Eleison Comments Multi

Communiqué on the death of Dr. David Allen White

Communiqué on the death of Dr. David Allen White on February 17, 2025

David Allen White died on Tuesday, February 11, 2025, at his home.

He was born on November 9, 1948, the son of Medwin and Lois White of Eau Claire, Wisconsin. 

Dr. White was a graduate of the University of Minnesota, B.A., summa cum laude, 1970. He earned his M.A. from the University of Wisconsin in 1971 and his PhD from Indiana University in 1981. 

He taught at Temple University, the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire and was a Professor at the U.S. Naval Academy, 1981–2009, where he was awarded the Excellence in Teaching Award in 1994/1995. 

Dr. White did many years of theater work, acting and directing in over 100 productions. 

He was the editor of Shakespeare A-Z, a Shakespeare encyclopedia, as well as a lecturer in many venues, including the Roman Forum in Gardone, Italy, 1995–2000 and over 20 (sea and river) cruises. 

For many years, Dr. White offered a monthly Shakespeare commentary on Hugh Hewitt’s national radio show. He also often appeared as a host/narrator for Annapolis Symphony Children’s concerts. 

Dr. White authored three biographies of controversial Roman Catholic bishops: The Mouth of the Lion (Bishop Antonio de Castro-Meyer), 1991; The Horn of the Unicorn, (Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre), 2000; and, The Voice of the Trumpet (Bishop Richard Williamson), 2017. 

Dr. White is survived by brother, Paul (Caroline) White of Plymouth MN; nephew Justin (Sophia) White of River Forest, IL; and niece Camille White of Chicago, IL. 

A visitation will be held for Dr. White on Wednesday, February 19, 2025, from 7pm to 9pm. A Requiem Mass will be conducted on Thursday, February 20, 2025, at 10am at Saint Athanasius Traditional Church, 9201 Leesburg Pike, Vienna, VA 22182. Interment will be private. 

“Fear no more the heat o’ the sun . . .,” Cymbeline, Act IV. 

SSPX BETRAYAL

SSPX BETRAYAL on January 18, 2025

Let a maid not meet with wolves. They may be charming,

But such charm is, for a maid, much too disarming!

How can an innocent maiden raw life know?

That’s why the Archbishop himself to Rome would go. 

At https://crowdbunker.com/v/A7bwTo5Ysp on the Internet can be found an interesting video presentation in French entitled “Betrayal of the SSPX, told by priests.” The background picture shows Pope Bergoglio and Fr. David Pagliarani, Superior General of the SSPX (Society of St Pius X) putting their heads together, as though they are the best of friends. The picture may well be a fabrication rather than real, but it is a good fabrication, because it sums up the huge unreality that both of them are pursuing, namely that 2+2=4, and 2+2= 4 or 5 (or 6 or 6 million), can be reconciled in 2+2 = four and a half. But that is exactly the same unreal reconciliation that Pope Benedict and Bishop Fellay were dreaming of in 2009. It is the unreal dream of liberals that things are not necessarily what they objectively are, but anything that I may subjectively like them to be. For instance, if I do not like Ten Commandments, then I make them Ten Options! 

And if for another ten years nothing interrupts the present course of Church affairs, then in in 2035 another Church leader and another SSPX Superior General will be caricatured in the same way because the liberal Church leader will still be posing as a friend of Catholic Tradition, while the dream-Traditional SSPX leader will still be seeking for official Church approval from the real enemies of the Faith. A good cartoonist could enhance the fabrication by portraying Fr Pagliarani as Little Red Riding Hood and the apparent Pope as the Big Bad Wolf: “What lovely teeth you have,” she fawns. “All the better to eat you up with, sweetie pie!” 

However,  “Judge not, that ye be not judged,” says Our Lord in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. VII, 1–5). Certainly not all priests in the SSPX are traitors well aware that they want to get rid of the last trace of Archbishop Lefebvre. Certainly seminarians in the seminaries which he built are still receiving something inherited from him. But the problem is among their Superiors, liberals firmly entrenched at the controls of the SSPX at Headquarters in Menzingen, Switzerland. They may themselves firmly believe that Catholic doctrine excludes contradiction, as certainly as 2+2=4 excludes contradiction in arithmetic. But how then can they be so intent upon obtaining official Church approval for Catholic Tradition from today’s apostates in Rome? These have modernism firmly in their heads, which means the profound undermining of ancient and obvious truth. Between modern ears there are no longer enough grey cells capable of grasping old truth. 

