December 6, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
The October 6 "canonization" of Msgr. Escrivá de Balaguer, founder of the "Opus Dei", like the September "beatification" of Pope John XXIII, launcher of Vatican II, re-opens an old and hurtful wound - how can the Catholic Church do such things? And if it is not the Catholic Church that is doing them, what is it?
For indeed it is clear beyond any doubt that the Catholic Church prior to Vatican II, when she was still essentially faithful to Catholic Tradition, would never have beatified the Pope who initiated the Council which devastated that Tradition, nor canonized the founder of "Opus Dei", an organization preparing the way for that Council.
There is an abundance of quotes, proudly published by "Opus Dei" itself, to prove that Msgr. Escrivá shared and promoted key ideas of Vatican II. Here are two: Msgr. Escrivá himself said, "Ours is the first organization which, with the authorization of the Holy See, admits non-Catholics, Christian or non-Christian. I have always defended liberty of conscience" ("Conversaciones con Mons. Escrivá", ed. Rialp, p.296). And his successor at the head of "Opus Dei" said about Msgr. Escriva's book "Camino", "It prepared millions of people to get in tune with, and to accept in depth, some of the most revolutionary teachings which 30 years later would be solemnly promulgated by the Church at Vatican II" ("Estudios sobre 'Camino'", Msgr. Alvaro del Portillo, ed. Rialp, p.58).
Therefore, for Pope John XXIII to have been truly a Blessed, and for Msgr. Escrivá to have been truly a Saint, the Second Vatican Council would have to have been a true Council, or a Council true to Catholic Tradition. Which is ridiculous, as at least regular readers of this Letter know. Yet are not Catholic canonizations meant to be infallible?
Indeed before Vatican II, Catholic theologians agreed that canonizations (not beatifications) of Saints were virtually infallible, for two main reasons. Firstly, the proposing of model Catholics to be venerated and imitated as Saints is so central to Catholics' practice of their faith, that Mother Church could hardly be mistaken in the matter. This being so, secondly, the pre-Vatican II Popes took such care in examining candidates for canonization, and successful candidates they canonized with such solemnity, that their act of canonizing was as close as could be to a pronouncement of the Popes' solemn and infallible magisterium.
But since Vatican II, firstly the models chosen for imitation are liable, like John XXIII and Msgr. Escrivá, to be chosen for their alignment on Vatican II, i.e. on the destruction of Catholic Tradition, and secondly, the formerly strict process of examination of candidates has been so loosened under the Vatican II popes and there has followed such a flood of canonizations under John Paul II, that the whole process of canonizing has lost, together with its solemnity, any likelihood of infallibility. Indeed, how can John Paul II intend to do anything infallible, or therefore do it, when he often acts and talks, for instance about "living tradition", as though Truth can change?
So this or that Saint "canonized" by John Paul II may in fact be in Heaven, even Msgr. Escrivá, God knows, but it is certainly not his "canonization" by this Pope which can make us sure of the fact. Nor need we then feel obliged to venerate any of the post-Vatican II "Saints".
Which leaves us with the problem we began with: the Catholic Church has the divine promise of indefectibility, i.e. it cannot fail ("Behold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" - Mt. XXVII, 20). Then how can canonizations, which are meant through infallibility to partake in that indefectibility, fail, by partaking instead in Vatican II? Are we not obliged to admit either that Vatican II was not so bad after all (as the priests of Campos are now doing), or else that the sedevacantists are right after all in saying that John Paul II is not really pope? Sedevacantism would explain any amount of fallibility on his part!
The Society of St. Pius X, following Archbishop Lefebvre (1905-1991), adopts neither the Conciliar nor the sedevacantist solution. It believes that the Second Vatican Council was amongst the greatest disasters in the history of the Catholic Church, yet it considers that the popes who promoted that Council and its ideas (John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II) were or are true popes. How can that be? How can true popes so act as to destroy the true Church?
Firstly, God creates all of us human beings free, with free will, because He does not want robots in His Heaven. That applies also to the churchmen, to whom He chooses to entrust His Catholic Church. These have therefore an astonishing degree of freedom to build up or to destroy the Church. For instance, when Our Lord asks if he will find the Faith when he comes back on earth (Lk XVIII, 8), we know for certain that by men's (not only churchmen's) fault, the Catholic Church will be very small at the Second Coming.
However Our Lord also promised that the gates of Hell would never prevail against his Church (Mt. XVI, 18), and so we also know for certain that God will never allow the wickedness of men to go so far as to destroy His Church completely. In this certainty that the Church will never completely fail lies her indefectibility, and since the first function of the Church is to teach Our Lord's doctrine of salvation, then upon indefectibility in existing follows infallibility in teaching. For souls of good will, the Catholic Church and her Truth will always be there.
So the Catholic Church to the end of time will never cease, on however small a scale, to make heard amongst men the doctrine of salvation, the Deposit of the Faith. From eternity this doctrine proceeds from God the Father to God the Son, it was faithfully entrusted by the Incarnate God to His Apostles, and it has been handed down as unchanging Tradition through the successors of the Apostles ever since. "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away", says Our Lord (Lk. XXI, 33). In fact unchangingness is so essential to this doctrine, that conformity with Tradition is the criterion of the Church's infallible ordinary magisterium. In other words if one wants to know what cannot be false in the day-to-day teaching of the Church's teachers, the way to tell is to measure what is being said against what the Church has said down all the centuries. If it corresponds to Tradition, the teaching is infallible, and if it does not, it is not infallible. Moreover, the Church's infallible extraordinary magisterium is the servant of this ordinary magisterium, insofar as it provides a divinely protected guarantee that such and such a doctrine belongs within the Church's true doctrine, i.e. within ordinary Tradition.
Therefore Tradition, or conformity with what the Church has always taught, is the ultimate yardstick or measure of the Church's infallible teaching, ordinary or extraordinary. Therefore anything outside Tradition is fallible, and anything contradicting Tradition is certainly false, for instance the new Vatican II teaching on religious liberty and ecumenism. But John XXIII was beatified, and Msgr. Escrivá was "canonized", for their sympathy with these Conciliar novelties. Therefore such "canonizations" are certainly to some extent contrary to Catholic Tradition, and to that extent they are automatically not infallible, without my having to examine any further. "If an angel from Heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema" (Gal I, 8).
So if one asks how it can be God's own churchmen who do so much damage to His Church, the answer is that He gives them great freedom, short of letting them completely destroy His Church, and because out of any evil they do he will bring some greater good. For instance, out of dubious canonizations he can bring to "Traditional Catholics" a still better grasp of the primacy of Tradition.
And to the question how canonizations, meant to be infallible, can instead be Conciliar, the answer is that if God allows a pope to believe in Vatican II, He may surely also allow him to take action and to "canonize" in accordance with Vatican II, and to loosen the strict old rules of true canonization which virtually guaranteed the candidate's conformity with Tradition. If Catholics are misled who blindly follow Church authority when it goes astray, that is their own problem, but Catholics who follow Tradition will, on St. Paul's command, with prudence, "anathematize" any clear departure from it.
So we may absolutely refuse Vatican II and all its pomps and all its works and yet not have to become sedevacantists, so long as we understand that Church indefectibility does not mean that large parts of the Church will never be destroyed, only that the Church will never be completely destroyed. Similarly Church infallibility does not mean that the Church's teachers will never teach untruth by, for instance, dubious "canonizations", only that, amongst other truths, the truth of Christian sanctity will never be totally falsified or silenced.
In conclusion, these more or less Conciliar "canonizations" are correspondingly fallible, and are automatically not infallible. Obviously, Padre Pio was an entirely Traditional Saint, and we need not doubt the worthiness of his canonization. However, it might be advisable not to profit by his Newchurch "canonization" to venerate him officially or in public, insofar as that might be liable to give to other Newchurch "canonizations" a credit which is not due to them.
Dear readers, I must warmly thank all of you whose spiritual and material support has carried the seminary through a remarkably happy calendar year. All September's entrants are still with us, in fact two more have come! Very many thanks.
Let the men sign up for the five-day retreat here from December 26 to 31. And let me wish all of you a happy Christmas free of sentimentalism, but forgive me if I again invite you to send me no cards, because I am abroad until early January. Get sentimental about my poor desk!
With all good wishes and blessings, in Christ,
+ Richard Williamson
Showing posts with label 2002. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2002. Show all posts
Monday
Truth Prevails, Times Five
Novembers, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
St. Thomas Aquinas says that it is easier for God to create a new galaxy than to move a human being's free will. Since the Second Vatican Council in particular, churchmen have used their free will almost to destroy the Catholic Church. Surely God is now in the process of allowing souls of good will to learn the hard way that His Church cannot be destroyed. Let us give here a few indications of how the new Conciliar religion is slowly but surely grinding to a halt, while the true religion is slowly regaining strength.
Firstly, the Congress held in Paris one month ago by, mostly, Society of St. Pius X priests and laity, to study the religion coming out of the Second Vatican Council, was an undoubted success. Some 60 priests were in attendance, with some two dozen layfolk, and the large majority contributed a more or less important paper examining some aspect of Vatican II.
It is impossible to pull together in one brief summary the variety of contributions on such a huge subject as, in effect, the wrecking of God's Church by God's own churchmen. What was interesting was the remarkable unity of thinking about Vatican II amongst the variety of contributors. The Society's new French District Superior had been afraid before the Congress that his French priests might all start arguing with one another - where could he have come by such an idea? - but it was the opposite that happened. Everybody agreed that Vatican II was introducing a new humanistic religion, unacceptable to Catholics.
Of course, in a way it was not surprising that priests of that Society which was raised by God in the wake of Vatican II to defend the true Faith, should find themselves all in agreement as to the profound harmfulness of that Council. Nevertheless, the priests' interest and unity in dismantling the Council were reassuring. In particular, the SSPX faithful in France, like, I think, a number of yourselves, were glad to know that their priests were attacking Vatican II, and coming to no soft conclusions about it.
