Eleison Comments

Fatima Secret

Fatima Secret on September 28, 2013

Yet another reconstruction has come to light of the third part of the Secret of Fatima, revealed by the Mother of God to Sister Lucy in July, 1917. The Blessed Virgin wished it to be made public in 1960 at the latest, but the perfidious churchmen controlling Rome pretended that she had merely allowed it to be published from 1960 onwards, and it has been locked away ever since. From hints of its contents revealed by the few churchmen that have been able to read it, several attempts have been made to reconstruct it. This latest attempt has much in its favour. Here is its story.

Cardinal Ottaviani (1890–1979) was a high churchman under Popes Pius XII, John XXIII and Paul VI, main protector of the Faith from 1959 to 1968. Given to read the Secret, but bound by secrecy, he found a way to reveal it without revealing it. Adding material to make the original Secret two to three times as long, he allowed the elongated version to be published, notably in a German magazine called Neues Europa. But the Vatican authorities could easily dismiss it as a fake, as it is now regarded, because the original Secret was known to be only 25 hand-written lines.

However, the Cardinal had a friend, Don Luigi Villa (1918–2012), a valiant priest and defender of the true Church, especially against Freemasonry. At some point the Cardinal revealed to Fr. Villa exactly which parts of the longer version came from the original Secret, and Don Villa in turn told the same to his faithful lay collaborator, Dr. Franco Adessa, who has just put the same information into Chiesa Viva, an Italian periodical. Here then would be the original “Third Secret”:—

“A great chastisement will come down on the whole of mankind neither today, nor tomorrow, but in the second half of the 20th century. Nowhere in the world is there order, and Satan rules in the highest places, determining the course of events. He will even manage to work his way up to the top of the Church. For the Church too will come the time of its greatest trials. Cardinals will oppose cardinals, bishops will oppose bishops. Satan will march in their midst, and in Rome there will be changes. What is rotten will fall, what falls will not get up again. The Church will be darkened and the world overwhelmed in terror. A great war will be let loose in the second half of the 20th century. Fire and smoke will fall from Heaven, the oceans’ waters will be turned into steam, the foam of the sea will rise up, overwhelming and flooding everything. Millions and millions of men will die from one hour to the next, while those who survive will envy the dead. Death will be everywhere because of the errors committed by the madmen and henchmen of Satan, who then and only then will reign over the world. Finally while those who survive these events are still alive, they will proclaim once more God and the glory of God, and they will serve him as men used to do when the world had not yet become so perverse.”

Fr Nicholas Gruner, an expert on Fatima, thinks that this version of the Secret may be incomplete, lacking mention of the Apocalypse and of recommended action. One may also object that the second half of the 20th century has come and gone with no World War. But have not madmen been stirring up war in the Middle East, continuously, from well before 2000 down to today? And it is worthy of note that every phrase in this version of the Secret does occur in the Neues Europaversion (accessible on the Internet), amidst material drawn or imitated from other pious sources.

In any case, may God truly have mercy upon us all, and let us pray the Rosary without ceasing.

Kyrie eleison.

Horrible Fall – III

Horrible Fall – III on September 21, 2013

Last June readers of these “Comments” were promised a third article on the horrible fall of the Society of St Pius X, to consider what can be done. Just recently there appeared on the website “Avec l’Immaculée” an article with some good answers to this question, starting with the question whether Catholics can go on attending SSPX Masses. I summarize and adapt:—

In 1984 an Indult from Rome allowed the Tridentine Mass to be celebrated, under certain conditions, within the framework of the official Church. Asked whether Catholics could attend these Masses, Archbishop Lefebvre replied soon after that they should not attend, because their re-entering the mainstream framework under those conditions was tantamount to accepting Vatican II and the subsequent reforms. The priests saying Indult Masses would not be able to speak freely, and by accepting implicitly the New Mass with the Indult, they would risk sliding into the new Conciliar religion and taking their people with them.

In 2012 Bishop Fellay declared that the New Mass was legitimately promulgated, which is tantamount to saying that it is legitimate. He stifles critics of Vatican II, and while still keeping priests and people as much in the dark as possible as to what he is really up to, he steadily pushes forward the ideas of his pro-Conciliar Declaration of April, 2012. Therefore just as the Archbishop ruled out attending Indult Masses, so now, as a general rule, attending SSPX Masses should be ruled out, because even if this particular Mass is still celebrated in accordance with Tradition, the SSPX is being remoulded in general as a framework within which the new Conciliar religion is less and less disapproved, so that there is more and more of a danger in attending its Masses.

