Eleison Comments

Vital Election

Vital Election on June 30, 2018

Upon the up-coming election in two weeks or so of the three senior officials of the Society of St Pius X hangs a great deal. For the first 20 years of its existence it was a unique obstacle in the way of the new man-centred religion taking over and occupying the Catholic Church in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Alas, for the last 20 years its Superior General has been making the Society less and less resistant to the Conciliar officials in Rome at the head of the new religion. Will he be re-elected for a third term in mid-July, or not? If he is re-elected, it is difficult to see how the Society will not come under Conciliar control. If he is not re-elected, whoever is elected in his place will need a divine miracle or much human skill to bring the Society back in line with its Founder’s original intention, to put Jesus Christ back on His throne as God and King of all human society. It is not enemies but friends of the Society who point out how liberalism has been allowed to soak into it.

Perhaps Archbishop Lefebvre’s noble attempt to fight godless liberalism by founding the Society in 1970 was doomed from the start. After all, he had on the one hand Almighty God with him, as so many quasi-miraculous interventions in the Society’s early history prove. On the other hand he had the whole modern world and Conciliar Church against him, so that what had for all the centuries since the early Church of the Apostles and martyrs become normal, namely Christian civilisation, was by his time thoroughly abnormal. And so how could the young men who were drawn to him in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and who are now at the head of his Society, know the relatively normal order of the Church as he himself had known it between the two World Wars? And how could they build what they did not know? And, humanly speaking, how could they not be vulnerable to the universal pressure of today’s abnormality?

For indeed it has become normal for men to disbelieve in God, or if they believe in Him, to treat Him as though He is of little importance. All He has to do is get out of the way. Heads man wins, tails God loses. After all, God is so good that he could never condemn any human being to eternal fires of Hell, and men are so good that merely by being men they have such dignity that they all deserve to go to Heaven. He gave us this life for us to enjoy it. He cannot possibly have meant His ten Commandments to stop us from enjoying it. Yesterday’s Church gave that impression, but technological man has come of age after centuries of backward peasantry, and so it was high time for that old Church to give way to a church of the New World Order, a church bright with inclusion instead of exclusion, with liberty instead of prohibitions, with liberalism instead of Catholicism!

Therefore, divinely speaking, let nobody exclude the possibility of miraculous help from Heaven whereby the Society’s General Chapter will choose three top officials who understand what God wants from the Society, and mean with His help to give it to Him, namely the Society’s continuing or restored witness throughout the Church to the Social Kingship of Christ the King and to the one true religion instituted by the Incarnate God. But humanly speaking, let nobody be under any illusion as to the likelihood of such miraculous help. God owes His miracles to nobody. It was already a miracle that the Society came into existence, survived and thrived for 40 years, and shone throughout the Church. It may have played its part of handing down Tradition for as long as God meant it to, and now all it has to do is to watch while the same torch is handed down to others. God knows. Men choose. God decides.

For our part, we pray: Blessed Mother of God, from your divine Son we beg of you to obtain for the Society’s General Chapter to choose for its leaders for the next 12 years servants of His who put no merely human calculation or ambition in front of His interests alone – the restoration of His own Kingship over all mankind, the Triumph of your own Immaculate Heart, and the salvation of souls. Amen.

Kyrie eleison.

Fiftiesist SSPX

Fiftiesist SSPX on June 23, 2018

The parallels between the state of the Universal Church in the 1950’s and the state of the Society of St Pius X in the 2000’s keep arising, because it is the same malady that has afflicted both Church and SSPX. In what does that malady consist? In a desire so to reach out to man slipping further and further away from God, that the true God is distorted beyond all recognition by being brought down to the level of godless modern man. With the Church, the Faith of all time was to be adapted to fit our modern world, giving rise to the Second Vatican Council. With the SSPX, Catholic Tradition of all time was to be made to fit that Council, giving rise to the slide of the SSPX. “The same causes produce the same effects.”