A second indicator of the weakness of the Conciliar churchmen is their on-going interest in talking with the Society of St. Pius X. For decades now they have been pretending that we are "divisive", "disobedient", "schismatic", and, since 1988, "excommunicated", so one would think that our goose had long been cooked, as the expression goes. However, it must be that the Romans still see the goose waddling around, because here is an instance of their coming back to the attack, but with "plausible deniability", i.e. by such channels as will enable them at any time to deny they ever did any such thing. Here is the approach: -
"A crisis is coming in the Church. Things cannot go on like they are now. We want to avoid another long freeze, or war for another 40 years. We want a solution within a very short time. The SSPX has also made its mistakes, but it is in the best situation it has ever been in (!). However, it needs to move a little, from Tradition to transition. Realism requires dialogue, dialogue requires that the two sides meet. Providence will help, if only they do so.
"Pope John Paul II wants a solution. He can make a deal with the SSPX, as his successor will not be able to do. Perhaps Cardinal Castrillon will be the next Pope, but if he becomes Pope he will no longer be able to make the same offer, of a deal which even Archbishop Lefebvre would not have refused.
"Cardinal Castrillon wants to do what is right. He has power, and he has access to Pope John Paul. He can get for the SSPX all it wants, but he cannot change the Newchurch overnight. Let the SSPX visit the new Traditional bishop in Campos, approved by Rome, Bishop Rifan, to see how Tradition can obtain anything it wants from Rome. The offer to the SSPX now is of unconditional approval within weeks".
Now Rome may absolutely - and plausibly - deny that it made any such approach to anyone in the SSPX. However, it seems to me also plausible that such a well-constructed approach is entirely what might have come from Rome. In which case I would reply for my own part to the eminent Cardinal that the one thing which the SSPX wishes for from Rome is the one thing which his channels took care to say he could not provide - an end to the Newchurch cuckoo's occupying the Catholic Church's nest.
Nevertheless, a third indicator suggests that there is perhaps - perhaps - more to this approach by Cardinal Castrillon than meets the eye. It is reported by a Dominican priest from Rome that around the end of last July and the first part of August, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared some dozen times to Pope John Paul II to warn him that the crisis in the Church is going to grow alarmingly worse. The Pope was hurt. She said nothing about events in the world. All prominent figures in the Curia and the Vatican know about these apparitions, but nobody is saying a word. Apparently the apparitions are a serious affair, and not to be shrugged off lightly.
Again, few things are made to seem so plausibly deniable as apparitions of the Blessed Mother of God, but again, an alarming intensification of the crisis in the Church is, in the present situation, all too likely. If then Cardinal Castrillon's apparent desire to re-open dialogue with the SSPX is at all motivated by any such warning from the Blessed Virgin, then we are no longer dealing merely with Roman politics, but we are hearing a stifled call for help.
To which the reply still remains that the SSPX cannot provide the solution by joining in the problem. If anybody thinks - correctly - that the SSPX has its hands on the solution, that is precisely because it has now for decades, without ceasing to belong to the Church, stood away from the Newchurch. As the Newchurch flounders and drowns in mid-stream of the modern world, the greatest service that the SSPX can render to the many victims which it is sweeping away to perdition is to run alongside them on the bank of Tradition, but in no way to jump off that bank into the perilous waters. With all due respect, Your Eminence, you need to move more than a little, from transition to Tradition.
A fourth indicator of the weakness of Conciliarism, or the danger of Vatican II, is the recently appeared book "Animus Delendi II", by Atila Sinke Guimarâes. This is the fifth volume in his eleven-volume series, "Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachtani", documenting the betrayal of the Catholic Faith by the thinkers, writers and leaders of Vatican II. The first and fourth volumes, "The Murky Waters of Vatican II" and "Animus Delendi I" are the only other volumes of the series so far to have appeared. If Mr. Guimarâes after Volume I jumped to Volumes IV and V, it is because he wished to denounce in public as soon as possible the desire to destroy ("animus delendi" in Latin) which truly animated the master spirits of the Council.
Volumes I and IV were briefly presented in this seminary Letter in July of last year. I would like to come back to Volume V in a future letter, because while charity "rejoiceth not in iniquity", it does "rejoice with the truth" (I Cor. XIII, 6), and Mr. Guimarâes has rendered great service to the truth by piling quotation upon quotation to prove how far from the truth Vatican II was pulled by minds seeking to be modern.
The fifth indicator is more positive, giving us the Catholic answer to the apostasy implicit in the ambiguities of Vatican II. It is the book "Marcel Lefebvre" written in a chaste and noble French by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, one of the Society's four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988.
Bishop Tissier was an intimate collaborator of the Archbishop from the beginning of the SSPX in the late 1960's through to the Archbishop's death in 1991. It might then be thought that Bishop Tissier was too close to the Archbishop to have been able to write an objective story of his life. However, this monumental book, fruit of ten years' hard labour, seems liable to remain the most complete biography of the Archbishop for some time to come. It certainly presents the Archbishop as I knew him, with those supreme qualities of godliness, selflessness and objectivity which enabled him to stand up to the raging subjectivism of the modernized churchmen. I will certainly return to this noble book, as soon as the English translation appears.
Dear readers, God's Truth will win. Let us only pray that as many free wills as possible allow it to win them over before they are lost for ever.
With all good wishes and blessings, in Christ,
+ Richard Williamson
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
St. Thomas Aquinas says that it is easier for God to create a new galaxy than to move a human being's free will. Since the Second Vatican Council in particular, churchmen have used their free will almost to destroy the Catholic Church. Surely God is now in the process of allowing souls of good will to learn the hard way that His Church cannot be destroyed. Let us give here a few indications of how the new Conciliar religion is slowly but surely grinding to a halt, while the true religion is slowly regaining strength.
Firstly, the Congress held in Paris one month ago by, mostly, Society of St. Pius X priests and laity, to study the religion coming out of the Second Vatican Council, was an undoubted success. Some 60 priests were in attendance, with some two dozen layfolk, and the large majority contributed a more or less important paper examining some aspect of Vatican II.
It is impossible to pull together in one brief summary the variety of contributions on such a huge subject as, in effect, the wrecking of God's Church by God's own churchmen. What was interesting was the remarkable unity of thinking about Vatican II amongst the variety of contributors. The Society's new French District Superior had been afraid before the Congress that his French priests might all start arguing with one another - where could he have come by such an idea? - but it was the opposite that happened. Everybody agreed that Vatican II was introducing a new humanistic religion, unacceptable to Catholics.
Of course, in a way it was not surprising that priests of that Society which was raised by God in the wake of Vatican II to defend the true Faith, should find themselves all in agreement as to the profound harmfulness of that Council. Nevertheless, the priests' interest and unity in dismantling the Council were reassuring. In particular, the SSPX faithful in France, like, I think, a number of yourselves, were glad to know that their priests were attacking Vatican II, and coming to no soft conclusions about it.
A second indicator of the weakness of the Conciliar churchmen is their on-going interest in talking with the Society of St. Pius X. For decades now they have been pretending that we are "divisive", "disobedient", "schismatic", and, since 1988, "excommunicated", so one would think that our goose had long been cooked, as the expression goes. However, it must be that the Romans still see the goose waddling around, because here is an instance of their coming back to the attack, but with "plausible deniability", i.e. by such channels as will enable them at any time to deny they ever did any such thing. Here is the approach: -
"A crisis is coming in the Church. Things cannot go on like they are now. We want to avoid another long freeze, or war for another 40 years. We want a solution within a very short time. The SSPX has also made its mistakes, but it is in the best situation it has ever been in (!). However, it needs to move a little, from Tradition to transition. Realism requires dialogue, dialogue requires that the two sides meet. Providence will help, if only they do so.
"Pope John Paul II wants a solution. He can make a deal with the SSPX, as his successor will not be able to do. Perhaps Cardinal Castrillon will be the next Pope, but if he becomes Pope he will no longer be able to make the same offer, of a deal which even Archbishop Lefebvre would not have refused.
"Cardinal Castrillon wants to do what is right. He has power, and he has access to Pope John Paul. He can get for the SSPX all it wants, but he cannot change the Newchurch overnight. Let the SSPX visit the new Traditional bishop in Campos, approved by Rome, Bishop Rifan, to see how Tradition can obtain anything it wants from Rome. The offer to the SSPX now is of unconditional approval within weeks".
Now Rome may absolutely - and plausibly - deny that it made any such approach to anyone in the SSPX. However, it seems to me also plausible that such a well-constructed approach is entirely what might have come from Rome. In which case I would reply for my own part to the eminent Cardinal that the one thing which the SSPX wishes for from Rome is the one thing which his channels took care to say he could not provide - an end to the Newchurch cuckoo's occupying the Catholic Church's nest.
Nevertheless, a third indicator suggests that there is perhaps - perhaps - more to this approach by Cardinal Castrillon than meets the eye. It is reported by a Dominican priest from Rome that around the end of last July and the first part of August, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared some dozen times to Pope John Paul II to warn him that the crisis in the Church is going to grow alarmingly worse. The Pope was hurt. She said nothing about events in the world. All prominent figures in the Curia and the Vatican know about these apparitions, but nobody is saying a word. Apparently the apparitions are a serious affair, and not to be shrugged off lightly.
Again, few things are made to seem so plausibly deniable as apparitions of the Blessed Mother of God, but again, an alarming intensification of the crisis in the Church is, in the present situation, all too likely. If then Cardinal Castrillon's apparent desire to re-open dialogue with the SSPX is at all motivated by any such warning from the Blessed Virgin, then we are no longer dealing merely with Roman politics, but we are hearing a stifled call for help.
To which the reply still remains that the SSPX cannot provide the solution by joining in the problem. If anybody thinks - correctly - that the SSPX has its hands on the solution, that is precisely because it has now for decades, without ceasing to belong to the Church, stood away from the Newchurch. As the Newchurch flounders and drowns in mid-stream of the modern world, the greatest service that the SSPX can render to the many victims which it is sweeping away to perdition is to run alongside them on the bank of Tradition, but in no way to jump off that bank into the perilous waters. With all due respect, Your Eminence, you need to move more than a little, from transition to Tradition.
