are not native Mexicans; 3) the Constitution forbids the wearing of religious garb of any kind in public; 4) the Archbishop had entered the country with a valid tourist visa and therefore should restrict his activities to that of a tourist.
The answers to these objections, given by the Archbishop, would also be frequently repeated during the next three weeks: 1) Pope John Paul II had visited Mexico and worn his cassock in public as did those who accompanied him, and performed religious services in public. Neither were they arrested nor deported, or forced to cease wearing their religious garb, nor prevented from officiating at religious services. Was the Constitution of Mexico written for the benefit of a chosen few or was it intended to be applied equally to all? 2) The City of Puebla had recently hosted a conference of bishops from Mexico, North, South and Central America. All bishops attending came on simple tourist visas. All officiated publicly in religious garb. Why, therefore, were we being singled out for persecution? 3) Archbishop Lefebvre had been invited to Mexico by thousands of Mexican Catholics who had in most cases obtained full authority from local civil officials. We had signed, approved documentation with us. In obtaining approval for the visit, the reasons had been clearly set forth. Also, visits of this kind were not unusual for foreign Church officials. Why single us out as exceptions?
Of course we all knew the reasons. The Bishops of Mexico objected to our presence because we were true Catholics. The government, which is Marxist and controlled by Freemasons, were working hand-in-hand with the Mexican Bishops, who are also largely Marxist and Freemasons. It was a simple case of one hand washing the other. The government objected. The Archbishop, wise in diplomacy, acted calmly and firmly, and while threats were made and opposition registered almost daily, we were allowed to stay. It was also made very clear in a report written by members of the Archbishop's party and sent off to the government in Mexico City, that the Archbishop had been invited and greeted by thousands of Mexicans, and was expected to visit thousands more. How would these people (citizens of Mexico) react to the expulsion of the Archbishop? This point was well taken by the government, which shuffled its feet and finally let us stay, but assigned a total of fifty guards to "protect us from the Mexican people"! The real purpose of course was surveillance.
One must not forget that in true Communist style, the press (and all else in Mexico) is controlled by the government. Therefore from the first day of our arrival until our departure, the papers would be filled with articles aimed at discrediting the Archbishop. Everything said at a press conference would appear the next day completely distorted. One journalist, who wrote a tolerably favorable article, told us that unless we paid a fee equal to $1,500 (U.S.), we could expect bad publicity in his next article. We of course had to refuse his offer, and sure enough, his next article was an attack on the Archbishop. So much for the Masons.
Everywhere we marveled at the deep faith of the Mexican people. To assist at Mass or to have their children baptized or confirmed, these people walked as much as one hundred miles through mountains and deserts. As it is their custom to offer a gift to the Bishop, many presented the Archbishop with a (live) chicken or an egg wrapped in a banana leaf or a small sack of rice or beans. All were taken to the kitchen where they ended up on our table. It was not unusual to see three or four chickens, each tied by one leg to a tree outside the kitchen door, waiting for their turn in the pot! This sometimes occurred the very day of the chickens' arrival.
We had set aside four days for Ojitlan, and when we left, people were still arriving. Our departure was as emotional as our arrival, with thousands of Mexicans following the Archbishop to the edge of town and others running alongside the car until they were lost in a trail of dust.
January 10 found us at Oaxaca, where a contingent of government officials awaited, along with a platoon of newsmen. Here, emphasizing our role as tourists, we visited the historical churches and pre-Columbian ruins. We went on to Tlaxiaco to be greeted by two or three thousand of the faithful. Speeches, fireworks, plays and singing were once again the order of the day.