However, particular SSPX priests vary from the genuinely Traditional to the virtually Conciliar. Obviously there is less danger in attending Masses of the former than of the latter, but if the priest concerned either defends and approves of the new direction being imposed by SSPX HQ, or if he persecutes and excludes from the sacraments anybody taking any part in the Resistance, these are two signs that his Masses should be avoided, especially if there is the Mass of a resisting priest not too far away. But circumstances do also come into play, so that if, for instance, one’s children risk being thrown out of a still decent SSPX school, that may justify still attending the local SSPX Mass. When the trunk of a tree is rotting, there can still be branches bearing green leaves.

The fact remains that the trunk of the SSPX is mortally stricken, without hope, humanly speaking, of recovery. Like the Synagogue between the death of Our Lord on the Cross and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D, it is carrying death within it, but it is not yet dead. Apostles preached there, and good Jews still attended, but they were all persecuted and eventually thrown out. If a Catholic can see today that throughout the body of the SSPX, from the head downwards, the deadly virus of a disguised Conciliar mentality is coursing, he must take action to help rescue as many souls as possible before they make shipwreck in the faith with the sinking lifeboat.

Let him, to forge his own convictions, read all he can lay his hands on, starting with the exchange of letters between the three bishops and Bishop Fellay in April of 2012. Let him talk to priests and fellow-parishioners, to co-ordinate, for instance, the putting together of refuges for priests who might not otherwise take action. There is much to be done, however few there are, at least for the moment, to do it. God is with these few.

Kyrie eleison.

Conciliarizing Apace

Conciliarizing Apace on September 14, 2013

A good article arguing that the June 27 Declaration of three Society of St Pius X bishops is not as faithful to Catholic Tradition as it may seem to be, appeared in the August issue of England’s new Catholic monthly magazine, The Recusant, self-described as “An unofficial SSPX newsletter fighting a guerrilla war for the soul of Tradition.” A brief survey can hardly do justice to the article’s seven dense pages, but the main line of thought deserves to be known. Here it is –

At first sight the June 27 Declaration seems to be Traditional, but, as with the documents of Vatican II A, there is usually a loophole, a fatal flaw, which allows the rest of the document to be undone. Let us take a closer look, paragraph by paragraph:—

#1 “Filial gratitude” is expressed towards Archbishop Lefebvre, but only harmless and soft-sounding quotes of his are included in the Declaration, with nothing from his 1988 Consecrations sermon, and none of his hard-hitting reasons for creating bishops to resist the “antichrists” in Rome. #3 It is admitted that the “cause” of the errors devastating the Catholic Church is in the Conciliar documents, but that is not to admit that the errors are there, since cause and effect cannot be identical. Yet most serious errors are themselves in the Council’s texts, e.g. religious liberty. #4 It is recognized that Vatican II changed and vitiated the Church’s manner of teaching, or teaching authority, but the main problem is not authority, but doctrine – see #8. #5 Only relatively soft language is used to evoke the Conciliar Church’s “non-preoccupation” with the “reign of Christ.” In fact the Conciliar Church denies and contradicts the full and true doctrine of the Social Kingship of Christ the King, battle-flag of the Archbishop and true Catholics today. #6 As in #3, it is admitted that the Council text’s teaching on religious liberty leads to the dissolving of Christ, but the text is that dissolving, or putting of man in the place of God. Vatican II is the fruit not just of human weakness or absent-mindedness, but of a diabolical conspiracy. #7 Similarly ecumenism and interreligious dialogue are not just “silencing the truth about the one true Church,” they are denying and contradicting it. Nor are they just “killing the missionary spirit,” they are killing the missions, and with them millions of souls, all over the world. #8 On the other hand the ruin of the Church’s institutions is blamed on the destruction of authority within the Church by the Council’s collegiality and democratic spirit. But the essential problem (as the paragraph’s opening sentence does weakly say) is the loss of faith. Authority is secondary. #9 While pointing to real faults and serious omissions in the Novus Ordo rite of Mass, no mention is made of the worldwide carnage of souls wrought by its falsifying of their worship of God. The Novus Ordo Mass has been the main engine of the Church’s destruction from 1969 until today. #10 In conclusion, timid and deferential language is used to “ask with insistence” that Rome return to Tradition. But of course, in accordance with the SSPX’s “re-branding,” the Newsociety wants no more fighters or fighting talk. #11 The three bishops “mean . . .to follow Providence,” whether Rome returns to Tradition or not. What can that mean other than the eventual acceptance of a deal that will by-pass doctrine? #12 The Declaration concludes piously, with another dovelike quote from the Archbishop.