A fourth indicator of the weakness of Conciliarism, or the danger of Vatican II, is the recently appeared book "Animus Delendi II", by Atila Sinke Guimarâes. This is the fifth volume in his eleven-volume series, "Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachtani", documenting the betrayal of the Catholic Faith by the thinkers, writers and leaders of Vatican II. The first and fourth volumes, "The Murky Waters of Vatican II" and "Animus Delendi I" are the only other volumes of the series so far to have appeared. If Mr. Guimarâes after Volume I jumped to Volumes IV and V, it is because he wished to denounce in public as soon as possible the desire to destroy ("animus delendi" in Latin) which truly animated the master spirits of the Council.
Volumes I and IV were briefly presented in this seminary Letter in July of last year. I would like to come back to Volume V in a future letter, because while charity "rejoiceth not in iniquity", it does "rejoice with the truth" (I Cor. XIII, 6), and Mr. Guimarâes has rendered great service to the truth by piling quotation upon quotation to prove how far from the truth Vatican II was pulled by minds seeking to be modern.
The fifth indicator is more positive, giving us the Catholic answer to the apostasy implicit in the ambiguities of Vatican II. It is the book "Marcel Lefebvre" written in a chaste and noble French by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, one of the Society's four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988.
Bishop Tissier was an intimate collaborator of the Archbishop from the beginning of the SSPX in the late 1960's through to the Archbishop's death in 1991. It might then be thought that Bishop Tissier was too close to the Archbishop to have been able to write an objective story of his life. However, this monumental book, fruit of ten years' hard labour, seems liable to remain the most complete biography of the Archbishop for some time to come. It certainly presents the Archbishop as I knew him, with those supreme qualities of godliness, selflessness and objectivity which enabled him to stand up to the raging subjectivism of the modernized churchmen. I will certainly return to this noble book, as soon as the English translation appears.
Dear readers, God's Truth will win. Let us only pray that as many free wills as possible allow it to win them over before they are lost for ever.
With all good wishes and blessings, in Christ,
+ Richard Williamson
A Congress on Vatican II
October 1, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
As the Society of St. Pius X strives not to lose its Catholic footing in its on-going diplomatic war-dance with the churchmen presently in Rome, it could be helped by a Congress taking place in Paris early this month to examine the documents and fruits of the Second Vatican Council (1962 to 1965).
The reason for the Congress taking place this autumn is that October 11, 2002, is the 40th anniversary of the solemn opening in St. Peter's Basilica of that Council, which was by any reckoning a momentous event in the history of the Catholic Church. And so a number of interested priests and layfolk, drawn mainly from within the ranks of the Society of St. Pius X and its followers, are meeting on October 4, 5 and 6, to take stock of 40 years of Vatican II.
That Council is intensely controversial. Some say it saved the Catholic Church, others say it is still devastating the Church, but there are three things that few Catholics deny: firstly, that Vatican II sought to bring the Church up-to-date with modern times; secondly, that that "modernization" has made today's mainstream Church almost unrecognizable from what the Catholic Church was prior to the Council; thirdly, that the highest churchmen now governing the Church in Rome, from the Pope downwards, still adamantly believe in that "modernization" wrought by Vatican II. In fact that Council so governs their thinking that if in any dealings with these Romans one wishes to know with whom one is dealing, that Council is the most important thing to know. That is why the Congress in Paris may, however humbly, help the Society to see how it needs to deal with the Romans, for as long as these are in the mental grip of Vatican II.
What, then, was the Council? It was the large-scale penetration within the Catholic Church - or churchmen - of the principles governing the modern world since, especially, the French Revolution of 1789. Both friend and foe of the Council (e.g. Cardinal Suenens and Archbishop Lefebvre) said that it was the Church's 1789. Now one may or may not like those principles, but they are what they are, and whether or not one likes them, they will have such and such effects: "liberty", "equality", "fraternity", "the rights of man", "pluralism", are amongst the main ones, and they are objective in their working.
Now from the moment these modern principles began to gain wide acceptance, let us say from the time of the French Revolution onwards, they were clearly, firmly and repeatedly denounced by the Catholic Popes and by the Catholic Church, up until Vatican II, as being principles of godlessness which would destroy the Church and civilization if they had their way. In other words, between the modern world, as such, and the one true God, there is an irreconcilable war.
Not so, said the friends of these principles. They said that the modern world is nice, that God is nice, and so since everybody is nice, there should be an end to the war. They said that the modern principles can and should be taken into the bosom of the Church which can purify them (so says Cardinal Ratzinger) and reconcile them with the still true (?) principles of the good old Catholicism.
And these friends of the modern world, under the decisive leadership of Popes John XXIII and Paul VI, prevailed at Vatican II over the rearguard enemies of those modern principles. Now this rearguard did put up a fight against the admission of the modern principles into the Church, so that the 16 final documents of Vatican II show both the ancient and the modern ideas alongside one another. In fact the ancient ideas are so well represented that even a conservative like Archbishop Lefebvre underwrote 14 (some say 16) of the 16 documents.
However, the modern principles were also there. They had at last gained admission within the Catholic Church, and in accordance with their objective nature, they began to do their work. Their most sensational success, affecting directly or indirectly every Catholic, was the replacement in 1969 of the Tridentine Mass by the Novus Ordo Mass. From that triumph of theirs onwards, they wrought one change after another within the Church to the point that, as said, anyone who knew the Church before the Council could hardly recognize it some time afterwards as being the same Church.
Now a large number of Catholics, layfolk, priests, bishops and cardinals, welcomed these changes. At last the Church was in step with the modern world all around us. That world is not bad, they say, so thank goodness the Church no longer requires us to fight it. Everything in the Church has been renewed, they say, and the signs of the renewal are all around us. For instance, when Italian journalist Vittorio Messori interviewed recently Pope John Paul II for one of his books, it appears that he tried repeatedly to get the Pope to admit that not all the fruits of the Council were good, but the Pope would not once admit it. As an SSPX colleague stationed in Italy says, this Pope has "a mystic belief" in the Second Vatican Council.
On the other hand enemies of modern principles, and therefore of the modern world as such, say that the "renewal" has devastated the Catholic Church and is still devastating what little remains of pre-Conciliar Catholicism.. That these modern principles would melt down the Church was as predictable as that heat will melt down ice, they say. Friends of modernity may claim that the modern world is changing, and that there is more and more heat, but therefore to pretend that if ice is put out into this heat, it will not melt, is ridiculous, because ice and heat have not changed their natures. Godless principles are bound by their nature to destroy the true Church of God, yesterday, today or tomorrow.
But the enemies of modernity go further. They will say that the Second Vatican Council, by conserving in its documents the ancient alongside the modern, and by thus seeming to preserve the good old Catholicism, did in fact no such thing. Just as the old elements of validity preserved in the Novus Ordo Mass helped the New Mass to be established by preventing a sane Catholic reaction of rejection of the New Mass, so the old elements of Catholicism preserved in the documents of Vatican II helped the new religion of secular humanism to be established within the Catholic Church by preventing what would otherwise have been a wholesale Catholic rejection of Vatican II and its modernized version of "Catholicism".
Therefore, say those who equate modernity with godlessness (and they have their arguments), the problem lies not in the after-Council (as many "conservatives" pretend) but in the Council itself. The problem is not that the documents have been misapplied following the Council, the problem is that the documents themselves are riddled with contradiction and ambiguity as they try to fit together heat and ice. Of course, then, both friend and foe of the old religion can appeal to the same documents. Of course, then, such documents were tailor-made to produce the civil war and havoc we have seen for 40 years within the Church.
In other words, say the enemies of modernity, whatever may have been the sincerity, good intentions, naivety, etc. , of the great majority of cardinals and bishops who at the Council voted for the 16 documents, the 40 years that have passed since the Council have shown by their fruits of devastation what the small minority of Council bishops said from the very beginning, namely that modernity as such is as objectively deadly for Catholicism as heat is for ice. Therefore the Catholic Church, to save souls, must throw out every single paragraph of Vatican II, and have no further truck with, nor mercy upon, the miserable principles of modernity.
Let us hope then that the Paris Congress will help firstly to distil out of the Conciliar fruits, but especially out of the documents, the powerful underlying error. Error, not errors, because a plurality of errors not united by some central idea could never have had the hurricane-force of destruction that Vatican II had upon the Church. If one were to claim that that central idea is the putting of man in the place of God, obviously one would not be pretending that that error of errors is stated in so many words in the Council documents - rather it appears there beneath the disguise of, for instance, the "dignity of the human person".
Secondly, may the Congress show with what skill - consciously or unconsciously - the modern errors are disguised beneath ancient appearances in the Conciliar documents, so that to this day a mass of sincere "conservatives" are still deceived. By insisting on giving to the documents their Catholic interpretation, such conservatives succeed in conserving only the Novus Ordo Church, which sweeps them aside! The Revolution eats her own children, says an old saying.
Thirdly, may the Society of St. Pius X be helped to see that while all due respect must be shown to the churchmen who occupy the seat of Moses (Mt. XXIII, 2), and while all allowance may be made for their subjective sincerity and even benevolence towards the Society, nevertheless for as long as they have not shaken off the bewitchment of the Council with its reconciling of irreconcilables, they must be treated like madmen, not clinical, but ideological madmen, whose minds are no longer working. And by what sign will we know that they have recovered their non-contradictory Catholic wits? Certainly not by their blanket approval of everything the SSPX zeroes do or say. Certainly by their unconditional approval of the ancient Faith which those zeroes attempt to defend by all they do and say!