This is so much so that when a would-be friend of the SSPX proposes it should follow the 1988 example of Archbishop Lefebvre by taking for itself, even without Rome’s approval, the bishops it so needs for its worldwide apostolate, a sadder and wiser friend replies, “That is no longer possible. SSPX HQ has so imposed on Newsociety seminaries a doctrine of obedience to the Roman authorities and of obedience to the Newsociety authorities, that the young priests coming out of these seminaries for the last many years would be in total confusion. Like in the Church of the 1950’s, obedience has taken precedence of Truth. Consequence – “You must do what I say, merely because I say it.” The folly existed in Latin –  “Sic volo, sic jubeo. Stat pro ratione voluntas” (Thus I wish, thus I command, my will takes the place of reason.) 

In the the 1950’s, Catholics had a very real problem: how to bridge the ever widening gap between the real demands of the Faith and the real godlessness of the modern world, rising all the time. Fiftiesism, “Pay, pray and obey,” or, keeping up the appearances of the Faith while emptying out its substance, was not the needed solution. Quite naturally, appearances without the substance meant the collapse of both appearances and substance, and that was the Church of the 1960’s. Vatican II naturally followed on Fiftiesism. Vatican IIB risks gravely following tomorrow on what Menzingen is imposing on its seminarians today. 

Therefore today’s Newsociety, but not all its priests, is leading not away from, but back to, Vatican II of the terrible 1960’s. “Cavete, consules.” Watch out, chiefs. At the very least, cease to inspire photographic cartoonists lampooning you as hobnobbing with your deadly enemy!

Kyrie eleison

CHARITY 2025

CHARITY 2025 on January 11, 2025

If Catholics practised charity, every foe 

Would be, without a drop of blood, struck low.

About one month ago a priest of the Catholic “Resistance” in France, Fr. Matthew Salenave, another refugee from the SSPX, penned a wise portrait of the state in which the Catholic Church finds itself today. Previously he had written in public somewhat critically of the state of the Newsociety of St Pius X as having slidden from what it used to be when it was founded and led by Archbishop Lefebvre. With the text that follows he wrote that he wished to add a few “more positive and encouraging considerations.” He continued –  

“. . . . If God allows for a priestly operation to slide, that does not mean He wishes to abandon His Church or the souls redeemed by His Precious Blood. That is why alongside the sad deterioration of the Society of St Pius X He has been raising up for at least the last 10 years a number of strongholds, a variety of little fortresses of the Faith. They do not necessarily all share the same point of view or show the same firmness in their positions, but for sure and certain they none of them want to go on following the Newsociety in its desire to go back under Roman authority.

Thus we have the Company of Mary with Fr Chazal, the Apostles of Jesus and Mary with Bishop Faure, the Priory of Villeneuve with Fr Pivert, the Dominicans of Avrille, the Benedictines of Bellaigue and various priestly confraternities under the authority of the “Resistance” bishops and different priories . . . all gathered together under the moral and spiritual authority of the seven bishops of the “Resistance.” Obviously, most important of all in this Catholic effort to resist is the Catholic Faith, with bishops in the front line of defence, for that is how the Church continues in its Faith, hierarchy, and sacraments. 

 Each stronghold will have its own characteristics and even weaknesses. One or the other stronghold may even fall to the enemy, as Fr Calmel said about them, but the fall of one or the other will not bring them all down together, as it would do if they were all united in one single organisation of Catholic Tradition. 

 Fr Calmel used to underline also the need for charity to bind these strongholds together. There may well be a certain autonomy to be respected in the case of each stronghold, but there is no less need for them to look after one another, and for them to avoid those ecclesiastical and religious jealousies which have always been a bane of Church life. This situation will not last for ever, but only until the Church regains a perfectly Catholic Pope. Let us so pray and act that God can give us one such as soon as possible!” 

 So why are these considerations of Fr Salenave worthy of recommendation?   In a few bullet-points –  

 * The prime perspective is of God (para 1), and of what He is doing to look after His Church. It is God who allowed the SSPX to flirt once more with the apostates in Rome, partly because their pride deserved it, partly because He needed a single worldwide congregation to re-establish the rights of Tradition, but once that was achieved, He no longer needed a single Congregation that might even seem to replace the official Church. 