And The Recusant arrives at the sad but all too probable conclusion that the Declaration is only an apparent step backwards from the Declarations of April 15 and July 14 of last year, which were two clear steps forward in the conciliarizing of the SSPX. Heaven help it!

Kyrie eleison.

Resistance, Organize?

Resistance, Organize? on September 7, 2013

The debate continues as to whether and how today’s “Resistance” should be organized (let us here define “Resistance” as former members or followers of the Society of St Pius X so upset with its recently manifest change of direction as to take action of some kind to resist that change). Broadly speaking, the (relative) youngsters want an organisation to co-ordinate action and make it more effective, while the oldsters tend to think that any structured organisation is no longer possible or even desirable in today’s chaotic circumstances.

To begin with, one must take the measure of the chaos. It comes essentially from the shepherd being struck and the sheep scattered (Zech. XIII, 7; Mt. XXVI, 31). Whether it believes it or not, whether it likes it or not, for the whole world that shepherd is the Catholic Pope. As we observe today, if he goes crazy then nobody in the whole wide world can restore order. This is because the Incarnate God made his Church the salt of the earth and the light of the world (Mt. V, 13–14), and he designed that Church as a monarchy, a design which not even Vatican II could undo. Therefore nobody can take the Pope’s place, and if he says things like, “Who am I to condemn a God-seeking homosexual?,” as the present occupant of the See of Peter said recently, then “chaos is come again,” and there is very little that one can do about it, besides praying for God to intervene.

Notwithstanding, Archbishop Lefebvre did all he could, and by the mercy of God he created an island of sanity and order, the SSPX. But, naturally, under pressure from one Conciliar Pope after another, his successors have given way. They ask, “How can we be Catholic and disobey the Pope?” – more confusion and chaos. However the Archbishop was so successful in organizing resistance to the Council that a number of those who understand what he was doing wish to organize the resistance to those betraying him. But can it be organized? That is the question.

A wise colleague, old enough to have campaigned hard and effectively at the Archbishop’s side in the worldwide expansion of the SSPX in the 1970’s and 1980’s, remembers from those early days a number of priests resisting the Council successfully all over the world, which they did independently of one another and of the Archbishop. They listened to him because he talked good Catholic sense, which is why many of them recognized his moral authority, but none of them obeyed him in the strict sense, and he demanded of none of them that obedience. Without the Pope, structured Catholic obedience was, and remains, impossible. My colleague goes on to point out that even the Archbishop’s Society resisted liberal Church and world for only 30, maybe 40, years, and the situation is rather worse now than it was in his day. When the homeland is occupied by an enemy army, my colleague concludes, it is impossible to organize an army of defence, all that remains is guerrilla warfare.

In my opinion he accurately portrays the increase of the chaos when he writes: “The hour of God and of the immaculate Heart will come (as she has said) only when everything seems lost, which must include the little SSPX. Bishop Fellay’s chief illusion was to have thought that the great SSPX would save the Church, to which the Devil added, “from within, like a Trojan horse.” All that we in fact needed to do was construct Noah’s Ark for the faithful remnant in accordance with the Founder’s plan, and to go on constructing it until the Flood. A deluded leader opened the Ark’s door ahead of time, and the Ark was flooded. God have mercy upon us all. The leader was not Noah, but the Captain of the Titanic.”

Kyrie eleison.

Milan Edict

Milan Edict on August 31, 2013

In our days when liberalism taking over the Society of St Pius X looks like merely the last in a long line of defeats of the Catholic Church, it is difficult to imagine that there was once a time when the Church scored one victory after another. Nevertheless this year we celebrate the 1700th anniversary of one of those victories, the Edict of Milan, dating from 313 AD.

The Roman Emperor Constantine, known as “Constantine the Great,” was born in 272 and he was baptised Christian only shortly before his death in 337, but he had been seriously sympathetic to Christianity for many years beforehand. When in 312 he marched on Rome to fight his rival, Emperor Maxentius, Our Lord promised him victory if he would put on his battle standards the “labarum,” the X with a P imposed on it, the first two Greek letters of the word Christ. Constantine did what Our Lord said, and defeated Maxentius at the battle of the Milvian Bridge. Once in firm control of Rome, Constantine issued the following year the Edict of Milan.

In the course of the previous 250 years, worshippers of Christ had suffered ten bloody persecutions under the Roman Emperors, from Nero (37–68) to Diocletian (243–316). Christians had refused the pagan State religion, so the State had banned Christianity. What the Edict of Milan did was to make Christianity for the first time legal alongside other religions allowed in the Empire. It was the decisive step in the conversion of Rome to Christianity. In 325 Constantine endorsed the orthodoxy of the dogmatic Council of Nicaea. In 380 the Emperor Theodosius made Christianity the official religion of Rome, and in 392 Theodosius forbade pagan worship.