Last year was the 100th anniversary of the great Apparitions of Our Lady in Fatima, Portugal. She warned of terrible disasters that would befall mankind if her warnings were not heeded. The churchmen reacted inadequately, because after several years She had to tell Sister Lucy that even good souls were not paying sufficient attention to Her requests, while bad people were of course going on their sinful way. Thus the first part of Pope Pius XII’s reign (1939–1958) was marked by his devotion to Fatima, but in the 1950’s he was persuaded to split the devotional aspect of the Apparitions from their political aspect, notably the Consecration of Russia, and to disregard the political aspect while retaining the devotional, a great mistake. Now see exactly the same mistake being made by certain Superiors of the Society in the 2010’s.

A colleague in the Society of St Pius X heard last year (2017) sermons on the subject of Fatima (1917) from two of its senior members. Where he expected a thorough treatment of the Apparitions of Fatima, all he heard was words pious, by no means false, but both of the preachers pictured a world in good health! The greatness, goodness and mercy of Our Lady were spoken of, and of course Her Immaculate Heart as a mighty place of refuge for us Catholics. Nothing wrong so far. But, our colleague goes on –

“There was not a word on the catastrophic situation in which individuals, nations and the Church find themselves today. The First Part of the Secret of Fatima was mentioned, but neither the Second nor the Third Part. Are the nations not in all kinds of trouble? Is not Mother Church with Pope Francis at its head in unimaginable trouble? Given this situation, how can anyone dare to pass over in silence the Second and Third Parts, with not even a mention?

Our Superiors are taking on a huge responsibility. They are lulling our Catholics to sleep, a religious sleep – “We have the true Mass, we have the Faith, we have priories, we are members of the Catholic Church . . . what more do we need?” Sermons like this prevent any reaction, there is no engagement in the battles of the Mother of God, no word of warning against today’s electronic gadgets. Here is how Catholics become lukewarm.

“When the children of Fatima were obliged to look into the fires of Hell, their prayers, efforts and sacrifices markedly increased. Do we Catholics of the 21st century no longer need such a view of Hell, such a view of the catastrophic condition of current politics and the Catholic Church? Many of our faithful do not even notice that something important is being kept from them. When they hear sermons of this kind, they are enthusiastic, they praise the preachers, they are happy as can be. Alas, it is all too understandable that men prefer what is light and pleasing to what is harsh and true.”

Kyrie eleison.

Rome Prepares?

Rome Prepares? on June 16, 2018

In the context of the crisis engulfing the Catholic Church for the last half-century since Vatican II (1962–1965), two recent moves of the Church authorities in Rome can seem surprising, because both moves seem to favour that Catholic Tradition which Pope Francis gives so many indications of wishing to uproot once and for all. Is the Big Bad Wolf really wanting to be nice to the Little Red Riding Hood of the Society of St Pius X, or are these another two wily moves to trap her in his Conciliar lair? Is Rome also preparing for the Society’s General Chapter in mid-July?

The first of the two moves was in mid-February of this year when the Ecclesia Dei Commission, launched in Rome in 1988 to slow down Catholic Tradition because it was threatening to speed up, granted to the semi-Traditional Fraternity of St Peter the use of the highly Traditional liturgical rites of Holy Week. These are the rites that were used for centuries and centuries prior to that reform of the liturgy by Cardinal Bugnini in the 1950’s which paved the way for the New Mass in the 1960’s. As rites for Holy Week the old rites are becoming more and more popular with Catholics who repudiate the New Mass, because the new rites contain so many features of that modernist liturgy which Paul VI would impose by deceitful trickery on the Universal Church in 1969. Is Rome at last backing away from the New Mass?

