Vatican II

Covid’s Logic

Covid's Logic on December 19, 2020

“Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof,” says Our Lord in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. VI, 34). We are never to worry excessively about what may happen tomorrow, amongst other reasons because it may never happen. Therefore the Canadian government’s blueprint for the future of Covid-19, already briefly presented in one paragraph of these “Comments” six weeks ago, may not be so much of interest for the details and timing which it announces, both of which can change, because on Lenin’s instructions the Revolution is to remain supremely adaptable. What is of real value to souls is to discern the logic in the elements of the Revolution so as not to be completely confused by how events risk soon unfolding.

In today’s world crisis the Revolution harnessed firstly (tertiary) economics in the autumn of 2019 when America’s Federal Reserve began to rescue the more and more tottering USA economy by more and more huge injections of funny money, enslaving the benefices beneath mountains of debt. Then in the spring of 2020 the revolutionaries began enslaving the (secondary) politics of the entire world in the chains of the huge Covid lie, namely that the Corona virus ranks alongside the bubonic plague as a danger to men. This cleverly chosen excuse of public health disguised also the enslaving of (primary) public religion, a bonus for the revolutionaries whose primary aim is war on God, and the damnation of souls. That the Catholic churchmen themselves even anticipated the State authorities in closing the Church doors testified to how weak the Catholic Church had become since Vatican II. And so they raise hardly a squeak of protest against the falsehood of the “pandemic” of Covid-19, which we were and still are being told by the “scientists” and politicians will kill millions and millions of people.

What an abject lie! By now nearly ten months of statistics prove that the corona-virus is little if at all worse than an average winter-flu virus, it is only our scientific, medical and political “authorities” that have conspired to create and maintain a state of panic among the people so as to manipulate them (fear is a famous manipulator). The Revolution comes from Satan, and Satan is “a liar and the father of lies” (Jn. VIII, 44). And so the abject lie continued in November with a second lock-down, due to be completed at the turn of the year, and by a third, Covid 21, later in the New Year, when these authorities are capable of letting loose for their purposes a much more serious virus than Covid-19.

Early next summer Canada is due to resort again to economics for the next feature of this Revolution, a “Universal Basic Income Programme” to enable the government to control every individual’s income, making all money digital and as equal as possible, equality being a major part of the Revolution’s anti-natural dream of eliminating all the variety and hierarchy that God planted in His Creation. The background should be a worldwide economic breakdown, engineered to force citizens to enter into the “World Debt Reset Programme,” by which Mammon’s International Monetary Fund will provide all the funny money needed to pay off every citizen’s personal debts (mortgages, loans, credit cards, etc.), in exchange for his forfeiting ownership of any and all property and assets for ever, and secondly for his accepting a double vaccination to “protect” him from Covid-19 and Covid-21. In the ending of private property readers may recognise both a major aim of the Protocols of the Sages of Sion, and that which some people call the essence of Communism. In the vaccinations they may recall a quote of Henry Kissinger from tens of years back: “When the people accept to be vaccinated, it is game over,” meaning that the Revolution will have triumphed once and for all. Revolutionaries deeply mistake God.

But so convinced are they of their ultimate victory that Canadians who refuse to enter into this new order of things will be detained indefinitely in new “isolation facilities” being hurriedly built now, until they accept, because of course by refusing vaccinations they will be a “public health menace” – always the same basic lie, that the authorities are concerned about our health. But “Fear not little flock” of those who truly love God. He has planned to give us His Kingdom (Lk. XII, 32), and not all the various Sages of the world, or of Sion, can stop Him.

Kyrie eleison.

Madiran – 6 Propositions

Madiran - 6 Propositions on November 28, 2020

From the Prologue of Jean Madiran’s book The Heresy of the 20th Century, presented briefly in #of these “Comments” eight weeks ago, readers may remember Madiran’s own dismissal of the heresy concerned as being “night, emptiness, and nothingness.” Nevertheless that heresy has had in the aftermath of Vatican II, and up till today, a devastating power to wreck the Catholic Faith, liturgy, Church and souls as they were before the Council, and so Madiran gives to his readers some account of the “nothingness.” This account he presents in Parts III, IV and V of his book, where he analyses seven main Propositions of the heresy, culled by himself from writings of Bishop Schmitt, whom Madiran credits with having brought into focus the devastating nothingness of the new Conciliar religion. Here in heavy type are all seven Propositions in order, followed by a brief summary of Madiran’s comments.

