Vatican II

Good Question

Good Question on April 25, 2009

On the blog-site of a certain Fr. John Zuhlsdorf appeared this week a number of comments provoked by “Difficult Discussions” appearing here a week ago. Many of these comments were relatively thoughtful – a compliment to Fr Zuhlsdorf. One went straight to the point: “Bishop Williamson is using terms without defining them. I’d really like to know if I am a Neo-modernist.” Joe Pinyan further wanted to know, “in order not to be in league with Baal,” whether he should be worshipping God rather at an SSPX Chapel than at a parish where both the “extraordinary” and “ordinary” forms of Mass are celebrated.

To offer Joe an answer, let me begin by defining Neo-modernism. It is the revival (“Neo-”), let loose within the Catholic Church by Vatican II (1962–1965), of the all-embracing heresy of Modernism. Modernism is the dreadful system of mind-rot, emerging over a century ago within the Church and solemnly condemned by St. Pius X in his Encyclical “Pascendi,” whereby the Catholic Church must be adapted to fit the modern world, as shaped by Protestantism and Liberalism. It is in fact the ultimate form of Liberalism, because by its Kantian principles it pretends to liberate man’s mind (and will) from any truth (or law) whatsoever.

Modernism is an especially hypocritical and dangerous error because it can leave intact the appearances of Catholicism even while emptying out its reality. Thus Jesus Christ is not really God, but I am free to make him God (for me) if I want to. Thus Catholic Truth and Law become whatever I care to make of them. Thus out of the Ten Commandments, I become free to obey none or all ten, because either way I am only obeying me. Neo-modernism is even more dangerous than Modernism, because by it the very highest of churchmen, instead of continuing like St.Pius X utterly to condemn Modernism, adopted it to establish it officially inside the Church!

Thus today Catholics have been made free to attend either the “extraordinary” or the “ordinary” form of Mass, according as they prefer the unchanging real God and his essentially unchanging true Mass, or both of them as suited to today’s world. Now this recent freeing of attendance at the true Mass may have proceeded from the best of intentions of Benedict XVI, but the real God imposes on all of us to worship him as he really is, and not as he has been downsized by modern man. So I hardly expect you to believe me against Rome, Joe, if I tell you to flee the “ordinary” form of Mass, but if you want nothing to do with the worship of Baal, then that is, objectively speaking, what you should do.

However, if you do wish to believe me, you must read! Alas, Pius X’s Pascendi makes for difficult reading. Start here on Dinoscopus with those “Eleison Comments” that treat of religion. Then graduate to the two books, soon to be four, advertised alongside. Then read anything written by Archbishop Lefebvre. Most important to obtain light, pray the Rosary to the Mother of the real God. And may God bless you.

Kyrie eleison.

Difficult Discussions – I

Difficult Discussions – I on April 18, 2009

From Bishop Tissier de Mallerais speaking in Paris we hear that terms have been fixed for the doctrinal discussions due to take place between the Society of St. Pius X and the Church authorities in Rome. The discussions are to be in writing, which is wise, insofar as there is less room for passion and more time for careful thinking. Also they will not be made public, a provision which at best eliminates “grand-standing” by either party, otherwise known as playing to the gallery, because there will be no gallery present.

From Rome we hear that the impetus towards a Rome-SSPX understanding which was generated by the Pope’s January “re-incommunication” of the four SSPX bishops, was seriously slowed down by the distrust generated by the media uproar of January-February, which is what that uproar was designed to achieve. Yet subjectively speaking, there is certainly still good will on the part of the Pope towards the SSPX, and there is no lack of good will on the part of the SSPX towards the person of the Holy Father.

The problem for these discussions is that, objectively speaking, as on either side there may be some reluctance to admit, we are in the presence of an irreconcilable clash between the religion of God and the religion of man. Vatican II mixed the two together, which was too much of the religion of man by half. Let us then say that Benedict XVI wishes to combine Vatican II with Catholic Tradition. That is still too much of the religion of man by a quarter. Let us now suppose that the SSPX and Benedict XVI were to agree to come half-way towards each other. That would still represent one eighth of the religion of man mixed with seven eighths of the religion of God, which for the purposes of Almighty God would still be one eighth too much.

For just as it takes a disproportionately small amount of water mixed with a tank full of gasoline (or petrol) to stop a car engine dead, so it takes only a small admixture of idolatry to stop dead the true religion of God. The Lord God himself tells us that he is a jealous God (Exod. XX, 5; etc.), and will not endure any false gods beside him. To anybody in the SSPX who might be tempted to worship with the neo-modernists, as to any neo-modernist who might wish to share worship with the Catholics, the Old Testament prophet Elias would say as he said to the hesitating Israelites, “How long do you halt between the two sides? If the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him.” Scripture then says, “The people did not answer him a word” (III Kings, XVIII, 21).