Tlaxiaco consists of a city of 48,000 inhabitants, divided into seven barrios (districts), each having its own mayor and church. Six of these churches are held by traditionalists and the largest by the progressives. We went each day to a different church, where we celebrated Mass, confirmed, baptized, married. The Archbishop visited the market place in Tlaxiaco and the peasants filled his arms with gifts of fruit, vegetables and other foodstuffs. Never did we encounter hostility. The Bishop of Oaxaca, who rarely visits Tlaxiaco, came there during Archbishop Lefebvre's visit. He thought to draw the people away from Archbishop Lefebvre by announcing that he would hold confirmation at the Novus Ordo church. I went to the church the morning of the proposed confirmations and, finding the church open, I went in and quietly read my breviary in a pew toward the back of the church. The Bishop of Oaxaca was engaged in giving a provocative talk against Archbishop Lefebvre and the Latin Tridentine Mass. After he finished his harangue, he came forward and said: "All those who have come to be confirmed, step forward." Not one of the twenty-five people in the church (twenty-six, counting me), moved from their pews. At the same time, Archbishop Lefebvre was celebrating Mass for hundreds at the nearby church where he confirmed over two hundred!
It is obvious that a great many Mexicans know there is a difference between the true sacraments and the new.
May 1981 Print
Triumph in Mexico Pt 2
by Reverend Hector L. Bolduc
In this second installment of a three-part series Father Bolduc recounts
the thrilling adventures of His Grace the Archbishop among
traditional Catholics south of the border.
NOT FAR from the city of Tlaxiaco several beautiful Dominican churches and monasteries, dating from Spanish colonial days, are to be found. These magnificent edifices are a tribute to the deep-rooted faith of the Mexican people. Once flourishing religious communities, teeming with life and caring for the spiritual and material needs of thousands of natives, these churches now stand largely neglected and in ruin. The anti-Catholic revolution sought to destroy the Church and Christianity, but succeeded in enslaving the Mexican people under a totalitarian government as cruel and repressive as that of Soviet Russia and other Communist states.
Few Americans seem to know of the bloody persecutions which raged in Mexico from 1917 until 1939, when hundreds of thousands of Catholics were hunted down and slaughtered, their only crime being that they were Catholic. The anti-Christian Masonic government which arose as a result of the revolution is the most repressive Marxist government in the Western Hemisphere.1 As in Russia, there are mock elections with one candidate, who automatically replaces his predecessor. The president of Mexico must be a Mason; all press is controlled by the government and bribery and payoffs are the order of the day. The Church is tolerated (even encouraged, now that it has become Communist-oriented) only to keep the faithful peasants placated. Not only is a priest (and all other religious) prevented from wearing religious garb in public; he is forbidden to express political opinions and can be arrested at any time without specification of charges, and is never granted the luxury of a trial by jury.
When it came time to leave Tlaxiaco, we returned to the Church of San Sebastian, where we had been welcomed on our arrival. There the Archbishop led the faithful in reciting the Rosary. Our departure was as tumultuous as our entry, with thousands of the faithful accompanying the Archbishop's motorcade through the heart of the city. Despite the efforts of the police, the Archbishop's car was barely able to creep through the crush of people. It was only when the momentum of the crowd slowed because of sheer exhaustion that we were finally able to proceed at a normal speed.
Our next stop was Cordoba (in the Southeast, between Puebla and Vera Cruz), where we had made arrangements to visit a number of traditional Catholics in outlying areas. Hordes of newsmen were on hand for our "secret" arrival. The police constantly tried to prevent the Archbishop from meeting with the crowds that awaited him. The reason they gave was security and concern for the Archbishop's life. This was difficult to understand, when the police gave the press every minute detail of our itinerary, including the make, model, color and license number of our car, all of which appeared on the front page of the national papers. One can hardly understand how the publication of such information could lead to greater protection of the Archbishop. The police spent hours on the telephone each day, giving detailed reports of our every movement. A typical day's report would be as follows: 'The Archbishop left the breakfast table at 8:23 this morning. For breakfast he had one egg, two slices of toast, one piece of fruit, one glass of orange juice, and one cup of coffee. With him at the table were ... etc., etc., etc." Sometimes these telephone conversations would go on uninterrupted for two or three hours. At times it was impossible for us to use our own telephones.
In Cordoba the people were no less fervent than those on our previous stops. The Archbishop made frequent trips to various homes to celebrate Mass and to confirm. Other priests visited villages in outlying areas, talking to the people and celebrating Mass.
The Mexicans especially wanted holy cards and rosaries. Many a missal, prayer book and breviary was depleted of holy cards in our efforts to provide these people with a representation of the Blessed Mother, Christ or the saints.