Hardly. As the famous line of Virgil runs, “Whatever it may be, I do not trust the Greeks, even when they bear gifts.” This gift to Tradition can easily have been designed by Rome to persuade all kinds of Little Red Riding Hoods, especially participants in the General Chapter of July, that the Big Bad Wolf is not so bad after all. The Chapter is important to Rome – that bastion of the Faith erected by the Archbishop must be dismantled, because by Archbishop Lefebvre’s true fight for the Faith it was a real road-block for the onward march of the New World Order, out of all proportion to the Society’s size. The fight has been severely weakened since his death, but Rome must fear the Chapter reviving it. Rome wants either another liberal as Superior General, or a compromise candidate will do, but not a fighter for the Faith!

The other surprising move of Rome was on May 16, when a well-known Vatican journalist, Andrea Tornielli, highlighted an extract from a recently appeared book written by a Roman official on Pope Paul VI (1963–1978). The extract is a detailed account of the September 1976 conversation held between the Pope and Archbishop Lefebvre, within two months of the Mass celebrated by the Archbishop in front of a huge crowd in Lisle, France. That Mass marked the beginning of the Traditional movement, so the Pope wanted to rein in the Archbishop. The conversation lasting a little over half an hour was noted down by the Romans at that time, and it was described somewhat differently by the Archbishop afterwards, but the Romans kept the contents to themselves for the last 42 years. Why publish them now?

The answer must lie in the “somewhat differently.” The admirable Internet site from Latin America, Non possumus, has published the details now released by the Romans and the Archbishop’s own account of the conversation alongside one another. Readers of Non possumus can check for themselves how the Romans have whitewashed the blindness of Paul VI and their own villainy. Outstanding example: Paul VI accused the Archbishop of making his seminarians swear an oath against the Pope, which was absolutely untrue. The Archbishop declared his readiness to swear on a crucifix that the Pope had accused him of such an oath. A Roman spokesman then officially denied that there had been any mention of any such oath.

In like manner Rome’s version glosses over the gulf between the modernism of Paul VI and the Faith of the Archbishop, as though the Capitulants need not worry that there is any huge gap between Conciliar Rome and the Society – let them elect another liberal for their Superior, but a compromise candidate will do!

Kyrie eleison.

Liberals Prepare

Liberals Prepare on June 9, 2018

Not everybody is asleep. Somebody in France is watching out for how the liberals are preparing to take over the imminent General Chapter of the Society of St Pius X, where the Society has its last chance, probably its last chance ever, to stand up for the Catholic Faith against Vatican II, as did Archbishop Lefebvre. Whoever it was wrote an excellent article on Fidélité catholique francophone denouncing some sinister words of the Society’s General Secretary, Fr Christian Thouvenot, spoken in an interview with the Society’s German District magazine early this year. What follows owes much to that article.

Firstly, the sinister words: “It is likely that the question of the present status of the Personal Prelature will be raised at the General Chapter (in July). But it is the Superior General alone who is at the head of the Society and who is responsible for relations between Catholic Tradition and the Holy See. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre made this point very clear.” These words are sinister because they are wide open to the interpretation that Menzingen, Society Headquarters where Fr Thouvenot works, is preparing members and followers of the Society for the General Chapter to be the time and place where Bishop Fellay will, apparently lawfully, take upon himself to accept Rome’s offer of a Personal Prelature, and by so doing will cripple once and for all the Society’s ability to defend the Faith by resisting the Novus Ordo Mass and the Second Vatican Council. And these words are sinister because they are ambiguous or false.

Firstly, it is not the Superior General who is alone at the head of the Society. By the Statutes of the Society established by Archbishop Lefebvre, it is true that once the Superior General is elected, he has remarkable powers at his disposal and for no less than a 12-year term, because the Archbishop wanted the Superior General to have time and power to achieve something, without being hindered as he himself had been in the Holy Ghost Fathers. But the General Chapter meeting every six or twelve years is above the Superior General, and he must follow the policies decided by it. Now in theory the General Chapter of 2012 decided that any “canonical normalisation” of the Society would require a majority vote of the full General Chapter, but in practice Bishop Fellay has already proceeded to “normalise” with Rome the Society’s confessions, ordinations and marriages. And now his General Secretary is talking as though the General Chapter has nothing further to say, as though Bishop Fellay alone can “normalise” the rest. Are all the forty future Capitulants of July aware of how Menzingen is talking? Do they agree?