Ring (203) 261-1133 for an April 28-May 8 Catholic pilgrimage through Holland, Belgium and France. Plan Christmas gifts from the enclosed CD and tapes flyer. Plan 5-day Ignatian Exercises for the following dates: men's: December 26-31 of this year, July 7-12 and 14-19 of next year. Women's, June 30-July 5 of next year. But, ladies, beware: from lack of space we must ask you to apply only if you have so far done no more than three Ignatian retreats at Winona. We beg your understanding that a priestly Seminary should work mainly with men, especially since theirs is the greater need.
All blessings. Let us pray there be no insane onslaught upon Iraq.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
As the Society of St. Pius X strives not to lose its Catholic footing in its on-going diplomatic war-dance with the churchmen presently in Rome, it could be helped by a Congress taking place in Paris early this month to examine the documents and fruits of the Second Vatican Council (1962 to 1965).
The reason for the Congress taking place this autumn is that October 11, 2002, is the 40th anniversary of the solemn opening in St. Peter's Basilica of that Council, which was by any reckoning a momentous event in the history of the Catholic Church. And so a number of interested priests and layfolk, drawn mainly from within the ranks of the Society of St. Pius X and its followers, are meeting on October 4, 5 and 6, to take stock of 40 years of Vatican II.
That Council is intensely controversial. Some say it saved the Catholic Church, others say it is still devastating the Church, but there are three things that few Catholics deny: firstly, that Vatican II sought to bring the Church up-to-date with modern times; secondly, that that "modernization" has made today's mainstream Church almost unrecognizable from what the Catholic Church was prior to the Council; thirdly, that the highest churchmen now governing the Church in Rome, from the Pope downwards, still adamantly believe in that "modernization" wrought by Vatican II. In fact that Council so governs their thinking that if in any dealings with these Romans one wishes to know with whom one is dealing, that Council is the most important thing to know. That is why the Congress in Paris may, however humbly, help the Society to see how it needs to deal with the Romans, for as long as these are in the mental grip of Vatican II.
What, then, was the Council? It was the large-scale penetration within the Catholic Church - or churchmen - of the principles governing the modern world since, especially, the French Revolution of 1789. Both friend and foe of the Council (e.g. Cardinal Suenens and Archbishop Lefebvre) said that it was the Church's 1789. Now one may or may not like those principles, but they are what they are, and whether or not one likes them, they will have such and such effects: "liberty", "equality", "fraternity", "the rights of man", "pluralism", are amongst the main ones, and they are objective in their working.
Now from the moment these modern principles began to gain wide acceptance, let us say from the time of the French Revolution onwards, they were clearly, firmly and repeatedly denounced by the Catholic Popes and by the Catholic Church, up until Vatican II, as being principles of godlessness which would destroy the Church and civilization if they had their way. In other words, between the modern world, as such, and the one true God, there is an irreconcilable war.
Not so, said the friends of these principles. They said that the modern world is nice, that God is nice, and so since everybody is nice, there should be an end to the war. They said that the modern principles can and should be taken into the bosom of the Church which can purify them (so says Cardinal Ratzinger) and reconcile them with the still true (?) principles of the good old Catholicism.
And these friends of the modern world, under the decisive leadership of Popes John XXIII and Paul VI, prevailed at Vatican II over the rearguard enemies of those modern principles. Now this rearguard did put up a fight against the admission of the modern principles into the Church, so that the 16 final documents of Vatican II show both the ancient and the modern ideas alongside one another. In fact the ancient ideas are so well represented that even a conservative like Archbishop Lefebvre underwrote 14 (some say 16) of the 16 documents.
However, the modern principles were also there. They had at last gained admission within the Catholic Church, and in accordance with their objective nature, they began to do their work. Their most sensational success, affecting directly or indirectly every Catholic, was the replacement in 1969 of the Tridentine Mass by the Novus Ordo Mass. From that triumph of theirs onwards, they wrought one change after another within the Church to the point that, as said, anyone who knew the Church before the Council could hardly recognize it some time afterwards as being the same Church.
Now a large number of Catholics, layfolk, priests, bishops and cardinals, welcomed these changes. At last the Church was in step with the modern world all around us. That world is not bad, they say, so thank goodness the Church no longer requires us to fight it. Everything in the Church has been renewed, they say, and the signs of the renewal are all around us. For instance, when Italian journalist Vittorio Messori interviewed recently Pope John Paul II for one of his books, it appears that he tried repeatedly to get the Pope to admit that not all the fruits of the Council were good, but the Pope would not once admit it. As an SSPX colleague stationed in Italy says, this Pope has "a mystic belief" in the Second Vatican Council.
On the other hand enemies of modern principles, and therefore of the modern world as such, say that the "renewal" has devastated the Catholic Church and is still devastating what little remains of pre-Conciliar Catholicism.. That these modern principles would melt down the Church was as predictable as that heat will melt down ice, they say. Friends of modernity may claim that the modern world is changing, and that there is more and more heat, but therefore to pretend that if ice is put out into this heat, it will not melt, is ridiculous, because ice and heat have not changed their natures. Godless principles are bound by their nature to destroy the true Church of God, yesterday, today or tomorrow.
But the enemies of modernity go further. They will say that the Second Vatican Council, by conserving in its documents the ancient alongside the modern, and by thus seeming to preserve the good old Catholicism, did in fact no such thing. Just as the old elements of validity preserved in the Novus Ordo Mass helped the New Mass to be established by preventing a sane Catholic reaction of rejection of the New Mass, so the old elements of Catholicism preserved in the documents of Vatican II helped the new religion of secular humanism to be established within the Catholic Church by preventing what would otherwise have been a wholesale Catholic rejection of Vatican II and its modernized version of "Catholicism".
Therefore, say those who equate modernity with godlessness (and they have their arguments), the problem lies not in the after-Council (as many "conservatives" pretend) but in the Council itself. The problem is not that the documents have been misapplied following the Council, the problem is that the documents themselves are riddled with contradiction and ambiguity as they try to fit together heat and ice. Of course, then, both friend and foe of the old religion can appeal to the same documents. Of course, then, such documents were tailor-made to produce the civil war and havoc we have seen for 40 years within the Church.
In other words, say the enemies of modernity, whatever may have been the sincerity, good intentions, naivety, etc. , of the great majority of cardinals and bishops who at the Council voted for the 16 documents, the 40 years that have passed since the Council have shown by their fruits of devastation what the small minority of Council bishops said from the very beginning, namely that modernity as such is as objectively deadly for Catholicism as heat is for ice. Therefore the Catholic Church, to save souls, must throw out every single paragraph of Vatican II, and have no further truck with, nor mercy upon, the miserable principles of modernity.
Let us hope then that the Paris Congress will help firstly to distil out of the Conciliar fruits, but especially out of the documents, the powerful underlying error. Error, not errors, because a plurality of errors not united by some central idea could never have had the hurricane-force of destruction that Vatican II had upon the Church. If one were to claim that that central idea is the putting of man in the place of God, obviously one would not be pretending that that error of errors is stated in so many words in the Council documents - rather it appears there beneath the disguise of, for instance, the "dignity of the human person".
Secondly, may the Congress show with what skill - consciously or unconsciously - the modern errors are disguised beneath ancient appearances in the Conciliar documents, so that to this day a mass of sincere "conservatives" are still deceived. By insisting on giving to the documents their Catholic interpretation, such conservatives succeed in conserving only the Novus Ordo Church, which sweeps them aside! The Revolution eats her own children, says an old saying.
Thirdly, may the Society of St. Pius X be helped to see that while all due respect must be shown to the churchmen who occupy the seat of Moses (Mt. XXIII, 2), and while all allowance may be made for their subjective sincerity and even benevolence towards the Society, nevertheless for as long as they have not shaken off the bewitchment of the Council with its reconciling of irreconcilables, they must be treated like madmen, not clinical, but ideological madmen, whose minds are no longer working. And by what sign will we know that they have recovered their non-contradictory Catholic wits? Certainly not by their blanket approval of everything the SSPX zeroes do or say. Certainly by their unconditional approval of the ancient Faith which those zeroes attempt to defend by all they do and say!
Ring (203) 261-1133 for an April 28-May 8 Catholic pilgrimage through Holland, Belgium and France. Plan Christmas gifts from the enclosed CD and tapes flyer. Plan 5-day Ignatian Exercises for the following dates: men's: December 26-31 of this year, July 7-12 and 14-19 of next year. Women's, June 30-July 5 of next year. But, ladies, beware: from lack of space we must ask you to apply only if you have so far done no more than three Ignatian retreats at Winona. We beg your understanding that a priestly Seminary should work mainly with men, especially since theirs is the greater need.
All blessings. Let us pray there be no insane onslaught upon Iraq.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
State of the Nations: Three Layers of Lies
September 1, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
All around us today, things are not what they seem. By a just punishment of God, the Devil is in virtual (only virtual) control of the world, and the Devil is the Father of Lies (Jn. VIII, 44). So in politics, in the arts, in the law, in education, in the media and - worst of all - in religion, we are today smothered in lies. For the sake of truth and for the sake of our temporal and eternal survival, we should attempt to discern what is, from what seems.
In the domain of economics, here in the USA, we are being told that the economic recession is only temporary, that the fundamentals are sound, that things will soon take an up-turn, that the good times will continue to roll. Holders of stocks and shares need only sit tight, and they will soon see Wall Street rising again. Here is a first major layer of lies. To establish what is true in economics, let us turn to two writers on matters financial who have their heads on straight, and then let us climb to the corresponding political and religious layers of lies.
FIRST LAYER: ECONOMICS
VIEW FROM USA
The first of these writers is James Cook, based in Minneapolis, MN, who lays out what he foresees for the American economy in his "Market Up-date" of last month, August 2002 (available through (800) 328-1860). With an old-fashioned common sense he explains in general economic terms why hard times must-normally-lie ahead:
"Booms are followed by busts . . . It's an economic premise generally accepted by every historical economist. The boom couldn't get started without artificially low interest rates, easy money and credit. A boom comes from businesses expanding in a way that wouldn't have happened if the market wasn't sending them false signals caused by rapidly expanding levels of money and credit. Low interest rates make it attractive to borrow excessively and to build up overcapacity. When this process ends and contraction begins, then comes a bust. The greater the boom, the greater the extent of the bust. We had (in the 1980's and 1990's) the greatest boom in decades. The bust will be a humdinger and, for a number of reasons, it could turn into a severe depression. In fact, I believe it will alter America like nothing since the Civil War.