 * Thus we have a diversity of Traditional groups (para 2), all centred on the Faith, not on their own glory nor even their survival, but relying on their own bishops for a minimal resemblance of Catholic authority. 

 * This diversity of these strongholds and the unofficial status of their bishops (para 3) are certainly not a normal way for the Catholic Church to function, but in today’s circumstances, of God cleansing His Church, the diversity prevents a joint fall (para 2), and the unofficiality leaves room for God to restore His Church officially and properly, in His own good time, by the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of His Mother. 

 * Fr Salenave began with the Faith and he finishes with Charity (para 4). If strongholds claim to be serving the Church but have no charity, especially towards one another, they are, as St Paul strongly says ( I Cor. XIII, 1) “as a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.” Let strongholds realise what example of charity they are giving! 

Kyrie eleison

BATTLEFIELD, the MASS

BATTLEFIELD, the MASS on January 4, 2025

Between the New Mass and the Old is war, 

Ending not with sweet talk, but blood and gore! 

“Take away the Mass, destroy the Church” is a famous quote attributed to Martin Luther (1483–1546). Perhaps he never said it, although it seems highly likely that he did, but in any case the quote is true, as Catholics could see in the aftermath of Vatican II. The very first of that Council’s 16 documents concerned the liturgy, by name “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” but the words of the text are thoroughly ambiguous. They can seem conservative but in fact they are designed to open the door to that liturgical revolution which in the aftermath of the Council virtually destroyed the Mass. Very soon after the – apparently – official imposition of Pope Paul’s New Mass in 1969, Archbishop Lefebvre said that if he had to introduce it in his newly founded Seminary of Econe, he might as well close the Seminary down within three weeks. Such is the anti-Catholic power of the “renewed” liturgy, for it is by attending Mass that most Catholics live their religion.

In fact, from 1969 until today, Pope Paul’s “renewed” liturgy turned the rite of Mass into the central battlefield of the great war of the Faith between the unchanging Catholicism of Tradition and the constantly evolving Revolution of Protestant-Liberal-Modernism. And it is still the central battlefield, as shown by the perseverance of Pope Francis in his insane efforts to obliterate the Latin Mass altogether. An excellent article by a French layman, Yves de Lassus, is summarised below. For access to the original article, much fuller, in English translation, see:   

https://respicestellam.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Letter-to-Friends-of-AFS-Jan-22.pdf 

On December 18 2021, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (CCD) published a note entitled Responsa ad dubia  responding to questions about the application of the Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes . Many of the faithful were distraught by the harshness of this response. But from the outset, the intention of the Motu Proprio was clear; the response of the Congregation only makes explicit a firmness already expressed in Traditionis Custodes . For the CCD, the Mass is the “sharing of the one broken bread” and the “memorial of the Passover”. To attend Mass means “to participate in the Eucharistic table”.  It is never recalled that the Mass is a sacrifice,  the unbloody renewal of the one sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. 

This wiping out of the sacrificial character is accentuated by the purpose that the CCD attributes to the Mass. For the CCD, the purpose of the Mass is unity. The first objective of Traditionis Custodes  and consequently of the Mass itself is to ” continue the constant search for ecclesial communion.”  Not one of the four traditional purposes of the Mass is recalled. For the CCD, the Mass is above all a manifestation of unity among men instead of an act entirely turned towards God. Thus it is clear that the general intention of the CCD response is to put an end once and for all to the use of the traditional Missal. The old rite, says the CCD, “is not part of the ordinary life of the Church.” Moreover, the CCD insists that “the liturgical reform is irreversible”. Any return to the old rite is therefore meant to be impossible.

We must not hide from the truth. The Holy See has gone to war against the Traditional Rite with the desire to completely eradicate it from the life of the Church. It is a real war between two different conceptions of the Mass and two radically opposed conceptions of the Church and the Christian life. We are even legitimately entitled to wonder if they are the same religion. Thus it is an illusion to hope that the Holy See will soften its position if only we hold a conciliatory discourse. No! Rome wants the end of the Traditional Mass, whereas we want to maintain the Tridentine Rite, because it is willed by God Himself. In the face of this war between the two rites, it is no longer possible to put off a decision. We must choose one side or the other.

Which side? We must condemn error, even if it comes from the Holy See. The Mass is first and foremost a sacrifice offered to God for a purpose that is at once adoration, thanksgiving, propitiation and expiation. No pope can ever abrogate the bull of St. Pius V authorizing the use of the Traditional Missal in perpetuity.