Secondly, Fr Thouvenot claims that Bishop Fellay is – alone? – responsible for relations between Catholic Tradition and the Holy See. That is no doubt how both Rome and Bishop Fellay himself would like to see the situation, so that Rome can scoop up all of “Tradition” at one fell swoop and Bishop Fellay can extend his empire. But “Tradition” is a varying and heterogeneous collection of religious societies and communities which certainly do not all want to be scooped up by Conciliar Rome, or headed up by Bishop Fellay. For this reason Archbishop Lefebvre repeatedly refused to be called the head of Catholic Tradition. But both Bishop Fellay and his Secretary are playing the game of Conciliar Rome.

And thirdly, if the Archbishop insisted at the time of the Consecrations in 1988, that he alone was still in control of the Society’s relations with Rome, that was because he knew that the young collaborators around him were no match for the wily Romans, as we have seen to our cost since his death in 1991. It was not because he trusted in the structure of the Society to endow its Superior General with a special grace to match the Conciliar Romans. When men want to go wrong, it is not necessarily a structure that will save them. But what could the Archbishop do? He had to die some time!

Readers, if you know a July Capitulant, ask him if he knows what the General Secretary is saying!

Kyrie eleison.

Mozart Questioned

Mozart Questioned on June 2, 2018

After issue # 550 of these “Comments” highly praised Mozart (Jan 27, 2018), a reader wrote privately to say that he had a problem with the famous composer: Mozart was an enthusiastic Freemason, he completed in the second half of his life no major work for the Catholic Church, and his operas treat of man-woman relations and of morality in a very casual manner. Now music is so important in people’s souls that this reader’s objections deserve to be answered in public, so that people who do not yet know Mozart may be encouraged – obviously not forced – to make of him the music of their leisure moments. So let us highlight some principles for each of the reader’s three objections.

That Mozart was a Freemason raises a most important principle: the artist and his art are not separate, but they are distinct. What makes the moral goodness of the artist as a person is not the same as what makes the artistic goodness of the artefacts that he produces (Summa Theologiae, 1a 2ae, Q57, Art. 3). Thus Picasso was a personal scoundrel, but his art, purely as art, is brilliant, whereas countless Victorian painters may have been personally very moral, but their paintings are as dull as ditch-water. Thus Masonry certainly entered into some of Mozart’s later music, notably the “Magic Flute,” but the music stands on its own feet, and it certainly owes its beauty not to Masonry’s war on God, but to Mozart’s Catholic parents and his early upbringing in the highly Catholic Austria of the Empress Maria-Theresa.

That, secondly, the mature Mozart never completed another major work for the Church is true insofar as the C Minor Mass and the Requiem are unfinished, but how often those two works are played, and with what religious effect! Also, is there any piece of music so often played or sung in Catholic churches and chapels as Mozart’s “Ave Verum Corpus”? And if we distinguish music implicitly from explicitly Catholic, can anyone deny that Mozart, like Shakespeare, is a tremendous carrier of Catholic values, in Mozart’s case the values of harmony, order, beauty and joy for countless listeners? And are not these great artists, implicitly and by heritage Catholic, a mercy of God to enable post-Catholics to enjoy Catholic values without realising it? If post-Catholics did realise it, would they not repudiate those values like the arrant liberals presently “de-constructing” Shakespeare in the so-called “universities” and no doubt Mozart in the “music conservatories”? In fact, can today’s liberal actors and musicians get anywhere near the heart of Shakespeare or Mozart? What does that say about that heart? Not liberal!