Contact with these people was especially rewarding as we found many young men and women who obviously have vocations and who needed spiritual guidance to fulfill their calling.
Archbishop Lefebvre showed a tremendous capacity for patience during the grueling trip. Never did he tire of giving blessings, signing holy cards, giving interviews or comforting the old or the young. He always made certain to seek out and bless the young. Any baby who came within his reach or sight was sure to receive a personal blessing. There were times when we knew the Archbishop was fatigued from a long day on his feet. We often tried to discourage additional requests by the faithful to spare him and allow him some rest. One evening when a group of peasants arrived quite late, asking to see the Archbishop, we flatly refused to disturb him. He had already retired to his room and was saying his breviary. On hearing the commotion, he asked what it was about, and learning that we had turned the group away, he sent us after them and was waiting in the courtyard to greet and bless them when we returned. Few will ever know the great joy this gave these peasants nor the great sacrifice it cost the Archbishop.
One afternoon, using a borrowed truck, Fathers Michel Faure, Regis Babinet and myself drove to a remote, nearly inaccessible village named Dos Rios. Cordoba is a mountainous, lush tropical area, famous for its coffee. The rainfall is frequent and heavy and the roads narrow and treacherous. We drove on and on through back roads that were little more than ruts with steep mountains on one side and deep gorges on the other. At one point we went through low areas where the wheels were more than half-covered with water. We arrived at the little village in the absence of the local priest. Our arrival was announced by the ringing of the church bell, which quickly brought the faithful to the church. After they were assembled, Father Faure gave them a talk on the Mass and the sacraments, pointing out the dangers of the new ways and exhorting them to remain faithful to the traditional teachings of the Church. Afterwards all went to the church, where the rosary was recited. Then we started the long trip back, promising to return.
WE WERE ABLE to obtain daily papers, which constantly kept us amazed at the latest absurdity dreamed up by the government, to try and distort or downplay the importance of the Archbishop's visit. When several thousand people turned out to see him, it was reported as a mere handful. It was interesting to read that the Archbishop and the Society catered to the rich, while we were sweltering in small villages in remote areas, living under the most primitive conditions. In one place that had no running water, the faithful formed bucket brigades to carry water one mile up a hill to our quarters. The hot days often gave way to hotter, more humid nights, and the lack of screens and even windows made the fighting off of insects a constant battle. One night Father Babinet found a deadly scorpion in his bed. The fact that a second scorpion was seen in the room and escaped into a crack in the wall before it could be killed, did not make sleeping any easier.
It was curious to read also that the Archbishop had "entered Mexico illegally," when in fact he held a valid visa good for ninety days and had entered like any other tourist.
When the Archbishop stated at a press conference that the answer for the poor of Mexico did not lie with Communism, it was reported the following day in bold print that Archbishop Lefebvre said the answer for the poor of Mexico lies with Communism. They conveniently left out the "does not."
When a crowd of thousands came to bid farewell to the Archbishop on his departure, the press reported that he had "fled from the town" and that he had been "driven out of town."
In a feeble attempt to justify the presence of dozens of government police to facilitate their surveillance of the Archbishop, the government reported that a group of commandoes, led by a woman, had arrived from the United States to assassinate the Archbishop. On another occasion they reported that the Archbishop had in fact been the "victim of an assassination."
In an effort to discredit the Archbishop, it was reported that the most Marxist hard-line bishop in Mexico had welcomed His Grace. On another occasion, a well-known group of leftists from Mexico City came to visit the Archbishop. I approached the government officials, who verified the background of these vermin but the government, in full control of the situation, would not prevent nor hinder them from coming. It is my belief that, far from discouraging them, the government actively assisted them.
The day finally arrived when we had to leave Cordoba, and we journeyed by car—escorted by the police—to Mexico City. On the outskirts of the city we were met by a very professional, elite group of police who were determined that, until our departure from Mexico, we should see as little of Mexico City as possible. We went directly to the airport and boarded a plane for Guadalajara. Hundreds of reporters were waiting at the airport and, although we were driven over the field to the door of the plane, we had to run the gauntlet of reporters, television cameras, etc.