". . . A runaway expansion of money and credit has ruined our economy. Savings are at the worst level ever. Profits and capital spending are in the tank. Deep-seated structural problems in the economy preclude better times. The loosest monetary policies in US history have failed to work. There are terrible days ahead. Consumer spending must collapse. The dollar's sure failure spells doom for stocks and bonds. Credit will seize up and paralyze the capital markets, followed by a raging epidemic of bankruptcies and a collapsing housing market. Governments across the nation will see bankruptcy and defaults on their bonds, which will turn this last bastion of security into financial quicksand. Then, in the depths of depression, inflation will rage . . . Blame will become the national pastime."
VIEW FROM SOUTH AFRICA
Possibly James Cook is taking too dark a view of the near future, but his general position is substantiated with many facts and statistics by our second writer, author of the lead article in the "Aida Parker Newsletter" of June, 2002. This newsletter comes out of Johannesburg, South Africa, and is available for US $80 a year from P.O. Box 91059, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa (telephone [27] (11) 726-6856). If I give these details, it is because in a world of lies, Aida Parker is a gallant teller of the truth, and her newsletter tells more truth about what is happening within the USA than the mass of the American media. I have shortened and edited the June lead article, "Armageddon Approaches," only very slightly. Any underlinings are my own:
"ARMAGEDDON"
"We saw it coming: but the US financial and corporate blow-out is now right on top of the bloodiest smash-up in history, far more damaging than anyone could have foreseen. And it becomes evermore critical: already in certain sectors worse than the Great Depression of fearsome memory. The facade of US financial impregnability built up over the past decade is kaput. Its much-delayed recession is here.
US STOCK MARKET
"Of most immediate danger is the staggering stock market debacle. That alone guarantees catastrophe. Total investor losses on the Wall Street meltdown now exceed $6 trillion, all of it from investors' pockets. This crash has destroyed up to half of people's life savings and scrambled the retirement nest eggs of more than 45.7 million "baby boomers" due to retire over the next five years. It has vaporized the prosperity, financial security and retirement dreams of millions.
"In sheer $ terms, the collapse since March, 2000, has brought the largest loss of wealth in the history of humanity, dwarfing the great 1929 stock market crash by a factor of 29 to 1. The resources, financial and otherwise, squandered in a vain attempt to keep the Dow between 10,000 and 11,000 "forever" don't bear thinking about.
"The Dow and the S&P are still both gross over-valued. Historically, investors invariably overreact to such a threat, driving stocks well below their historical valuations. Yet not in the US today. As the market moves into its third full year of stock losses, despite everything more than 50% of shareholders remain in it, ensnared by the despicable lies and manipulation of the US Government, Wall Street, Federal Reserve, all aided by the general media.
"The picture gets worse: much worse. With zero savings, householders hold $7.6 trillion in debt. Such debt is at its highest level in US history, with consumers holding $1 trillion in new home mortgages acquired in the last year. Personal bankruptcies last year were more than double those 1990/91. 2002 will be even worse.
THE DOLLAR
"The US Government insists that its "Strong $ Policy" remains intact. Unfortunately the $ does not remain intact. Today it crumbles before the eyes of the world. The $ as a currency is bankrupt. We all know that the US $ is dropping against all other currencies: in some cases, very hard. The US trade deficit is huge and growing.
"Morgan Stanley recently wrote that the trade deficit is now 4.3% of US trade. If the trade deficit of a developed nation reaches as high as 5% of GDP [Gross Domestic Product], there is usually a drop of 20% in that nation's currency within three years. Morgan Stanley projects that the US trade deficit could reach 6% by next year, which means a deficit of $2 billion a day. Net real investment in the US is now nil. Further, the US has been importing far more than it exports.
US CORPORATIONS
"Much of corporate America is in deep trouble. There have been five consecutive quarters of declining corporate profit. US companies now owe a record $4.7 trillion to banks, venture capitalists, bondholders, money funds and other institutions. The Fed says this debt is growing almost three times faster than GDP.
"In 2001, more than 40,000 businesses filed for bankruptcy. Estimates are that 652 big companies will have a tough job surviving another year. Xerox has $162 billion in debt, exponentially more than it has in assets. Nextel had $16.7 billion of debt, only $4.2 billion in cash reserves. Both could fall into bankruptcy. Del Monte, General Mill, Trump Hotels & Casinos, Ford, Kellogg, Campbell Soup, 7-Eleven, all are in trouble.
"Boeing's orders dropped 45% last year. Hotel chains are plagued with very high vacancy rates; steel makers have a ±50% in excess capacity, and the worst earnings in 40 years. The Ford Motor Co. is closing five plants in North America, and has chalked up 35,000 job cuts over the past year.
"Levi Strauss is closing another six plants in the US, laying off 3,600 workers. This means the company will have shut 29 plants in the US, while opening lower wage plants overseas. Sears is closing 89 stores; drugstore chain CVS is closing 200 pharmacies; Toys "R" Us, 64 stores. Heavy truck sales, a measure of US transportation, shipping of raw and finished goods, are down 25% over the past year, Mack trucks down 19.3%.
"Many of America's largest public companies are so weak that they could go bankrupt at any time. As company earnings decline, companies are cutting dividends, adding still further to investor woes. Martin Weiss of Safe Money Report, recently reported: "Corporate America is swamped with debt to the tune of 156% of GDP. That's more than 44% a year ago. It's also bigger than the debt load Japan faced before its stock market bubble burst back in 1990."
"As hundreds of thousands of homeowners are laid off, so the recent real estate bubble bursts. Sales of existing homes dropped 8.3% in March, and continued down in April and May. There's over-capacity and dwindling demand for new office space and shopping malls.
US BANKING
"All of the above is devastating news for the US banks, themselves their nation's curse. The US Government estimates that 9% of banks are "very vulnerable" to a real estate turndown, another 16% "somewhat vulnerable." In other words, on top of all else, it is a banking catastrophe. A reported 4,913 banks suffered an increase in bad loans in the first nine months of 2001.
"The final nail in the banks' coffin is derivatives: high-risk bets on stocks, bonds and foreign currencies that now stand at truly staggering levels. In 1998 US banks held about $27 trillion in derivative contracts. Today, according to the US General Accounting Office (GAO), US banks are exposed to more than $40.5 trillion in derivatives. All told, more than 400 commercial banks are in financial derivatives.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING
"Financially, the US Federal government stands with a deficit budget, with deficit spending blowing out while tax revenues fall. The US needs to import $1.6 billion of capital a day just to fill the deficit. That's no longer happening. Just as the fertilizer hits the fan, so the international community has decided to take its money away from the US.
"According to the US Treasury, foreigners sold a net $16.9 million of US securities in the first two months of this year. Japanese banks are already dumping the $447 billion in US stocks and bonds they hold.
FEDERAL RESERVE
"The raw economic facts are terrifying. The physical US economy is cluttered with massive over-investment, malinvestment and horrendous mismanagement, all of it held up by minuscule investment rates and- very fancy bookkeeping. The Fed lowered interest rates eight times before the Great Depression: without effect. Alan Greenspan has cut interest rates eleven times, till rates now are very near zero. Still with no effect.
"Dr. Kurt Richebacher, in his Richebacher Letter, writes: "While the Bank of Japan deliberately pricked its bubble in the late 1980's with tight money, the Fed has tried to sustain the US bubble with ultra-loose money policies. Such an effort has no precedent in history. Such madness was bound to fail. On the other hand, the unsustainable excesses are of such preposterous magnitude that in any case they would come too late to avoid disastrous consequences."
US PROSPECTS
"Summing up: What we are seeing is the troubled homecoming of ALL the US economic chickens. US financial powers are now embattled on all fronts. The US $, the US stock market, the entire US economy stand with their collective backs to the wall. Result? The US economy has entered a period of observable decline. And the real economic problems have not even begun to be tackled yet.
"Indeed, prospects are that the position will continue to get much worse, not better. In the face of worldwide economic recession; escalating geopolitical tensions, with Israel on the boil and Mr. Bush threatening war against Iraq's Saddam Hussein and the US market now in its 35th month of bear market decline, US recovery prospects appear nil.
"Former World Bank chief Economist and Nobel Prize winner, Joseph Stiglitz, is advising Asian economies to pool their vast foreign reserves as a step towards a reshaped monetary system that would be less of a tool for US interests, the IMF and other agencies . . .
"Many hearts elsewhere will probably not bleed too much for the US and its dire calamities. To quote Bill Buckler of The Privateer newsletter: "America has imposed a draconian clampdown on the freedom and liberties of its own citizens. It has dived headlong into deficits. It has lost control of government spending. It has antagonized its friends and allies with import tariffs, demands for military alliances and ultimatums that you are with us or against us. No neutrality is allowed."
Again, it is possible that the Aida Parker Newsletter is taking too dark a view of events, but it is not likely. Those are too many hard facts and statistics. The truth is that for some years now American "prosperity" has been upheld by smoke and mirrors, of which "fancy bookkeeping" (as the APN calls it) is merely one now notorious example. There is a whole house of cards to come crashing down, and the longer the crash is delayed, the harder the crash will be. The interesting thing is the deeper layers of lies in politics and religion which make such fantasy possible in economics.
SECOND LAYER: POLITICS
A FIRST LIE
The first political lie is that economics is independent of politics. It is true that there are laws of economics, like the law of supply and demand, which operate independently of the politicians, but how a nation will navigate in amongst those economic laws is still a political decision. For instance, in the 19th Century, selfish capitalists pretended to justify their selfishness by the inexorable working of economic laws, but all the time they were choosing which of those laws to set in motion, and how, so that labor would be cheap. President F.D. Roosevelt is famous for saying, "If something happens in politics, you can be sure it was planned that way," and that will include economic booms and busts.