1 Today’s changing world imposes a change in the very concept of salvation brought by Christ,

2 and it shows that the Church’s idea of the plan of God was, up till now, not evangelical enough.

3 Faith listens to the world.

4 Socialisation is not only an ineluctable fact of world history. It is also a grace.

5 No age before ours has ever been able better to grasp the Gospel ideal of brotherhood practised.

6 In a world turned towards the future, Christian hope takes on its full meaning.

7 Natural law is the expression of the collective consciousness of mankind. (This seventh Proposition is so devastating that Madiran will reserve for it all of Part V.)

1 The first two Propositions have already been analysed by Madiran in the preceding Part of his book, so on the first (P1) he merely adds here that it is the necessary and sufficient principle of the whole new religion. One could sum up: just as Catholicism is “all Tradition,” so modernism is “all change.”

2 P2 begins to spell out P1, i.e. it begins to specify what change is needed. Like countless systems since Protestantism protesting against Catholicism, it appeals falsely to the Gospel against the Church.

3 P3 makes clear that P1 and P2 have changed what believers are henceforth to believe in: as Catholics used to believe in God because He is God, now they are to believe in the world because it is the world.

4 And believing in the modern world means believing in its great movement of socialisation or collectivism, i.e. Communism, because not only is the movement inevitable, it is also a religious grace (!).

5 In other words “Christ’s salvation” (P1) and “God’s plan” (P2) have become merely words, kept as relics of the past, but with all supernatural meaning and reality emptied out.

6 Similarly all supernatural hope and striving for God’s Heaven are emptied out and fulfilled – better – by modernity. For never before in all 20 centuries of Church history have Christians so well understood Christian hope as we men of today, all straining forward together to the Brave New World Order (!).

Madiran’s final comment is to observe how all six Propositions hang together which he culled from Bishop Schmitt. Thus P1 is the springboard of all six. But why this mania for change, which is so clear also in all modern politicians? Because before the modern age, everything used to be based on, and to turn around, God. But now man rejects God. Therefore everything must be changed, (P2) with man instead at the centre, and (P3) with man’s world as the complete horizon. This centring on man (P4) cannot be reversed, but (P4) it is as good as a religion, and (P5) never have men been better suited than today to centring on man, or (P6) to looking forward to the human future of mankind. The synchronisation of this system with Communism is clear, with its elimination of God and deification of man. It will be even more clear with (P7) the elimination of nature and of the natural law. The summer riots in the USA were all about the final elimination of Almighty God. Lord, have mercy on us!

Kyrie eleison.

Vigano Answers

Vigano Answers on November 21, 2020

In the month of August a journalist with Life Site News wrote to Archbishop Viganò in hiding in Italy an article concerning daily life in today’s world for Catholics wishing to keep the Faith. The title was Questions for Viganò: His Excellency is right about Vatican II. But what does he think Catholics should do now? The Archbishop began his reply of September 1st by assuring Stephen Kokx that he was happy to answer the questions, because they addressed “matters that are very important for the faithful.” The Archbishop’s reply is summarised here below, while at the end of it these “Comments” will highlight one point in particular.

Kokx asked the Archbishop, “Who belongs to the Catholic Church and who is separated from it?” The Archbishop replied, anybody who proposes any of the adulterated doctrines of the Council cannot possibly be Catholic. Nor can anybody be Catholic who accepts any of those doctrines knowing them to be in rupture with unchanging Catholic doctrine. On the other hand if a person is baptised, considers themselves to be a Catholic and recognises the Catholic Hierarchy, that does not necessarily mean that they accept the Conciliar doctrine, or adhere to the Conciliar team, knowing them to be in rupture with Catholic Tradition. Nor then are they necessarily outside the Church. But even office-holders who have authority inside the Church are doubtfully Catholic if they accept Conciliar doctrine knowing it to be contrary to Catholic Tradition. They have Authority in the Church, but they cannot exercise it. Only their Authority entitles Conciliarists to claim that they are Catholics, and not just members of a sect.