Guadalajara was a welcome arrival. There we were met by friends of the Archbishop, Mr. and Mrs. Glenn Florance, who graciously opened their home in nearby Chapala to Archbishop Lefebvre and his party. The Society of St. Pius X has long enjoyed support in this area, and the Archbishop's visit there had been anticipated with great excitement.
As usual, the Archbishop won the hearts of the local people by his unannounced and very casual visits to the local marketplace, where Mexicans and Americans alike sought him out for a blessing and a word of encouragement. Also noted by the people was the fact that His Grace walked into a local barbershop for a haircut.
Large crowds gathered outside the house for a chance to see the Archbishop or to attend his daily Mass. The police were more evident than ever. Two stayed inside the house day and night, while others swarmed around the exterior of the property. An amusing incident happened concerning the police. Late one evening a car was observed approaching the house. While still some distance away the car's lights went out and the car parked along the dark street. One man stayed in the car while a second, moving very suspiciously, slipped into the shadows of nearby trees. Their actions had gone unnoticed by the ever "diligent" police. Having witnessed the whole affair, I sought out the police and sent them to investigate. They returned very soon and, much chagrined, reported that the suspicious characters were more secret police, sent to see if the regular police were doing their job!
Many were confirmed and baptized in Guadalajara. The Archbishop gave an excellent talk which brought hope and encouragement to all. Once more we discovered a number of prospective vocations. Much of the credit for this goes to the tireless missionary activities of Fathers Babinet and Faure, who, besides bringing the Mass and sacraments to the faithful, annually preach retreats and give conferences in these areas. The fruits of their labors will be seen in the native Mexican priests who will eventually return to their homes to minister to the faithful.
Leaving Guadalajara proved to be harder than our arrival. The government was determined that we should spend as little time as possible in the nation's capital. The night before our departure, lengthy telephone calls had gone back and forth from the police to Mexico City. The same continued the next morning and we found that our departure time from the house to the airport had been suddenly changed. It was changed several times during the morning, and when we arrived at the airport, we were told that we had arrived too late and would not be able to leave for Mexico City until late that evening. A quick check showed that our plane was still at the gate. We sat in our cars and watched it leave some time after our arrival at the airport. It was also evident that our delay was anticipated, as a large private van was ready to receive us in a secured part of the airport. The proof of the duplicity of the officials came later, when I inquired about our baggage, which had been taken to the airport ahead of us to be loaded on the plane. The police took our baggage check numbers and looked into the matter. They then informed us that our baggage was in Mexico City and would be kept there until we arrived. "Are you absolutely certain it is in Mexico City?" I asked a policeman. "Absolutely!" was the reply. "We checked each number against the tags of the bags being held there." After they had emphatically verified that our luggage was safe in Mexico City, I asked them to explain the fact that our bags were sitting in plain view on a cart not ten yards from where we were being detained. There were some hasty shouts and angry commands and the "bilocation baggage" was whisked out of sight.
Eventually we reached Mexico City and hurriedly put our delayed program into operation. Meetings and confirmations were in order, as well as visits to some of the historical and religious monuments of the city.
Our visit to the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe will long be remembered. The Archbishop was not feeling well, but he insisted on visiting the Shrine, to pray before the miraculous picture of Our Lady. The original shrine, a magnificent old basilica, is closed. A sign on the door announces that it will one day be re-opened as a museum. The similarity between this and what happens to shrines and churches in Communist countries of Europe is not coincidence.