Subjectively, the Israelites wanted to have it both ways. Objectively, that was impossible. For ourselves too.

Kyrie eleison.

Busted Compromising

Busted Compromising on March 28, 2009

Between the crisis of the Church, still compounding, and the economic crash now, as Americans say, “barrelling down the pike,” there is an interesting parallel to be drawn. Only those who think religion and economics have nothing to do with one another need be surprised. Both are seated in the same human beings and societies.

In both cases, according as, say over the last 300 years, man has moved further and further away from God, so he has made more and more compromises with the Truth and Laws of God and nature. But the nature of God and man and things cannot be changed, so that the moment comes when the compromising stretches too far from reality, and breaks down. That moment is today.

In economics, the founding of the Bank of England in 1694 was a major step on the way towards modern finance: central banks taking control of the money supply and therefore of the real government of the nations, by progressively replacing real deposits as the foundation of credit with fictitious credit as the foundation of “deposits.” Fake finance became global in the 20th century, and is being crashed in the 21st century to give to the money-men final control of world government. Alas, the sense of economic realities may have been lost too far back in the past for even real suffering and real riots to wrest that control from those who are masters of the mass of minds by their vile media.

In the Church, the steady diminution of the Faith over the 17th and 18th centuries gave rise to Concordats in the 19th and 20th centuries, by which the Church would renounce certain of her natural privileges in order to establish her most important rights by at least a contractual agreement with States where those privileges were no longer believed in. So it came to seem that instead of the human resting on the divine, the divine rested on the human, with the result that Catholic dogma may have remained for the 19th century anchored in God’s Truth, but when with the 20th century’s modernism and Vatican II the same shift towards man took over even Catholic doctrine, then the Church’s very structures immediately began to fall in ruins, today still piling up.

In both economics and religion, the remedy can only be to go in time forward by going back to healthy basics, and by giving up on trying to extend the series of unhealthy compromises with a world that has run itself onto the rocks. However, whereas in economics the enemies of mankind may win, in religion we have God’s own promise (Mt. XVI, 18–20) that they will not prevail over the Catholic Church. So we prepare to suffer, but we pray, especially for the Pope, with an unshakable trust in God.

Kyrie eleison.

Don’t Cry

Don’t Cry on March 14, 2009

“Don’t cry for me , Argentina,” nor let readers of “Eleison Comments” coming from any other part of the world cry for me, because you may have thought that the last two months have been difficult for the Eleison Commentator, but actually his condition is, as usual, rather better than he deserves. “Use each man according to his deserts,” says Hamlet, “and who should ‘scape whipping?”

When the media onslaught broke out some two months ago with the Pope for its main target, I was myself well protected inside the Seminary of La Reja. Journalists prowled round and around, but they did not get through. I only regret having had to leave La Reja and Argentina in circumstances that left me no chance of correctly taking leave of many Latin American colleagues and friends. Let priests, seminarians and layfolk in Argentina all accept here the expression of my real gratitude for the five and a half happy years that I spent in their midst. Let everyone praying for me also accept my sincere gratitude. I will celebrate from tomorrow a novena of Masses for all your intentions.

For the Society of St Pius X did not let me down either when I landed in England. The District Superior in England had contacted the right friend of ours in London for there to be a little police escort sufficient to see me straight through the pack of “gentlemen of the Press” lying in wait for me, and ever since then I have been waited on hand and foot in the Society’s house in London. No work. No responsibilities. Who could complain?

Moreover the rest-cure looks like it is going to be prolonged. In a recent interview with the German weekly “Der Spiegel,” the Society’s Superior General is quoted to have said amongst other things, perhaps under pressure coming through the media – who missed their next onslaught on the Pope travelling to Africa, because he objected to artificial means of birth control? – “If Bishop Williamson is silent, if he stays out of sight, that would really be better for everyone . . . I hope that he drops out of public life for a long while . . . He has hurt the Society and damaged our reputation. We are definitely distancing ourselves from him . . . “

Therefore the future is in God’s hands. I wish I could say that I object to being reduced to silence, but if the alternative is being reduced to saying only those things that the “gentlemen of the Press” do not object to, then I think I prefer the silence. As far back as 1985, the year of publication for “Iota Unum,” Romano Amerio’s famous analysis of Vatican II changes, the Italian Professor was anticipating that a time might come when there would be only silence left . . .

Kyrie eleison.

Getting Serious

Getting Serious on February 28, 2009

Another good friend will not mind if I quote recent correspondence of ours, because he asked a question which a number of souls may be asking: “What to do now?”