A SECOND LIE
So the second political lie is that the present threat of a severe economic crash was not planned. The foolishness of a people (not only in the USA) believing in a free lunch, or loving a party and wanting the party to go on for ever, has been skillfully exploited to create either the threat or the reality (it little matters which) of a severe crash, to drive the nations into a Third World War. Well over a century ago Judeo-Masonry is known to have been envisaging three World Wars to achieve its unified global domination.
By lies, Judeo-Masonry brought about the first two World Wars. To get Americans to enter the First World War, President Woodrow Wilson told them that it would be the "war to end all wars." In fact, WWI established the Masonic League of Nations in Geneva and the Communist Revolution in Russia, and crushed numerous Christian monarchies, in particular the Catholic Austro-Hungarian Empire. And the Masonic Treaty of Versailles ending WWI deliberately paved the way for WWII, of which President F.D. Roosevelt promised it would "make the world safe for democracy." In fact, WWII established the Masonic United Nations, hugely promoted socialism in the USA and in the Western "democracies," and crushed the Eastern "democracies" under Communism.
WORLD WAR III
By lies, Judeo-Masonry is preparing for the Third World War. As the Depression of the 1930's necessitated WWII, triggered for the US by the supposed treachery of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, so we see all the conditions created for another much worse Depression in the US, with the supposed treachery of Arabs last year against the Twin Towers in New York already igniting American public opinion to go to war against Afghanistan and now Iraq. And as we now in 2002 know with certainty that our governments and media told us far from the complete truth in 1941 as to who was truly responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbor, so we will eventually know that those truly responsible for the attack on the Twin Towers were certainly not those primarily held up as being responsible by our governments and media.
And if some decent men in the US and Western governments wish to resist this insane drive towards World War III in the form of an overpowering drumbeat for an attack upon Iraq, then their hands will be forced by the economic crisis which will cause such troubles at home that they will be virtually forced to fight a war abroad. As Shakespeare's dying Henry IV said to the imminent Henry V (who successfully acted upon the advice): "Busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels."
A THIRD LIE
However, let none of us think that minds are giddy only under monarchies. Pearl Harbor and the Twin Towers are classic examples of how modern democracies must be led with lies, and we come to a third great political lie behind today's economic crisis, and that is the lie that only "democracy" is an acceptable form of government.
In either a monarchy or an aristocracy where there is an authority recognized above the people, the people could be told, with authority, "There is no such thing as a free lunch. The party is over. These and these are the measures which all of us must take to get over the crisis." As it is, if in Western democracies today a politician dares to breathe a word, for instance, against welfare or against the Jews, he knows he will be shouted down and voted out at the next election. In other words, the politicians are virtually controlled by public opinion, which is fabricated by the media, which are tightly controlled by a handful of Judeo-masons, the people who also control finance and the governments.
A FOURTH LIE
Therefore, a fourth great political lie making possible today's economic crisis is the lie that modern "democracies" are government of the people, by the people, for the people. The truth is that they are secret aristocracies, i.e. government by the few, and those few are hidden.
CATHOLIC TRUTH
What the Catholic Church teaches about democracy, aristocracy and monarchy (rule by all, by a few or by one) is that all three are acceptable and all three are corruptible. So God leaves any nation free to choose whichever of the three forms of government it prefers, so long as all authority is recognized to come from Him. In other words, contrary to what most people think today, the choice of democracy or aristocracy or monarchy matters much less than the godliness or godlessness of the people involved. A bad system with good people is much preferable to a good system with bad people.
THIRD LAYER: RELIGION
DEMOCRACY IDOLIZED
This priority of goodness over systems leads by itself to the third and by far the most important layer of lies: the religious lies which make possible the political and economic lies. For when all common sense says that the people of a nation cannot lead themselves, how can it be that the mass of people, as in the West today, hold the quasi-religious belief that only rule by the people, or "democracy", is acceptable? Democracy for the Catholic Church means not that the people rule themselves, but that the people choose the ruler upon whom authority to rule the people descends from God (see Leo XIII's "Diutumum Illud"). "Democracy" for the modern world means on the contrary the sovereignty of the people. Then how did the West come not only to believe in sovereignty of the people, but also to make out of it a quasi-religion, a worldwide crusade?
A RELIGIOUS PROBLEM
The answer lies in the last 500 years of the history of the West. Before the so-called Reformation, the Catholic Church possessed the total Truth with certainty, and taught it with a divine authority to all the nations. "Woe is unto me if I preach not the Gospel," says St. Paul (I Cor. IX, 16). Woe to the Catholic Church if it does not authoritatively teach God's truth to the nations! (Mt. XXVIII, 18)
But then came Protestantism which disputed that Truth and denied that authority, whereupon Truth at least appeared to be disputable and authority questionable. Then came the liberals - secretly led by the Freemasons - who said that since Truth is unknowable and there is no divine authority, then there only remains for the people to decide for themselves, i.e. sovereignty of the people. (And indeed if truth were unknowable and if no authority were more than human, then sovereignty of the people would be reasonable. But Catholic Truth is not made questionable merely because Protestants question it!)
It should now be clear why sovereignty of the people, like liberalism, has a quasi-religious status in so many minds today. Since Protestantism, to this day, replaces Catholicism wherever it can, it sets itself up as a replacement religion, and since liberalism unceasingly pretends to resolve all religious clashes, then it too presents itself as a substitute religion. That is why Freemasonry claims both that it is not a religion and that it is, because it is not a religion like Catholicism or (supposedly) Protestantism, but it claims to take the place of both of them, and of all other "religions," so that it serves an entirely religious function. That is why Masons and liberals push sovereignty of the people with a religious fervor. And all people who believe in no Truth or Authority are ready to follow them.
Thus the deep-seated problem of modern politics is religious, and it began with the apostasy of the West from the Catholic Church, from Our Divine Lord, and from God. That this God, His Son and His One True Church are in fact sovereign is the reason why - in reverse order of the political lies listed above - sovereignty of the people is necessarily a lie, "democracy" is not the only acceptable form of government, this economic crisis was planned to promote the interests of the enemies of God's sovereignty, and nations do not drifton self-moving economic currents but are either led towards God by His friends or are led away from Him by His enemies.
Thus as economics is directed by politics, so politics is directed by religion. So economics is directed by religion? Our Lord says so: "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and His justice, and all these things (food and clothing, etc.) will be added unto you" (Mt. V, 33). Food and clothing are, after all, the basics of economics.
BISHOPS' LIE
That economists, politicians, Freemasons and Jews should miss out on these truths is progressively graver, but when Catholic bishops miss out on them, we have a problem far graver still, because it is then the highest ministers of God, appointed by Him to guard the religious Truth, who are betraying it. Yet what do we hear of in the last few days? The American Conference of Bishops has issued a declaration of policy that no attempt should be made any longer to convert Jews to Catholicism, because they have a still valid Covenant of their own with Almighty God!
Poor dear American Jews! You may not think it, and you may hate me for saying so, but you are being horribly betrayed! The Old Covenant between the Israelites and God came to an end with the death of Our Lord upon the Cross. From that moment on, a soul can be saved only within the New Covenant, sealed by the Blood of Our Lord flowing from the Cross. Howsoever it be with your interests in this world, which are comparatively of no importance, the eternal salvation of your souls can be secured only by your becoming members of the one true Church. And if you wanted to martyr me or anyone else for saying so, I pray we would have the courage to give you that Catholic witness!
Dear Catholics, let us, as Our Lord commands us to do, love for their eternal salvation the agents of our poor world's corruption, which is our own fault. Wars come from our own evil desires, says St. James (IV, 1). Let us, as Our Lord commands us to do, respect the lawful authorities and governments over us, but not always believe them. Let us put no trust in the media. Let us get out of debt, as far and as soon as possible, or at least get into no new debt. Let us pray the Rosary, and let us put our trust in God and in His Blessed Mother alone.
He seems to be bringing to Winona this year some 18 new seminarians. Never despair. May He bless you.
Sincerely yours in His Divine Son,
+ Richard Williamson
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
All around us today, things are not what they seem. By a just punishment of God, the Devil is in virtual (only virtual) control of the world, and the Devil is the Father of Lies (Jn. VIII, 44). So in politics, in the arts, in the law, in education, in the media and - worst of all - in religion, we are today smothered in lies. For the sake of truth and for the sake of our temporal and eternal survival, we should attempt to discern what is, from what seems.
In the domain of economics, here in the USA, we are being told that the economic recession is only temporary, that the fundamentals are sound, that things will soon take an up-turn, that the good times will continue to roll. Holders of stocks and shares need only sit tight, and they will soon see Wall Street rising again. Here is a first major layer of lies. To establish what is true in economics, let us turn to two writers on matters financial who have their heads on straight, and then let us climb to the corresponding political and religious layers of lies.
FIRST LAYER: ECONOMICS
VIEW FROM USA
The first of these writers is James Cook, based in Minneapolis, MN, who lays out what he foresees for the American economy in his "Market Up-date" of last month, August 2002 (available through (800) 328-1860). With an old-fashioned common sense he explains in general economic terms why hard times must-normally-lie ahead:
"Booms are followed by busts . . . It's an economic premise generally accepted by every historical economist. The boom couldn't get started without artificially low interest rates, easy money and credit. A boom comes from businesses expanding in a way that wouldn't have happened if the market wasn't sending them false signals caused by rapidly expanding levels of money and credit. Low interest rates make it attractive to borrow excessively and to build up overcapacity. When this process ends and contraction begins, then comes a bust. The greater the boom, the greater the extent of the bust. We had (in the 1980's and 1990's) the greatest boom in decades. The bust will be a humdinger and, for a number of reasons, it could turn into a severe depression. In fact, I believe it will alter America like nothing since the Civil War.