Thus Constantine began that union of (Catholic) Church and State which was the foundation of Christendom, better known today as “Western civilisation.” Whatever may have been down the ages the abuse of that union in practice, it is in principle immensely fruitful for the salvation of souls. One need only think of how any township even today will profit from a sane priest and a sane policeman complementing one another. For 1600 years the Catholic Church held to that principle of the union of Church and State, whereas for the last 200 years Revolutionary liberalism has constantly sought to undermine it. Only with Vatican II did the Church at last give way and repudiate the doctrine of the Catholic State by its teaching on religious liberty in Dignitatis Humanae. A ringleader of the neo-modernists at the Council, Fr Yves Congar rejoiced that the Council had put an end to the “Constantinian Church.”

Now it is true that the churchmen being linked to the worldly authorities will bring temptations of worldliness with it, but any State is bound to enforce laws that correspond to some religious or anti-religious view of God and man. To see how difficult it is to lead a Catholic life when that view of the State accords with the anti-religion of secular humanism, just look around you. It was the all-surrounding pressure of modern irreligious States upon the bishops of Vatican II that made them want to change the Catholic Church to fit the modern world. The same pressure is now making the leadership of the Society of St Pius X go the way of the Revolution.

Constantine on the contrary must down the ages have contributed to the salvation of millions of souls, an achievement for which he is surely in Heaven. Emperor Constantine, pray for us.

Kyrie eleison.

Resistance Vision

Resistance Vision on August 24, 2013

A number of Catholic souls today keeping the Catholic Faith are scared by the direction still being taken at present by the leadership of the Society of St Pius X, and since they appreciate just how much they have received from the Society over the last few decades, they desperately wish for a replacement Society to take its place. They are scared by the different vision of a network of independent pockets of resistance being their future. They may be reassured to know that it was the vision of an outstanding prophet and pioneer of the Traditional movement, the French Dominican priest Fr Roger-Thomas Calmel (1914–1975). Here are pages, freely translated and adapted from the French, of his Brief Apology for the Church of all Time (pp. 48–51):—

“However crazily the Catholic hierarchy may behave, priests cannot take the place of bishops, nor can laity take the place of priests. Do we then think of setting up a huge worldwide league or association of priests and Christian layfolk to enter into dialogue with the hierarchy and force them to restore Catholic order? It is a grand and touching idea, but it is unreal. That is because any such group, wanting to be a Church group but being neither a diocese nor an archdiocese nor a parish nor a religious order, will come under none of the categories over which and for which authority is exercised in the Church. It will be an artificial grouping, an artefact unknown to any of the Church’s real groups which are established and recognized as such.

“So, as with every grouping together of men, the problem of leadership and authority will arise, and the huger the group, the sharper the problem. Unfailingly it will come down to this: being an association, the group must solve the problem of authority; being artificial (no kind of natural or supernatural group), it cannot solve the problem of authority. Rival sub-groups will rapidly arise, war will become inevitable, and there will be no canonical way to end or wage such a war.

“Are we then condemned to being able to do nothing amidst the chaos, often a sacrilegious chaos? I do not think so. Firstly, the indefectibility of the Church guarantees that down to the end of the world there will be enough of a genuine personal hierarchy to maintain the sacraments, in particular the Eucharist and Holy Orders, and to preach the one and only unchanging doctrine of Salvation. And secondly, whatever be the failings of the real hierarchy, we all of us, priests and laity, have our little part of authority.

“Therefore let the priest capable of preaching go to the limits of his power to preach, to absolve sins and to celebrate the true Mass. Let the teaching Sister go to the limits of her grace and her power to form girls in the Faith, good morals, purity and literature. Let every priest and layman, every little group of laity and priests having authority and power over a little fort of the Church and Christendom, go to the limits of their possibilities and powers. Let leaders and inmates of such forts know and be in contact with one another. Let each of the forts protected, defended, trained and directed in its praying and singing by a real authority, become as far as possible a fortress of holiness. That is what will guarantee the continuation of the true Church and will prepare efficaciously for its renewal in God’s good time.

“So we need not to be afraid, but to pray with all confidence and to exercise without fear, according to Tradition and in the sphere that is ours, the power we have, preparing thus for the happy time when Rome will come back to being Rome and bishops to being bishops.”

Kyrie eleison.