He quoted back to me from a letter of mine to him two years ago: “As for the ability of Catholic Tradition and naturally sensible people to respond adequately to this unprecedented crisis of human nature, I think that if these days are not shortened, everybody will go under. Of course the Catholic Church will survive, but maybe in a rather smaller remnant, by a severe purge of what today goes under the name of ‘Tradition’ .” And I went on to wonder how many good souls in 2007 had a sufficient grasp on the big picture (not just on the mechanics of Tradition) to prevent their being in effect left high and dry, not to say positively undermined, “by the corruption sweeping on, around and beneath them.”

After this quote of mine, my friend then asked, “Where do we go from here? With the horrible effects of the economic implosion reaching down to Main Street and the political upheaval naturally following in its wake, where are we in history and what do men like myself now do? I have not spent my life fighting for the Faith to finish up defending an American Indian-style reservation for Catholics!”

As to the economic disaster, I replied to him a week ago that it is now only starting, and that it means that family fathers like him must look to ensuring the basics of survival for their families. I said it will surely come to hunger and starvation, and I could have added, to blood in the suburbs. The Western peoples and therefore their politicians are so far out of touch with reality that only an appalling Third World War can begin to bring them back to it. War will present itself to such politicians as the only possible way out of the insoluble economic problems. Another 9/11 risks being fabricated to start it.

As for the disaster in the Church and our situation in history, I replied that it means we must pray quietly, steadily and seriously, as though the Lord God is important. With the 313 AD victory of the Roman Emperor Constantine at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, Catholics switched from fighting lions to fighting heresies, but with Vatican II rotting out both Faith and minds, the official Church gave up fighting heresy, so for Catholics it is back to fighting mindless beasts in the arena. Another Age of Martyrs is upon us. “Today’s Catholic Church,” I concluded, “desperately needs friends of God as serious as are his enemies,” because such seriousness is alone capable of conquering them for Our Lord. Moreover such seriousness “can no longer be proved with mere words, which have been worn bare of meaning, but only with” – and we come back to – “blood.”

Dear friend, pray the family Rosary, plant potatoes in the garden and teach your children about the martyrs of the Early Church, whose testimony reaches way back beyond any native reservations.

Kyrie eleison.

“Excommunications” Lifted

“Excommunications” Lifted on January 24, 2009

As of course a large number of readers already know, a Decree dated Jan. 21 from the Congregation of Bishops in Rome (not Ecclesia Dei) “remitted” the “excommunicating” Decree of July 1, 1988, so that the four Society of St. Pius X bishops, then declared to be “excommunicated,” are now “re-incommunicated.” In my opinion this latter Decree is a great step forward for the Church without being a betrayal on the part of the SSPX.

It is a great step forward for the Church because if the Church’s problem ever since Vatican II has been a separation of Catholic Authority from Catholic Truth, with this Decree Catholic Authority has taken a decisive step back towards their re-union. Just as after the Motu Proprio of July, 2007, nobody could any longer say that the true rite of Mass was banned by Rome, even if they can still behave as though it is, so too now nobody can any longer say that Catholics holding to Tradition are “outside the Church.” Certainly a number of Conciliarists will go on behaving as though they are, but they clearly no longer have the Pope on their side only. The difference is enormous!

Of course there is still a long way to go before the neo-modernists in Rome, conscious or unconscious, realize – if ever! – how they mistake the Faith, but as the old proverb says, “Rome was not built in a day,” and it will not be repaired in a day. The fact is that “Half a loaf is better than no bread” – ask a hungry man! – so meanwhile let us know how to thank God for this major shift of the rudder of the Conciliar Church. Let us then thank the Blessed Virgin Mary whose intervention will have been decisive, thanks to the nigh on one and three quarter million rosaries offered to her for this intention, by a number of yourselves amongst others. And let us thank and pray for Benedict XVI and all his collaborators who helped to push through this Decree, despite, for instance, a media uproar orchestrated and timed to prevent it.

However, by asking for and accepting such reconciliation with the Conciliar Church, is not the SSPX threatening to lead the way back into Conciliarism? In no way! No doubt some Conciliarists in Rome are hoping that the Decree will serve to draw the SSPX back into the fold of Vatican II, but the Decree itself, as it stands, commits the Society to nothing more than to entering into those discussions to which the Society committed itself in 2000 when it proposed the liberation of the Mass and the ending of the “excommunications” as pre-conditions in the first place.

Then are such discussions without danger? Certainly not! But St. Peter says we should always be “ready to satisfy every one that asks you for a reason of that hope which is in you” (I Pet. III, 15). How can the SSPX not rejoice in the opportunity to lay out in Rome, before the Roman authorities themselves, the profound doctrinal reasons which we believe to be at the root of the Church’s present distress? Woe unto us Catholics of Tradition if we were not ready to give reason for that hope which is in us for the rescue of the Church! So continue to pray the Rosary, dear Catholics, for the possible realization and outcome of such discussions, so that they may serve first, last and foremost, the interests of God, of God, of God.

Kyrie eleison.