Eleison Comments

Besides the balance between liberalism and sedevacantism (cf. these “Comments” last week), there is another angle from which to come at the wisdom of Archbishop Lefebvre’s resisting “to their face” Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II, and that is how exceptional he was at that time in seeing how necessary for the Church such resistance was. When in 1974 he made his November Declaration which was like the Charter of the Traditional movement to come, and when in 1975 he was punished for it with the official “suspension” of his Society of St Pius X, and in 1976 with his personal suspension from all activity as a bishop by Rome, the great majority of his colleagues in the episcopacy sided with Rome, and many of them put continual pressure on him to give way to Paul VI, and to cease “disobeying.”

All the way until the consecration of four bishops in 1988 for Catholic Tradition he hoped to be able to put together a little group of four or five Traditional bishops which he knew would seriously obstruct the neo-modernists’ on-going dissolution of the Church, but although he visited many, he never found any who would join him in his public stand against the Roman dissolvers. Only in 1981 did a colleague at last stand with him in public, and that was only because Bishop de Castro Mayer, having just reached the age of 75, had had to resign as diocesan bishop of Campos, Brazil. However, he did stay faithfully at the Archbishop’s side, in public, notably at the ceremony of consecration of bishops in 1988, a gesture hugely appreciated by the Archbishop, because it proved that the Archbishop was not alone in judging that the crisis of the Church justified such drastic action as episcopal consecrations without Papal approval.

And the two clear-sighted bishops stayed together until both died within a month of each other in 1991. However, neither was followed for long after his death by his own followers, which highlights just how exceptional the clear sight of the two of them had been. In Brazil the group of Campos priests were soon splitting Bishop de Castro Mayer in two: the obedient Pastor prior to his rebellion “against Rome,” and the “disobedient Rebel.” And declaring that their loyalty was to “Castro I,” they scuttled collectively back under the skirts of Rome. As for the worldwide Society that the Archbishop had left behind him, within a few years its leaders were making private contact with representatives of the official Church in organised talks of GREC, and within a few more years the Society’s Superior was announcing in public that only the final seal was lacking to an official agreement between the Society and Rome. To the Society leaders’ credit, the agreement has never happened yet, but to their discredit, that has not been for lack of trying.

But how dare one so sharply discredit the Society’s leaders for their noble efforts to regain their rightful status as a Society recognised within the official Church? Answer, by the fruits of those same efforts. Is there any comparison between the fruits of the Society when, behind the Archbishop, it was sharply repudiating contact with the traitors to the Faith in Rome, and ever since when, behind his successors, it has been seen to be trying to come to an understanding with them? Granted, it is not as though the Society has been bearing no fruit after it began treating these Romans as though they are Catholic, but in the ever worsening – and not easing! – crisis of the Church, how much more real fruit the Society could have borne if only souls had not been put off by a mixed message: “Yes, of course the Romans are bad, but they cannot be all that bad! They will give us recognition if only we do no treat them too badly!”

No, they really are that bad. They are primarily responsible for the destruction of the Church, on which hangs the salvation or damnation of millions and millions of souls. And they are still at it, clearly, with the latest Motu Proprio of Pope Francis. Nor have they ever not been at it, for the last 60 years. So how did the Archbishop see that so clearly and neither his colleagues nor his successors? By the strength and purity of his faith.

Kyrie eleison

And what do these “Comments” have to say about Pope Francis’ latest smashing scandal, namely his Motu Proprio “Traditionis Custodes” in which he does all he can to extinguish the age-old Traditional rite of Mass in Latin, and to make sure that it will disappear for ever from celebrations of Mass? First and foremost these “Comments” would give glory to God for having given us as model, to guide us through this end of world crisis of the Church, Archbishop Lefebvre. He ended his days supposedly “excommunicated” by the mainstream churchmen. Nor has he been faithfully followed by the leading churchmen of the Society of St Pius X, which he himself formed. But the historic record of what he did and said is there, and its wisdom for the Church’s future becomes more clear with each day that passes.

That record tells us exactly how he would have reacted to Traditionis Custodes. On the one hand he would have once more wholly rejected the false doctrine of Vatican II, which is behind the Novus Ordo Mass and which to this day strives to abolish all trace of the old Tridentine rite of Mass which has proved since 1969 to be the indestructible competitor of Pope Paul’s New Mass, risking to live on long after the New Mass is in the dustbins of history. On the other hand even with the agonising problem for Catholics set by Popes fighting against Catholic Tradition more bitterly than ever, like Francis in this Motu Proprio, it seems highly unlikely that the Archbishop would have declared that Pope Francis was not Pope. Rather, for the sake of the Church’s structure he would have insisted on respect and courtesy towards all the apparent Popes of Vatican II, leaving to the official Church alone in a more tranquil future time to decide what status to attribute to these Vicars of Christ who had so little understanding of Catholic Tradition.