". . . A runaway expansion of money and credit has ruined our economy. Savings are at the worst level ever. Profits and capital spending are in the tank. Deep-seated structural problems in the economy preclude better times. The loosest monetary policies in US history have failed to work. There are terrible days ahead. Consumer spending must collapse. The dollar's sure failure spells doom for stocks and bonds. Credit will seize up and paralyze the capital markets, followed by a raging epidemic of bankruptcies and a collapsing housing market. Governments across the nation will see bankruptcy and defaults on their bonds, which will turn this last bastion of security into financial quicksand. Then, in the depths of depression, inflation will rage . . . Blame will become the national pastime."
VIEW FROM SOUTH AFRICA
Possibly James Cook is taking too dark a view of the near future, but his general position is substantiated with many facts and statistics by our second writer, author of the lead article in the "Aida Parker Newsletter" of June, 2002. This newsletter comes out of Johannesburg, South Africa, and is available for US $80 a year from P.O. Box 91059, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa (telephone [27] (11) 726-6856). If I give these details, it is because in a world of lies, Aida Parker is a gallant teller of the truth, and her newsletter tells more truth about what is happening within the USA than the mass of the American media. I have shortened and edited the June lead article, "Armageddon Approaches," only very slightly. Any underlinings are my own:
"ARMAGEDDON"
"We saw it coming: but the US financial and corporate blow-out is now right on top of the bloodiest smash-up in history, far more damaging than anyone could have foreseen. And it becomes evermore critical: already in certain sectors worse than the Great Depression of fearsome memory. The facade of US financial impregnability built up over the past decade is kaput. Its much-delayed recession is here.
US STOCK MARKET
"Of most immediate danger is the staggering stock market debacle. That alone guarantees catastrophe. Total investor losses on the Wall Street meltdown now exceed $6 trillion, all of it from investors' pockets. This crash has destroyed up to half of people's life savings and scrambled the retirement nest eggs of more than 45.7 million "baby boomers" due to retire over the next five years. It has vaporized the prosperity, financial security and retirement dreams of millions.
"In sheer $ terms, the collapse since March, 2000, has brought the largest loss of wealth in the history of humanity, dwarfing the great 1929 stock market crash by a factor of 29 to 1. The resources, financial and otherwise, squandered in a vain attempt to keep the Dow between 10,000 and 11,000 "forever" don't bear thinking about.
"The Dow and the S&P are still both gross over-valued. Historically, investors invariably overreact to such a threat, driving stocks well below their historical valuations. Yet not in the US today. As the market moves into its third full year of stock losses, despite everything more than 50% of shareholders remain in it, ensnared by the despicable lies and manipulation of the US Government, Wall Street, Federal Reserve, all aided by the general media.
"The picture gets worse: much worse. With zero savings, householders hold $7.6 trillion in debt. Such debt is at its highest level in US history, with consumers holding $1 trillion in new home mortgages acquired in the last year. Personal bankruptcies last year were more than double those 1990/91. 2002 will be even worse.
THE DOLLAR
"The US Government insists that its "Strong $ Policy" remains intact. Unfortunately the $ does not remain intact. Today it crumbles before the eyes of the world. The $ as a currency is bankrupt. We all know that the US $ is dropping against all other currencies: in some cases, very hard. The US trade deficit is huge and growing.
"Morgan Stanley recently wrote that the trade deficit is now 4.3% of US trade. If the trade deficit of a developed nation reaches as high as 5% of GDP [Gross Domestic Product], there is usually a drop of 20% in that nation's currency within three years. Morgan Stanley projects that the US trade deficit could reach 6% by next year, which means a deficit of $2 billion a day. Net real investment in the US is now nil. Further, the US has been importing far more than it exports.
US CORPORATIONS
"Much of corporate America is in deep trouble. There have been five consecutive quarters of declining corporate profit. US companies now owe a record $4.7 trillion to banks, venture capitalists, bondholders, money funds and other institutions. The Fed says this debt is growing almost three times faster than GDP.
"In 2001, more than 40,000 businesses filed for bankruptcy. Estimates are that 652 big companies will have a tough job surviving another year. Xerox has $162 billion in debt, exponentially more than it has in assets. Nextel had $16.7 billion of debt, only $4.2 billion in cash reserves. Both could fall into bankruptcy. Del Monte, General Mill, Trump Hotels & Casinos, Ford, Kellogg, Campbell Soup, 7-Eleven, all are in trouble.
"Boeing's orders dropped 45% last year. Hotel chains are plagued with very high vacancy rates; steel makers have a ±50% in excess capacity, and the worst earnings in 40 years. The Ford Motor Co. is closing five plants in North America, and has chalked up 35,000 job cuts over the past year.
"Levi Strauss is closing another six plants in the US, laying off 3,600 workers. This means the company will have shut 29 plants in the US, while opening lower wage plants overseas. Sears is closing 89 stores; drugstore chain CVS is closing 200 pharmacies; Toys "R" Us, 64 stores. Heavy truck sales, a measure of US transportation, shipping of raw and finished goods, are down 25% over the past year, Mack trucks down 19.3%.
"Many of America's largest public companies are so weak that they could go bankrupt at any time. As company earnings decline, companies are cutting dividends, adding still further to investor woes. Martin Weiss of Safe Money Report, recently reported: "Corporate America is swamped with debt to the tune of 156% of GDP. That's more than 44% a year ago. It's also bigger than the debt load Japan faced before its stock market bubble burst back in 1990."
"As hundreds of thousands of homeowners are laid off, so the recent real estate bubble bursts. Sales of existing homes dropped 8.3% in March, and continued down in April and May. There's over-capacity and dwindling demand for new office space and shopping malls.
US BANKING
"All of the above is devastating news for the US banks, themselves their nation's curse. The US Government estimates that 9% of banks are "very vulnerable" to a real estate turndown, another 16% "somewhat vulnerable." In other words, on top of all else, it is a banking catastrophe. A reported 4,913 banks suffered an increase in bad loans in the first nine months of 2001.
"The final nail in the banks' coffin is derivatives: high-risk bets on stocks, bonds and foreign currencies that now stand at truly staggering levels. In 1998 US banks held about $27 trillion in derivative contracts. Today, according to the US General Accounting Office (GAO), US banks are exposed to more than $40.5 trillion in derivatives. All told, more than 400 commercial banks are in financial derivatives.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING
"Financially, the US Federal government stands with a deficit budget, with deficit spending blowing out while tax revenues fall. The US needs to import $1.6 billion of capital a day just to fill the deficit. That's no longer happening. Just as the fertilizer hits the fan, so the international community has decided to take its money away from the US.
"According to the US Treasury, foreigners sold a net $16.9 million of US securities in the first two months of this year. Japanese banks are already dumping the $447 billion in US stocks and bonds they hold.
FEDERAL RESERVE
"The raw economic facts are terrifying. The physical US economy is cluttered with massive over-investment, malinvestment and horrendous mismanagement, all of it held up by minuscule investment rates and- very fancy bookkeeping. The Fed lowered interest rates eight times before the Great Depression: without effect. Alan Greenspan has cut interest rates eleven times, till rates now are very near zero. Still with no effect.
"Dr. Kurt Richebacher, in his Richebacher Letter, writes: "While the Bank of Japan deliberately pricked its bubble in the late 1980's with tight money, the Fed has tried to sustain the US bubble with ultra-loose money policies. Such an effort has no precedent in history. Such madness was bound to fail. On the other hand, the unsustainable excesses are of such preposterous magnitude that in any case they would come too late to avoid disastrous consequences."
US PROSPECTS
"Summing up: What we are seeing is the troubled homecoming of ALL the US economic chickens. US financial powers are now embattled on all fronts. The US $, the US stock market, the entire US economy stand with their collective backs to the wall. Result? The US economy has entered a period of observable decline. And the real economic problems have not even begun to be tackled yet.
"Indeed, prospects are that the position will continue to get much worse, not better. In the face of worldwide economic recession; escalating geopolitical tensions, with Israel on the boil and Mr. Bush threatening war against Iraq's Saddam Hussein and the US market now in its 35th month of bear market decline, US recovery prospects appear nil.
"Former World Bank chief Economist and Nobel Prize winner, Joseph Stiglitz, is advising Asian economies to pool their vast foreign reserves as a step towards a reshaped monetary system that would be less of a tool for US interests, the IMF and other agencies . . .
"Many hearts elsewhere will probably not bleed too much for the US and its dire calamities. To quote Bill Buckler of The Privateer newsletter: "America has imposed a draconian clampdown on the freedom and liberties of its own citizens. It has dived headlong into deficits. It has lost control of government spending. It has antagonized its friends and allies with import tariffs, demands for military alliances and ultimatums that you are with us or against us. No neutrality is allowed."
Again, it is possible that the Aida Parker Newsletter is taking too dark a view of events, but it is not likely. Those are too many hard facts and statistics. The truth is that for some years now American "prosperity" has been upheld by smoke and mirrors, of which "fancy bookkeeping" (as the APN calls it) is merely one now notorious example. There is a whole house of cards to come crashing down, and the longer the crash is delayed, the harder the crash will be. The interesting thing is the deeper layers of lies in politics and religion which make such fantasy possible in economics.
SECOND LAYER: POLITICS
A FIRST LIE
The first political lie is that economics is independent of politics. It is true that there are laws of economics, like the law of supply and demand, which operate independently of the politicians, but how a nation will navigate in amongst those economic laws is still a political decision. For instance, in the 19th Century, selfish capitalists pretended to justify their selfishness by the inexorable working of economic laws, but all the time they were choosing which of those laws to set in motion, and how, so that labor would be cheap. President F.D. Roosevelt is famous for saying, "If something happens in politics, you can be sure it was planned that way," and that will include economic booms and busts.
A SECOND LIE
So the second political lie is that the present threat of a severe economic crash was not planned. The foolishness of a people (not only in the USA) believing in a free lunch, or loving a party and wanting the party to go on for ever, has been skillfully exploited to create either the threat or the reality (it little matters which) of a severe crash, to drive the nations into a Third World War. Well over a century ago Judeo-Masonry is known to have been envisaging three World Wars to achieve its unified global domination.