Therefore Traditional Catholics belong in the Church, and Modernists do not. Moreover laity faithful to Tradition often may and must seek out priests, communities and institutes that are likewise faithful to Tradition, especially in the celebration of Mass. In this respect the clergy are less free that the laity because they belong to a hierarchy which normally requires obedience, but they have the same right and duty to practise their Faith, that Faith which justifies and requires their use of the old rite of Mass. And if the Church is to rise again from the various horrors of the Newchurch, note that the fidelity of true believers under persecution is needed inside the Church, to defeat Modernism.

It was by staying inside the Church that Archbishop Lefebvre was a model of faithfulness under persecution. His Society of St Pius X was a standing reproach to Modernists, and it was enabled to survive by the episcopal Consecrations of 1988, so that eventually the true Mass could be set free again, and Vatican II could be shown up. Bishop Tissier de Mallerais is right that for the time being there are both the true Church and a false “church” under one roof, but that roof is Catholic, so that it belongs to the true Church while the false Conciliar Church is nothing but an intruder. We must hope and pray that a number of now sleeping shepherds will wake up to see how they have been deceived.

In this necessary fight for Our Lord and His Mother it is a privilege to take part, and by so doing to help to revive honour, fidelity and heroism. By the sacrament of Confirmation, we are soldiers of Christ, and Christians have had to take part in one great battle after another to defend the True, the Good and the Beautiful. Let us resist Modernists with Truth and charity. Those who practise Modernism are at fault, not we who denounce it! Let the laity by all means attend Masses which do not shock, but nourish their Faith. True pastors will be given back to us by God, untrue pastors will die off. Let the laity look after good priests, recreate charity, avoid division and rebellion, offer advice respectfully, calling in question not Church authority but how it is misused. God will not fail to reward our fidelity and to restore His Church, drawing vocations from families which will have kept the Faith. All serious problems are human problems. All human problems have a Catholic solution.

And the point to highlight? Notice how the Archbishop measures everything by Truth and Faith.

Kyrie eleison.

Madiran; the Heresy

Madiran; the Heresy on November 14, 2020

In his book “The Heresy of the 20th Century” Jean Madiran (1920–2013) has presented the heresy’s gravity (Foreword); its underlying philosophy (Part I) and the bishops responsible for it (II); in Parts III, IV and V he comes to the heresy itself, which he analyses according to its seven Propositions. In Part III he presents the first two on their own because of their importance; in Part IV the first six in a little detail; in Part V the seventh Proposition, also on its own because of its overwhelming importance for Madiran. Part III, subject of this week’s “Comments,” sub-divides into six Chapters.

In Chapter One, Madiran declares that on the eve of Vatican II (1962–1965) the religious atmosphere was already pestilential in general, but the then Bishop of the city of Metz in Eastern France, Msgr. Schmitt, brought the whole vague pestilence into clear focus. Seven Propositions sum up what was in fact the new religion which he backed by all his episcopal authority. The first Proposition declares that today’s changing world imposes a change in the very concept of salvation brought by Jesus Christ. And the second declares that the Church’s idea of the plan of God was up till then not evangelical enough. In brief, (P1) the Church must promote “socialisation,” says the Bishop of Metz, because (P2) the old Church was not collective enough, but too merely personal in its practice of the Gospel. But what the Bishop is in fact promoting is Communism, says Madiran.

For indeed “socialisation,” argues Madiran in Chapter Two, rests upon a Marxist view of history, materialistic and determinist, which shows that the Bishop of Metz has lost the Christian faith, because how can the spiritual goals of Christianity coincide with the materialistic goals of Communism? Communism is a social system to be rejected for religious reasons, because as a social system it pretends to replace the Church’s social system and therewith Christianity.

In Chapter Three Madiran rejects Bishop Schmitt’s claim that men today best of all understand Gospel brotherhood (cf. Proposition II above). Such a down-grading of all the social works and achievements of the pre-Conciliar Church is ridiculous and for Catholics, says Madiran, it is an unseemly narcissism.