This balance of the Archbishop between condemning the Conciliar Popes’ doctrine but respecting their office has come to be known as “Recognise and Resist” – recognise their office, resist their doctrine. But as a policy for Catholics to follow, it comes into heavy criticism from both sides. Liberals will say, if you rightly recognise the office, then you have no right to resist its commands. Anti-liberal “sedevacantists” will turn that position around, saying, if you rightly resist the office’s false commands, then you cannot still be recognising the office issuing those commands, i.e. you cannot both recognise and resist, it must be one or the other. No, said the Archbishop, I reject the teacher’s teaching but not necessarily his office. Catholic Popes hating Tradition are a mystery for a future age of the Church to solve, if it will and can. And in this position the Archbishop has been followed ever since by many Catholics, not because of his official authority of which he had little to none, but because, confronted by the same problems in the Church, they had by themselves come to the same conclusions as he had, and therefore followed him, thus making him the trail-blazer of balance and sanity in the Church’s on-going crisis.

And so what was it that enabled the Archbishop to keep his balance and serenity when in the wake of the Council so many believing Catholics either lost their faith or despaired of the Church? Undoubtedly it was his unshakable faith in a God and a Truth both far above all human changes or influences or politics or whatever, a God and a Truth enshrined in Catholic Tradition for the benefit of humans, but not in any intrinsic way subject to humans or dependent on humans. Here are the heights on which he lived in spirit and from which he descended into daily life, neither admitting undue change in the things of God, nor demanding too much perfection in the things of men. Liberals are mad to be wanting to adapt God’s one true Church to our age of godlessness, while Catholics are mistaken if they doubt God’s Providence in His management of His Church.

So Pope Francis is mad, but Jesus Christ is with His Church until world’s end. He said so Himself – Mt. XXVIII, 20.

Kyrie eleison.

Readers may remember from these “Comments” last week the article of a British patriot, Dennis Whiting, in which he denounced the British Government for organising lies in order to run the country, especially but not only, in connection with the Covid nonsense. To call it “Covid nonsense” is not of course to deny any reality to the Covid virus (although it has never yet been properly isolated). It is to say that the Covid phenomenon, when presented to us as a medical problem by our politicians and media, makes no sense. It is only when it is taken as a major political instrument for the enslaving of mankind that it makes perfect sense, and then one sees that it comes not just from our puppet politicians and media, but from their far more sinister puppet-masters, the Judeo-Masonic power that has created the modern world to fight against God. Along these lines runs the promised second half of Whiting’s article –

Managing the “pandemic,” it seems, has taken over Britain and most of the world. However, Covid-19 is a nasty new species of influenza but it is not a pandemic. There are no bodies on the street. Funeral directors are not working overtime. Overall annual death rates have not risen significantly, if at all. Over 99% of those who catch the disease survive and the average age of death for those for whom it proves fatal is 82.

Mass vaccination, the supposed remedy for the crisis, is not a true remedy but rather a huge crime. People are being treated as guinea pigs to try out experimental “vaccines” that have adverse symptoms on a horrific scale. Lock-downs are designed not to curb the “pandemic” but to destroy small businesses and make the whole of society dependent upon big government and billionaires.

What is happening today has not sprung out of nowhere. The plan for global governance has been maturing for more than a century. After World War 1, the locus moved from the British Empire to the USA. Financiers in New York supported both the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler, with the intention of creating war and disruption which could only be resolved by the formation of a one-world government.

Machinery is now at work to divide and disrupt society. Those whose aim is to “build back better” want to knock everything flat first. The attack by neo-Marxists and neo-Cons in the West on Christian belief and practice has been unrelenting. Their aim is to create a new kind of human being and they need to obliterate the old-fashioned benchmarks for how we should behave. ( no less! Emphases from E.C.)

10. We all have to do what we can to resist this New World Order that is threatening to sweep us into slavery. Hamlet – that Everyman figure created by Shakespeare at the dawn of the modern age – was not keen to rise to the challenge, but he knew that he could not shirk it:

The time is out of joint. O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right. (Hamlet, end of Act 1)

When Whiting writes of the Covid phenomenon as “a huge crime” with “adverse symptoms on a horrific scale,” he is by no means exaggerating, as a mass of material on the Internet attests, for instance the admirable work being done by the German lawyer Reiner Fuellmich and his team. He is optimistic, but it is to be feared God’s punishment must run its course, otherwise we shall only return to our godless vomit.