And thirdly, that some of Mozart’s operas are in part so light-hearted as to have incurred the scorn of Beethoven – “Never could I write such frivolous operas,” he said – leaves out of view the serious part of the same operas. Alongside Zerlina’s flirting are the flames of Don Giovanni’s damnation, alongside the Count’s philandering is his sincere apology to his suffering Countess; alongside the Seraglio is the highlighting of forgiveness. Real life in a fallen world is both comic and serious. See how at the beginning of “Don Giovanni,” Mozart combines musically a duellist’s duel and death with the burbling panic of Don Giovanni’s rabbit-servant, Leporello. Surely Mozart, like Shakespeare, “saw life steadily and saw it whole,” as Matthew Arnold said of Sophocles.

However, one side of Mozart does remain that of a naughty boy (cf. the film “Amadeus”), and he is an integral part of a Christendom already decadent at the end of the 18th century. But, when compared with the downfall of music ever since, is his music not almost angelic, without its being so far removed from our own times that it can seem inaccessible? Any man harms his soul by getting used to listening to music which is trash, with little or no intrinsic value of melody, harmony or rhythm. He will not usually harm his soul by getting used to Mozart, on the contrary.

Kyrie eleison.

Totalitarian Abortion

Totalitarian Abortion on May 26, 2018

It is possible to give too much importance to the fight against abortion insofar as it is only natural life that is being defended, and not supernatural life. All things being equal, the same time and effort would be better spent on defending by whatever means the life of grace than on defending the unborn life of nature, but in today’s society all things are not equal. Above all, there is so little faith left in our godless world, that to talk of the supernatural with most people today is like talking to them Greek – “God, Heaven, Hell, eternity – what on earth are you talking about?” But if people today have a shred of decency left in them, they can still conceive what a crime it is to turn the sanctuary of life, a mother’s womb, into a prison of death. Therefore God bless Catholics who do what they can to hinder abortion.

But they are up against the totalitarian State of England today. An anti-abortion campaigner of many years’ standing writes that a new technique of “pavement counselling,” which engages more directly with women coming for an abortion, has provoked a draconian reaction from the System in place, no doubt because it has been effective, at least in the short term. In the first PSPO (Public Space Protection Order) of its kind in the country, the local Council has voted to confine the anti-abortionists to a grass area 100 metres from the abortuary, where they are not to number more than four, they are not allowed to display posters larger than A3 size, they are not to mention abortion, baby, mum, foetus, soul, kill, hell or murder, they are not to display any images, play amplified music or voices, shout messages relating to abortion, or even pray aloud. These restrictions came into force on April 23 and could be applied both more widely by this local Council, and also by others. Fines for defying the restrictions could run up to £1,000.

What can one say? England is committing suicide. Possibly the local Council chose to enforce the restrictions on April 23 because that is St George’s Day, when England celebrates its patron Saint, as though to protect abortion is an act of patriotism, or love of country! But what is more anti-natural for a woman than to destroy the fruit of her own womb, or more anti-social for a man than to encourage her to do so? How far must a woman have gone down the road of self-destruction to consent to the literal murder of her motherhood, the main purpose of her existence next after the saving of her own soul. “Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty,” says Scripture (I Tim. II, 15), which is the Word not of a supposed misogynist, but of God.

True to form, Shakespeare has seized on the essence of woman’s self-destruction in a few lines which he puts in the mouth of Lady Macbeth (Act 1, Scene 5) as she steels herself to push her husband to murder Duncan, his king, cousin and friend, even while Duncan will also be a guest under Macbeth’s roof. In terrifying words she calls on devils to rip out of her all feminine tenderness and compassion:—

“. . . . Come, you spirits

That tend on mortal thoughts! Unsex me here

And fill me from the crown to the toe top full

Of direst cruelty, make thick my blood,

Stop up the access and passage to remorse,

That no compunctious visitings of nature

Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between

The effect and it! Come to my woman’s breasts,

And take my milk for gall, you murdering ministers . . .”

She proceeds to overwhelm Macbeth’s scruples, and he murders Duncan, the first of many more victims.

Readers, please pray for England, once the Dowry of Mary and still the object of Her motherly care.

Kyrie eleison.