We went to Guadalupe early in the morning to escape the heat and crowds. The new building, which has replaced the old, is the ultimate in ugliness. It looks like a cross between a gymnasium and a ski jump. It is mercifully void of religious symbolism. The only religious artifact it contains is the miraculous picture of Our Lady, which is placed far up on one wall—so high that it cannot clearly be seen by visitors. The faithful used to come and kneel reverently under the picture. To discourage this, moving sidewalks were installed directly beneath the picture. This makes it impossible for anyone to stop or kneel. Visitors are carried past the picture in a few seconds and have to crane their necks for a glimpse. As if by Divine Providence, the moving sidewalk apparatus was out of order, so we were able to walk beneath it. The Archbishop knelt and remained for a long time in prayer. We visited the gift shop and purchased two large reproductions of the miraculous image. After blessing them in the Shrine itself, the Archbishop autographed both, and placed two houses of the Society (St. Mary's College in St. Marys, Kansas and Jesus and Mary Chapel in El Paso, Texas) under the patronage of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
Mexico and the Church:
Today & Tomorrow
Father Hector L. Bolduc
TO APPRECIATE THE SITUATION in Mexico one must be familiar with the section of the Constitution which deals with religion and religious affairs. Section 11 of Article 27, as well as Article 130, are reprinted at the end of this article for the benefit of the reader. One must keep in mind that the only religion prevalent in Mexico, a nation which is 95% Catholic, is Catholicism. Therefore the laws directed at suppressing religion were directed exclusively against the Roman Catholic Church.
Mexico's Catholics had fought valiantly against the forces of Freemasonry. It is certain that they could have eventually won the fight had they not been duped into laying down their arms. It is true that the actual facts were more complicated; however, it was the ill advice given to Pope Pius XI, prompting him to request that the Catholics lay down their arms, which culminated in the disaster. Pope Pius XI had been made to believe, by advisors already neutralized, that the Masons wanted peace and would respond with kindness to the Church if she cooperated in ending the bloodbath which was raging from one end of Mexico to the other. No sooner had the Catholics acceded to the Pope's request and surrendered their arms, when all the leaders of the opposition, both military and civilian, were rounded up and liquidated in true Masonic-Marxist fashion. With their leaders gone, their spirit broken by what they considered treason from Rome, Mexicans settled down to enslavement and persecution from which they have never recovered.
The saddest circumstances surrounding the plight of Mexican Catholics is that the world is virtually ignorant of these facts. While the free world laments the conditions of Catholics and other Christians behind the Iron and Bamboo Curtains, the situation in Mexico is as serious and far more dangerous simply because it is unknown and ignored. Perhaps it is time to coin a new phrase: the Tortilla Curtain. It is also the largest most important implementation of a Freemasonic government in the world. Through it one can easily see how identical Freemasonry and Communism are, coming as it were from a common root and being in reality one and the same. It is a well-known and clearly documented fact that the government of the United States of America worked diligently for the destruction of Catholicism in Mexico and assisted in the establishment of Freemasonry as the leading power. The attempt to kill Catholicism in Mexico failed largely because the people have such a deep-rooted faith in Our Lady of Guadalupe, the Patroness of Mexico and Mother of all the Americas.
Where torture, imprisonment, death and desecration have failed, indifferentism, compromise, infiltration and ecumenism have succeeded. When one refers to the Red Bishops of Mexico, they are not referring to the color of their blood. Some, like Mendez Arceo, are self-proclaimed Marxists. Holding high office in the Mexican Church, they are of course favored and supported by the government. They receive plenty of publicity and, as their statements are usually of an anti-Catholic nature, the government allows them free reign. The Mexican Bishops and the government of Mexico differ only in that, while the government seeks to bring the nation and its people under complete Marxist domination gradually and with as little disruption as possible, the bishops, having been well indoctrinated with the party line, want immediate action through armed revolution. They have placed all of the Churches' resources toward the accomplishment of that goal. Open fighting has already broken out in several parts of Mexico. It appears that Mexico will once more experience bloodshed and, as of old, it is the Catholic Faith which is at stake.
Unfortunately there is little or no opposition to the Marxists, be they in the government or in the Church. As in America, traditional Catholic groups there are small and for the most part the pawns of politically oriented groups. They act as front groups for the politically motivated opportunist groups, and like some in our own country, call themselves traditional, but are used for the selfish ends of their masters. This is especially true of one of the groups called TRENTO, which has done more to neutralize and compromise Catholics than the Novus Ordo. This group in fact works openly with the Freemasonic government in opposing champions of the faith like Archbishop Lefebvre. During the Archbishop's recent visit, they openly and publicly attacked him, cooperating fully with the government, using the government controlled news media which were placed at their disposal by their comrades in high places. The group is highly organized and generously financed by what some call "Rockefeller money." They hire and control priests by controlling the purse strings, and any priest who does not spout their political line is cast out in the street. The fact that the priest celebrates the Latin Tridentine Mass has no bearing on the matter. They have a paranoia about "Jews" and, while the Zionist threat is real and cannot be minimized, these individuals utilize this stigma by branding anyone who does not agree with them as a "Jew."