Kyrie eleison.

(No couplet from E.C. – it cannot compete with Shakespeare)

Without a true God or His personal judgement at death to fear, what is there to stop rulers or ruling elites from exploiting their privileged rank for their own benefit and not that of the people they rule? A modern politician answers to nobody except the media. The media answer to very few people who do not belong to a race lusting for world domination by means of installing their New World Order. But this NWO can only be installed secretly because it will eliminate the last vestiges of Christendom, including all the liberties that derived from Christendom – it is not freedom that gives truth, because of original sin. It is truth that gives freedom (Jn. VIII, 32), it was Christian truth that gave the West its political freedoms, and life, whereas the NWO plans to kill off billions of the world’s populations (just as the Covid “vaccines” are starting to do).

Therefore, the world’s present godless rulers are bound to pretend they are promoting the peoples’ life and liberty when they are in fact preparing their death and enslavement. Here is why politicians are such liars, especially since the French Revolution in 1789, when the West lurched to the left, away from God.

Let these grand accusations be illustrated from recent real life: actions of Her Majesty’s Government of Great Britain. On the website of a British nationalist party (patria-uk.org), a British patriot wrote an article which supports Archbishop Vigano’s contention in these “Comments” last week, namely that the peoples of the world must stop thinking that their governments are ruling for their benefit. Quite the opposite is true. Here is an edited summary of the first half of Dennis Whiting’s article –

“Today, we are not in charge of our own country – we have a government of occupation which creates its own “truth” and spins events in line with a preconceived narrative. Since the year 2000 various disasters have occurred for which the official government explanations are not believable. Notably 9/11, 7/7 and more recently, the Salisbury poisoning. The narratives of these and similar events put out by successive governments and faithfully reported by the media are inconsistent and incoherent.

In 2014, in a speech at the United Nations, UK Prime Minister David Cameron characterised the questioning of official narratives by “conspiracy theorists” as a form of “right-wing terrorism” that needed to be dealt with. Since the onset of Covid-19, the UK government has been frantically countering alternative narratives, setting up bodies such as the Integrity Initiative, and now it is threatening to criminalise any serious search for the truth with the Online Harms Bill. The Behavioural Insights Team was set up in 2010 as an official body answerable to the Cabinet Office. Its function is the psychological management of public perception. SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) is a similar body set up to advise the Cabinet Office, together with its subgroup SPI-B (Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours). In 2020, SPI-B stated that a “substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened [by Covid-19]” and the “perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging” – in other words fear must be ramped up to ensure that the public at large accepts the government’s narrative on Covid-19.

Similarly, in the aftermath of the mysterious poisoning of the Scripals in Salisbury in March 2018, the government had some difficulty in making the official narrative stick. So, at the G7 meeting in June of that year, Prime Minister Theresa May announced that “G7 leaders have agreed to establish a new Rapid Response Mechanism.” This meant that all the G7 nations would automatically accept the version of such events as given by one of their members, and would react appropriately . . .”

In other words, the leading seven governments of the world promised to unite in their organising of the lies! See these Comments next week for the rest of Whiting’s article.

Kyrie eleison

For the Philosophy Festival held in Venice two months ago, Archbishop Vigano wrote another of his splendid overviews on modern events, presenting a truly Catholic point of view such as all churchmen should be presenting, but which by the Conciliar madness the large number of them are still preventing. To the Church in its unprecedented distress approaching the end of the world (cf. Mt, XXIV), God has assuredly set aside this Archbishop as a beacon of light, to go on telling the fullness of God’s Truth which the rest of his colleagues have been more or less smothering ever since the close of the wretched Second Vatican Council over half a century ago. Here follows a summary of the Archbishop’s letter on “The Great Reset: the Latest Greatest Lie.”

The lack of “common sense” in individuals has in large part made possible this assault against God, against the Church, and against the human race that is represented by the Great Reset. Irrationality, the abdication of reason, the annihilation of critical judgment and the denial of evidence are the true pandemic virus of our time. We should renounce the comforting premise which tells us that our leaders act for our good. The reality is not only different but diametrically opposed to what we are being told.

The workers of the Great Reset consider that they have already so enslaved the masses of people that they need fear no revolt. These masses now believe their salvation depends on vaccines, and soon they will put out their hands to receive a chip beneath the skin. And if the “pandemic” farce wears off, the next deceit is ready:  “climate change” will impose “ecological transition” and “sustainable development.”