Thus by 1967, says Madiran in Chapter Four, it had become clear to the world that Bishop Schmitt was promoting no less than a new religion, or a heresy, vandalising centuries upon centuries of Catholic tradition. The French bishops are vandals without intelligence or character. Henceforth it is up to the laity to defend the Penny Catechism, in other words the very basics of the Faith!

In Chapter 5, against keeping up with the times (Prop. I), Madiran upholds the First Commandment, because it is the unchanging God and not the changing world that must hold first place in our hearts and minds. Nor will the times ever be with the Church, because the Church is with Jesus Christ. It is only worldly Catholics that the world admires. And against the Church not practising the Gospel enough (Prop. II), Madiran says that the Saints never invented anything in order to be “evangelical enough,” on the contrary they always strove to be as faithful as possible to tradition in order to put the Gospel into practice.

In conclusion, Chapter Six, Madiran denies that there is any truth to be salvaged from Propositions I and II, and he declares that Bishop Schmitt’s new religion wants the Church to gain the whole world by losing its own soul. The new religion has neither true authority nor true obedience, and Madiran has a prophetic vision of Catholic Tradition surviving Vatican II, because it makes free men kneel nobly before their God in accordance with a real authority and a real obedience. Such Catholics will never follow the false religion of poor bishops like the Bishop of Metz, just let him wait and see!

Kyrie eleison.

Madiran; the Bishops

Madiran; the Bishops on October 31, 2020

It will be recalled that in the Prologue of his book The Heresy of the 20th century Jean Madiran placed the blame for that heresy fairly and squarely on the Catholic bishops who led up to and followed straight after the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), notably on the bishops of France whom he best knew. Chapter I of his book showed, following St. Pius X’s great Encyclical Pascendi of 1907, how these bishops’ minds were rendered unfit for reality, let alone for Catholic doctrine, by the subjectivism of Kant’s philosophy, now reigning supreme in the philosophy departments of virtually all “universities.” In Chapter II Madiran tackles the French bishops themselves, in six loosely connected sections.

Firstly, he says that to follow these bishops we would have to throw away a veritable treasure trove of Catholic treasures, such as St. Pius X, Gregorian Chant, Thomism, Canon Law, Our Lady, patriotism, our Greco-Latin heritage, Marian piety and last but not least, the devotion of little old women praying. For our part, he says, we refuse to scorn any of these familiar features of the Catholic family. Behind all of them is the love of Christ, while behind all the talk of “recycling,” “renovations” and “renewal” is hate. And behind all achievements of “Western civilisation” is Christ, neither India nor Africa nor China.

Secondly, to all the world the Newchurch has proclaimed its apostasy: the Newbishops’ policy is no longer to convert anyone. Yet the basics of life and death remain exactly the same. Let the Church teach us how to live and die. We are all too full of the world. Let priests teach us how to get to Heaven!

Thirdly, these bishops say that “the change of civilisation” calls for “a more evangelical concept of salvation,” by which they mean not just “a new form of words,” which is what they say they mean, but a new content of the words, meaning a new religion. Your Excellences, our answer is “NO!” Moreover, as a baptised Catholic I am entitled to demand of you the true Faith, because your “new form of words” in pursuit of a new “concept of salvation” is bound to be heretical, not just clumsy, but a new religion, contradicting the true Faith.

Fourthly, up until 1966 these bishops had not yet defected from the Catholic Faith, but now they are claiming that theirs is at last the authentic Christianity, when in fact their “post-Conciliar mentality” is breaking with the true Faith. The truth is that we are in the middle of a war between two different religions. And actively or passively, all the bishops are supporting the new religion. Some Catholic bishop must speak up, because souls are perishing! Msgr. Lefebvre, are you listening?

We need no bishops to tell us to be modern. We are all too modern. But modern technology and modern philosophy are not the business of Catholic bishops! We know the moderns, and we scorn them. You do not know them and you love them. Marx, Nietzsche, Freud are mere fantasy-merchants. Wake up!

Fifthly, the Newchurch is now ruining all apprenticeship, teaching and education. By wanting to give to the youngsters only what is modern, which they already have, you give them nothing, while making them think they know everything. Thus abandoned, they will become tomorrow’s barbarians, so that you are betraying not only the Faith but all civilisation. Come back to Tradition! God, give us some true bishops!