A letter being circulated in the U. S. by the leaders of TRENTO, bitterly attacking Archbishop Lefebvre, clearly admits this group's cooperation with the Marxists and Masons to smear Archbishop Lefebvre and to have him expelled from the country. The letter signed by Anacleto Gonzales Flores, carries the following quotations (remember that all papers in Mexico are Masonic-controlled):
At Morelos newspapers, someone took the name of peasant leaders of Trento, inviting Archbishop Lefebvre to visit the traditionalist churches of Trento. They and we published at paid space our rejection to Archbishop Lefebvre, both in Excelsior, the most important daily in Mexico City, and at Cuernavaca newspapers. [Editor's comment: Excelsior is a well known pro-Communist, anti-Catholic publication. All Cuernavaca papers are Masonic and boast of their anti-Catholic position.]
On Saturday, Trento priest Adolfo Zamora and a group of laymen appeared for one hour on TV. [Trento priest Adolfo Zamora bitterly attacked Archbishop Lefebvre and all traditional Catholics.]
These are the news. Regarding sending article from Gloria Riestra to Fr. Bolduc, better wait until we see what The Angelus prints. Enclosed Xerox of newspaper publications, for your own use. Not for translating. [What does the writer fear of having the truth made known to the public? Does he not want traditional Catholics to know of Trento's alignment with Mexico's Communist government? Trento was more than willing to sponsor the visit of Archbishop Lefebvre if the Archbishop would agree to embrace their heresies, say what they wanted him to say, visit who they wanted him to, etc. If Trento, despite its bad record, is well intended, it had better start manifesting these intentions in a positive manner and use its forces to oppose the enemies of the Church instead of constantly attacking those who defend true Catholic positions. This is, in fact, a veiled bribe. In clearer words, Mr. Gonzales is saying: If the Angelus Press does not expose us, we will keep a low profile and continue our duplicity rather than risk losing the support of the thousands of followers of Archbishop Lefebvre who don't really know what we are up to. Talk about the works of darkness!]
THERE ARE SOME BRAVE PRIESTS who act independently and who, through great sacrifice, bring the Mass and Sacraments to the people. All receive constant persecution from TRENTO.
The Independent University of Guadalajara shows much promise and has accomplished much. They are by far the most effective and the most efficient. It is unfortunate that some of their members have fallen into the "sede vacante" trap. When freedom comes to Mexico, the Independent University of Guadalajara will play an important role. A second great failing is the fact that the True Mass and Sacraments are not available to the students at the campus. The University publishes a newspaper called Ocho Columnas—Eight Columns, which has a wide circulation and which takes a strong stand against Liberalism, Communism and the progressives. They also publish good traditional Catholic catechisms and catechetical material. Mr. Antonio Leano Alvarez del Castilo is a man deeply rooted in the Faith who maintains a private chapel at his home where the Latin Tridentine Mass is celebrated. His position can, in many ways, be likened to that of the late Generalissimo Francisco Franco of Spain.
The TRENTO group, realizing that they had at last blown their cover, and allowed the world to see their anti-Catholic, anti-Lefebvre sentiments, lost no time in sending emissaries to Europe in an attempt to smooth things over with the Archbishop, who quickly surmised that they were talking out of both sides of their mouths. The action of TRENTO confirmed the information confided to me by Father A. Saenz when I ministered to him during his last illness, shortly before his death. The fears he expressed to me then proved well founded.
The greatest hope in Mexico and the only organization working positively for the salvation of souls and in defense of the True Mass and Sacraments is the Society of St. Pius X. Only the Society has the capability of supplying priests for Mexico and it already has a number of seminarians studying at Switzerland, America and in Argentina. Other groups are too busy playing politics for their own financial gain to bother with vocations, the Mass or the Church. Furthermore, it is to their advantage to keep the people without priests and dependent on them (TRENTO). How well they have learned from the Red-masters.