Such lies are the consistent hallmark of the architects of the various Great Resets over the last few centuries – the Protestant Pseudo-Reformation, the Industrial Revolution, the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution. the two World Wars, the Revolution of 1968, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. In this long series of Great Resets organized by the same elite of conspirators, not even the Catholic Church has managed to escape. She too, with Vatican II, saw a greater understanding of the liturgy by the people given as a pretext for destroying the apostolic Mass, for cancelling the sacred language and profaning the rites. So this latest Great Reset may be traced back to all the other assaults that in the course of history have tried to nullify the work of Redemption and establish the tyranny of the Antichrist. What is happening corresponds to a diabolical plan which over the centuries has pursued a single goal – The New World Order. The final step is the establishment of a joint rule in which command is seized by a few faceless tyrants, themselves given over to the worship of death and sin.

The Kingship of Christ was in the way? Vatican II shifted it to the end of the world, leaving the Church to fall victim to the same democratic deception into which civil societies had fallen almost two centuries earlier, at the French Revolution. By recognizing the legitimacy of error and false religions, the Church dethroned herself with her own hands, reducing herself to having to beg for approval from the powerful masters of this world, to whose orders she has submitted.

Today, each of us has the possibility of choosing to align himself with Christ or against Christ. Commit yourselves with renewed zeal to Him, so that the Crown that His enemies have torn from Him may be restored to He who is Our King. Make Our Lord reign in your souls and in all areas of private and public life. Only where Christ reigns is there true peace and concord: the peace of Christ in the reign of Christ.

May God give many more years to this outstanding Shepherd of souls, Archbishop Vigano.

Kyrie eleison.

“And then the lawless one (the Antichrist) will be revealed and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of his mouth and destroy him by his appearing and his coming. The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends upon them an operation of error, to make them believe what is false, so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness” (II Thess. II, 9–11).

If many of the serious professionals who have studied the contents of the Covid inoculation are right, then many thousands of those who have been inoculated have already died of it. But the worst is yet to come, they say, because what the inoculation does is to cripple the body’s own natural immune defence, so that any further exposure to viruses can be fatal, notably from this autumn onwards with the reopening of the flu season. Whether this dire prophecy is true remains to be seen, but given just how much damage in deaths and injuries the so-called “vaccine” has already done, the prophecy seems highly possible, if not probable, and if it turns out to be true, then there is going to be a large number of very angry people.

That they will be furious with all the propagandists who lied to them that the “vaccine” was safe and effective, politicians, journalists, doctors and so on, is one thing. The problem is that they will be tempted to blame God, and they risk resorting to quotations like the one above to prove their point. Then in the calm before the possible storm, let us look at this quotation which is not the only one of its kind. So how can God positively send error, and secondly, what entitles Him to impose His idea of “Righteousness”?

Firstly, God is absolute Goodness because He is absolute Being, only a lack of being can be evil. It is absolutely impossible for God to cause directly moral evil. What He can do is cause it indirectly by not giving the grace or graces which would have prevented that moral evil from happening. In that case He is not acting positively, He is refraining from acting, or acting negatively, to allow the evil to happen. Those graces that would have prevented the evil, He is entirely free to give or not give, and if He always gave them, He would in effect be stopping human beings from exercising their free-will and from meriting for Heaven. But an unmerited Heaven could not have the quality of a merited Heaven, which is why we live in this “vale of tears” – God created us only for the best, even if it necessitated the “collateral damage” of a “vale of tears” in which a majority of all souls created would choose Hell (Mt. VII, 13–14).

Secondly, who made “true” true? Who made “false” false? And why is “true” “righteous”? And why is “false” “unrighteous”? Answer, God created the universe to be mankind’s home as an ordered whole out of many parts. God’s Order of our home is true (it corresponds to the mind of God), it is beautiful (city-dwellers still flock out of modern cities at weekends to enjoy the beauties of God’s Nature / Order) and it is good (that Order is real, being, in Nature, not just fabricated by my imagination). Therefore the Order of God is true, beautiful and good in all His Creation, and God created my soul out of nothing to give me a number of years of life sufficient for my free-will to choose either to recognise that goodness in His Creation and to love the Creator for giving me the chance to go to His Heaven for eternal bliss; or to refuse to recognise the goodness of the Creator in and behind His Creation, and in His utterly stupendous offer of eternal bliss in exchange for a few years of my observing His Order’s truth and righteousness. In brief, truth and righteousness are not arbitrary, but are based on what is, on my faith in its goodness, and on my submission to it.

Kyrie eleison.