Sixthly, the bishops’ authority is based only on truth, legitimacy and law. If these bishops were right, the Church of Tradition would no longer exist. But the Truth is primarily their business, so that they have no authority to change the Faith, and if they do so, they have no authority to be obeyed, nor will we leave them in peace. We expect from them the certainty, purity and sanctity of the unchanging Catholic Faith.

(In Section 4 above, Archbishop Lefebvre is not mentioned by name, but he was in Madiran’s mind. Two years later the Archbishop founded the Society of St Pius X, and the rest is history.)

Kyrie eleison.

Madiran’s Philosophy

Madiran's Philosophy on October 17, 2020

Like Pope Pius X in his great anti-modernist Encyclical of 1907, Pascendi, Jean Madiran in his book “The Heresy of the 20th Century” starts out from philosophy, because both of them see that the problem which makes it so difficult for modern minds really to grasp Catholicism is rather philosophical than theological. Thus the first of six Parts of Madiran’s book has for its title “Philosophical Preamble.”

Surprisingly, Madiran himself tells readers that they can skip the Preamble if they like, but that can only have been to spare many a modern reader who is rightly allergic to the delinquent nonsense which proceeds from the so-called “universities” of today. In fact, the argument of Madiran’s book is as dependent on true philosophy as it is independent of today’s “philosophistry,” or pseudo-philosophy.

But how and why can supernatural Faith be so dependent on philosophy, which is the rational study of all natural reality, the raising of (true) common sense, from an amateur to a professional level, so to speak? Answer, a good wine-maker does not depend on clean and uncracked glass bottles to make good wine, but he cannot run his wine business without such bottles, because if all the bottles are dirty inside, nobody is going to buy his wine, however good it is. The wine-maker presupposes that he will get automatically clean bottles. Compared with the wine, the glass bottle is worth next to nothing when it is empty of wine, but it is absolutely necessary without cracks or dirt for the wine-maker to contain his wine.

Now human reason is like the bottle. It is only a natural faculty but by the time it reaches death it is meant on pain of eternal condemnation to contain the supernatural wine of the Faith (Mk. XVI, 16). The Faith is a supreme gift of God by which a man’s reason is supernaturally elevated to believe , but if that faculty of reason is fouled up by human errors and misbeliefs, then like the dirty bottle it risks fouling up God’s wine of belief, however divine that belief is in itself. Now just a little dirt in the bottle will spoil the wine it contains, but modernism in the mind is such a radical error that it will spoil, or undermine, any Faith poured into that mind. And as wine poured into a dirty bottle cannot help being spoiled, so Catholic Faith poured into a modern mind can hardly help being undermined. So teach Pius X, de Corte, Calderón and Madiran, along with all others who have grasped the full objective malice of a modernist mind.

So how does Madiran in particular prove that the French bishops in the 1960’s were out of their Catholic minds? He starts out from an official declaration of theirs in December of 1966 (p. 40) where they affirm that “for a philosophical mind,” the words “person” and “nature,” crucial for Christology (Catholic theology of Christ) have changed their meaning since the time of Boethius (who hammered out the definition of “person”) and of Aquinas (who did similarly for “nature”). In other words, for the French bishops modern philosophy has left behind the Church’s classic philosophy embedded in unchanging Church doctrine, so that for them, thomism is obsolete “for a philosophical mind,” and to be discarded.

But in a Church whose doctrine always corresponded to what never changes in extra-mental reality, this perspective of the French bishops is absolutely revolutionary. It can only mean, says Madiran (43), that they are accepting the Copernican revolution in philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), who placed “reality”no longer outside but inside the mind. However (45, 46), there is no obligation, except in Kantian philosophy, to accept this internalising of reality. Only on its own premisses must one arrive at its unreal conclusions. By their moral choice of Kant over Aquinas, the French bishops were in fact demonstrating their implicit apostasy (50) and their anti-natural religion. They were declaring their independence from God’s Truth by their rejection of God’s reality, and of the Order which He implanted in Nature (60–63).

Madiran concludes his Part I by saying that whereas Thomism corresponds to the human experience of all times and all places (66), Kantism has cut the French bishops mentally adrift, like the modern age they so seek to please (67).

Kyrie eleison.