As the Society continues to increase its influence in Mexico, the people will be given a choice between following the politically-oriented pseudo-Catholic movements, or of aligning themselves with those whose only interest is in the salvation of souls. Our priests will be all the advertisement we need—their faith and their actions will speak for themselves. If the true Catholic Church in Mexico is going to enjoy a brighter future, it is because Archbishop Lefebvre produced the spark which lit the lamp.
* * *
THE MEXICAN CONSTITUTION
Section II of Article 27
"II. The religious institutions known as churches irrespective of creed, may in no case acquire, hold or administer real property or hold mortgages thereon; property so held at present, either directly or through third parties, shall revert to the Nation, any person whatsoever being authorized to denounce property so held. Strong presumptive proof shall suffice to declare the denouncement well-founded. Places of public worship are the property of the Nation, as represented by the Federal Government, who shall determine which of them may continue to be devoted to their present purposes. Bishoprics, rectories, seminaries, orphan asylums and schools belonging to religious orders, convents and any other buildings constructed or intended for the administration, propagation or teaching of any religious creed shall at once become, by inherent right, the property of the Nation, to be used exclusively for the public services of the Federal or State Governments, within their respective jurisdiction. All places of worship erected hereafter shall be the property of the Nation."
Article 130
"The Federal authorities shall have power to exercise in matters of religious worship and outward ecclesiastical forms such intervention as may be determined by law. All other authorities shall act as auxiliaries to the Federal authorities.
Congress is not empowered to enact any law establishing or forbidding any religion whatsoever.
Marriage is a civil contract. Marriage and all other acts relating to the civil status of individuals shall appertain exclusively to the civil authorities, in the manner set forth by the law, and they shall have the force and validity which said laws give to them.
A simple promise to tell the truth and to comply with the obligations contracted shall subject the promisor, in the event of non-fulfilment, to the penalties established therefor by law.
The law recognizes no legal capacity to the religious institutions known as churches.
Ministers of religious creeds shall be considered as persons exercising a profession, who shall be directly subject to the laws enacted in regard thereto.
The State Legislatures shall solely be empowered to determine the maximum number of ministers of religious creeds, according to the needs of each locality.
Only a Mexican by birth may be a minister of any religious creed in Mexico.
Ministers of religious creeds may not, either in public or private meetings, or in acts of worship, or religious propaganda, criticize the fundamental laws of the country, the authorities in particular, or the Government in general; they shall have no vote, nor be eligible for office, nor shall they be entitled to assemble for political purposes.
Permission must be obtained from the Ministry of the Interior prior to engaging new places of worship for public use; the opinion of the respective State Governor shall previously be heard on the subject. Every place of worship shall have a person in charge of its care and maintenance, who shall be legally responsible for the faithful performance of the laws on religious observances within same, and for all the objects used for the purposes of worship.
The person in charge of each place of public worship, together with ten residents of the town, shall promptly notify the Municipal authorities as to the person responsible for the same. The outgoing Minister shall in every instance give notice of any change, for which purpose he shall be accompanied by the incoming minister and ten other residents of the town. The Municipal authorities shall be responsible for the exact compliance with this provision, under penalty of dismissal and fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos for each breach; and, subject to the same penalty, they shall keep a register of the places of worship and of the person in charge thereof. The Municipal authorities shall give notice to the Ministry of the Interior, through the Governor of the State, of any permit given for opening a new place of worship for public use, as well as of any change in the persons in charge of it. Collections of personal property may be made inside the place of worship.
Under no condition shall studies be made in institutions devoted to the professional training of ministers of religious creeds be given credits or granted any other dispensation or privilege whereby said studies shall be accredited in official institutions. Any authority who violates this provision shall be liable for criminal prosecution, and all such dispensation or privilege shall be null and void; and the professional degree toward the obtaining of which this provision has been violated shall be wholly and entirely invalidated.
No periodical publication which, by reason of its