The Mass is in a situation which, in many ways, resembles that experienced by Our Lord during his Passion: the supreme Authority condemns it to death. But during the Passion, Our Lady did not revolt: She remained unfailingly close to Her Son, silent and recollected. No doubt She prayed for the executioners. With regard to the Latin Mass, let us adopt the same attitude: let us remain unfailingly attached to it, even if it has just been condemned to death. 

Kyrie eleison 

AGAINST SEDEVACANTISM

AGAINST SEDEVACANTISM on December 28, 2024

How men behave must be by law refined,

But law must follow reality close behind.

The controversy over the resignation by Benedict XVI from the Papacy in February of 2013 continues to feed the argument over the vacancy of the Apostolic See – was that resignation valid or not? If it was valid, then the ensuing election of Pope Francis was not invalidated by Benedict still being in any way the valid Pope. But if Benedict’s resignation was doubtfully valid, then a doubt is left hanging over all Francis’ subsequent papacy, because Benedict only died in 2022 after Francis had acted as Pope for the space of nearly ten years. In the autumn of last year Bishop Athanasius Schneider wrote a most interesting article, accessible on the Internet, giving precious principles on the whole dispute of whether the Apostolic See (Latin “sedes”) is vacant or not.

It may seem an idle dispute, but it is not. The Catholic Church is a worldwide organisation, strictly hierarchical, in which all parish priests depend upon valid diocesan bishops for their valid appointment to parishes, and those bishops depend in turn upon a valid Pope for their valid appointment to their dioceses. For the Church to be able to function, its head must be really existent, clearly identified and universally accepted. Of course several times in Church history the identity of the Pope has been disputed, notably during the Great Western Schism from 1378 to 1417, which saw at its end not just two but three candidates all claiming to be Pope. However, all Catholics knew that more than one Pope was most harmful to the Church, so the Schism lasted only 39 years.

In that dispute, it is precious to observe how the Church judged of the validity of the popes in question. On the one hand Urban VII was duly elected in Rome in the papal conclave of 1378 amid huge pressure and threats, but he was accepted and recognised as Pope by all the cardinals who had elected him. The Church has come to see in him and in his successors the line of true and valid Popes. On the other hand, a few months later, French cardinals counter-elected a Frenchman as Pope Clement VII, who set up the Avignon papacy in Southern France. This line of “Popes” the Church has come to condemn as anti-popes. What is to be observed from this example and several others, especially in the Middle Ages, is that for a Pope to be valid the letter of the law is less important than the absolute need for the Church to have a single, visible, recognised and certain head.

Thus Gregory VI bought his papacy in 1045 for a large sum of money, so that his election was strictly invalid, yet the Church has always recognised him as a valid Pope. In 1294 Pope Celestine V doubtfully resigned and Boniface VIII disputedly succeeded him, yet both events were “healed at the root,” or made valid afterwards, by their being universally accepted by Catholics, clergy and laity. This doctrine of an event, illegal at the time but being made legal afterwards, the Church applies to marriages and to papal elections, under certain conditions. For papal elections those conditions are that the new Pope should be immediately accepted as Pope by the Universal Church. This was surely the case of Pope Francis, when he greeted the crowd from a Vatican balcony overlooking St Peter’s Square just after his papal election, with all the election’s possible canonical faults.

As for the disputed or doubtful resignation of Benedict XVI, opinions may differ, and the Church may decide with Authority what it meant, only after the Church emerges at last from the unprecedented crisis brought about by the splitting of Catholic Authority from Catholic Truth at the Second Vatican Council. However, based on the realistic principles laid out by Bishop Schneider in his article, it does not seem difficult to conclude that that resignation was both doubtful in itself and harmful in practice to the Church.

Doubtful in itself, because God designed His Church as a monarchy, or rule of one, and not as a diarchy, or rule of two. God obviously meant His Vicar, or stand-in, to have at his disposal in Rome a whole aristocracy of officials to help him to rule the worldwide Church, but of that aristocracy he is the undisputed sole king. And harmful in practice, because Benedict’s distinction between “munus” (office) for himself and “ministerium” (ministry or work) for Francis, did not clearly exclude his own continuing to participate in the rule of the Church. However, who did rule the Church from Benedict’s resignation to his death? Not Benedict. And when Benedict died – was there a papal conclave? No. It is Francis who has been Pope, from 2013 until now.

Kyrie eleison.