By lies, Judeo-Masonry brought about the first two World Wars. To get Americans to enter the First World War, President Woodrow Wilson told them that it would be the "war to end all wars." In fact, WWI established the Masonic League of Nations in Geneva and the Communist Revolution in Russia, and crushed numerous Christian monarchies, in particular the Catholic Austro-Hungarian Empire. And the Masonic Treaty of Versailles ending WWI deliberately paved the way for WWII, of which President F.D. Roosevelt promised it would "make the world safe for democracy." In fact, WWII established the Masonic United Nations, hugely promoted socialism in the USA and in the Western "democracies," and crushed the Eastern "democracies" under Communism.
WORLD WAR III
By lies, Judeo-Masonry is preparing for the Third World War. As the Depression of the 1930's necessitated WWII, triggered for the US by the supposed treachery of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, so we see all the conditions created for another much worse Depression in the US, with the supposed treachery of Arabs last year against the Twin Towers in New York already igniting American public opinion to go to war against Afghanistan and now Iraq. And as we now in 2002 know with certainty that our governments and media told us far from the complete truth in 1941 as to who was truly responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbor, so we will eventually know that those truly responsible for the attack on the Twin Towers were certainly not those primarily held up as being responsible by our governments and media.
And if some decent men in the US and Western governments wish to resist this insane drive towards World War III in the form of an overpowering drumbeat for an attack upon Iraq, then their hands will be forced by the economic crisis which will cause such troubles at home that they will be virtually forced to fight a war abroad. As Shakespeare's dying Henry IV said to the imminent Henry V (who successfully acted upon the advice): "Busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels."
A THIRD LIE
However, let none of us think that minds are giddy only under monarchies. Pearl Harbor and the Twin Towers are classic examples of how modern democracies must be led with lies, and we come to a third great political lie behind today's economic crisis, and that is the lie that only "democracy" is an acceptable form of government.
In either a monarchy or an aristocracy where there is an authority recognized above the people, the people could be told, with authority, "There is no such thing as a free lunch. The party is over. These and these are the measures which all of us must take to get over the crisis." As it is, if in Western democracies today a politician dares to breathe a word, for instance, against welfare or against the Jews, he knows he will be shouted down and voted out at the next election. In other words, the politicians are virtually controlled by public opinion, which is fabricated by the media, which are tightly controlled by a handful of Judeo-masons, the people who also control finance and the governments.
A FOURTH LIE
Therefore, a fourth great political lie making possible today's economic crisis is the lie that modern "democracies" are government of the people, by the people, for the people. The truth is that they are secret aristocracies, i.e. government by the few, and those few are hidden.
CATHOLIC TRUTH
What the Catholic Church teaches about democracy, aristocracy and monarchy (rule by all, by a few or by one) is that all three are acceptable and all three are corruptible. So God leaves any nation free to choose whichever of the three forms of government it prefers, so long as all authority is recognized to come from Him. In other words, contrary to what most people think today, the choice of democracy or aristocracy or monarchy matters much less than the godliness or godlessness of the people involved. A bad system with good people is much preferable to a good system with bad people.
THIRD LAYER: RELIGION
DEMOCRACY IDOLIZED
This priority of goodness over systems leads by itself to the third and by far the most important layer of lies: the religious lies which make possible the political and economic lies. For when all common sense says that the people of a nation cannot lead themselves, how can it be that the mass of people, as in the West today, hold the quasi-religious belief that only rule by the people, or "democracy", is acceptable? Democracy for the Catholic Church means not that the people rule themselves, but that the people choose the ruler upon whom authority to rule the people descends from God (see Leo XIII's "Diutumum Illud"). "Democracy" for the modern world means on the contrary the sovereignty of the people. Then how did the West come not only to believe in sovereignty of the people, but also to make out of it a quasi-religion, a worldwide crusade?
A RELIGIOUS PROBLEM
The answer lies in the last 500 years of the history of the West. Before the so-called Reformation, the Catholic Church possessed the total Truth with certainty, and taught it with a divine authority to all the nations. "Woe is unto me if I preach not the Gospel," says St. Paul (I Cor. IX, 16). Woe to the Catholic Church if it does not authoritatively teach God's truth to the nations! (Mt. XXVIII, 18)
But then came Protestantism which disputed that Truth and denied that authority, whereupon Truth at least appeared to be disputable and authority questionable. Then came the liberals - secretly led by the Freemasons - who said that since Truth is unknowable and there is no divine authority, then there only remains for the people to decide for themselves, i.e. sovereignty of the people. (And indeed if truth were unknowable and if no authority were more than human, then sovereignty of the people would be reasonable. But Catholic Truth is not made questionable merely because Protestants question it!)
It should now be clear why sovereignty of the people, like liberalism, has a quasi-religious status in so many minds today. Since Protestantism, to this day, replaces Catholicism wherever it can, it sets itself up as a replacement religion, and since liberalism unceasingly pretends to resolve all religious clashes, then it too presents itself as a substitute religion. That is why Freemasonry claims both that it is not a religion and that it is, because it is not a religion like Catholicism or (supposedly) Protestantism, but it claims to take the place of both of them, and of all other "religions," so that it serves an entirely religious function. That is why Masons and liberals push sovereignty of the people with a religious fervor. And all people who believe in no Truth or Authority are ready to follow them.
Thus the deep-seated problem of modern politics is religious, and it began with the apostasy of the West from the Catholic Church, from Our Divine Lord, and from God. That this God, His Son and His One True Church are in fact sovereign is the reason why - in reverse order of the political lies listed above - sovereignty of the people is necessarily a lie, "democracy" is not the only acceptable form of government, this economic crisis was planned to promote the interests of the enemies of God's sovereignty, and nations do not drifton self-moving economic currents but are either led towards God by His friends or are led away from Him by His enemies.
Thus as economics is directed by politics, so politics is directed by religion. So economics is directed by religion? Our Lord says so: "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and His justice, and all these things (food and clothing, etc.) will be added unto you" (Mt. V, 33). Food and clothing are, after all, the basics of economics.
BISHOPS' LIE
That economists, politicians, Freemasons and Jews should miss out on these truths is progressively graver, but when Catholic bishops miss out on them, we have a problem far graver still, because it is then the highest ministers of God, appointed by Him to guard the religious Truth, who are betraying it. Yet what do we hear of in the last few days? The American Conference of Bishops has issued a declaration of policy that no attempt should be made any longer to convert Jews to Catholicism, because they have a still valid Covenant of their own with Almighty God!
Poor dear American Jews! You may not think it, and you may hate me for saying so, but you are being horribly betrayed! The Old Covenant between the Israelites and God came to an end with the death of Our Lord upon the Cross. From that moment on, a soul can be saved only within the New Covenant, sealed by the Blood of Our Lord flowing from the Cross. Howsoever it be with your interests in this world, which are comparatively of no importance, the eternal salvation of your souls can be secured only by your becoming members of the one true Church. And if you wanted to martyr me or anyone else for saying so, I pray we would have the courage to give you that Catholic witness!
Dear Catholics, let us, as Our Lord commands us to do, love for their eternal salvation the agents of our poor world's corruption, which is our own fault. Wars come from our own evil desires, says St. James (IV, 1). Let us, as Our Lord commands us to do, respect the lawful authorities and governments over us, but not always believe them. Let us put no trust in the media. Let us get out of debt, as far and as soon as possible, or at least get into no new debt. Let us pray the Rosary, and let us put our trust in God and in His Blessed Mother alone.
He seems to be bringing to Winona this year some 18 new seminarians. Never despair. May He bless you.
Sincerely yours in His Divine Son,
+ Richard Williamson
SSPX in Distant Lands
August 1, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
Say what one will about monster machines, there is no denying that today's gigantic aeroplanes make possible, as I can remember Archbishop Lefebvre once remarking, long and accurate apostolic journeys. Between the end of June and mid July they enabled me for the third time to travel around the world for the Society of St. Pius X.
First stop was for the priestly ordinations at the end of the school year in the Society's main seminary in Ecône, Switzerland, where 15 new priests were ordained, mostly French, for postings all over the world. Since the first major ordination of priests by Archbishop Lefebvre for the Society in June of 1976, this made the 27th ordination in 27 years in the tent erected each year in the meadow beneath the seminary. For a canvas cathedral, that is a remarkable stability and source of strength for the Faith!
The event being now annual routine, the crowd attending the ordinations in Ecône was less than double the crowd attending ordinations in Winona five days beforehand, but in Ecône no fewer than 159 priests helped Bishop Tissier to lay hands on the ordinands. Of the many priestly friends I can remember that used to come from outside the Society to lay on hands in the early days, few are still living. To replace them, each year now more and more of the Society's own priests come to the ordinations for this purpose, and it is interesting to watch these men swiftly growing older, or maturing, under the steady pressure of the priesthood. With each year that passes, the Society's priests become less and less a mere collection of youngsters, as one can have thought of them a little while back. They are becoming with God's grace a formidable phalanx in defence of the Faith. Pray we never betray!
Second stop was Holland, to provide a Sunday Mass and two Confirmations in the Society's one and only floating chapel, which is in The Hague. Property is so expensive in this city of Europe's International Court that years ago Fr. De Merode (now based in St. Louis, serving Cincinnati) purchased a retired barge moored by the side of one of Holland's multiple canals. Here he established an attractive and perfectly workable chapel. It may be faintly disconcerting for the preacher to watch the chandeliers gently swinging over the congregation's heads during Mass, but after all Our Lord Himself used a boat for a pulpit (Lk. V, 3)!
Holland is very liberal, and it is a difficult country for Catholic Tradition today (see Verbum # 77). But the Society priest who looks after The Hague, Fr. Robert Schmitt from neighbouring Germany, is a happy young man nevertheless. To celebrate the tenth anniversary of his priesthood, amongst other things we visited an exhibition in Amsterdam's renowned Rijksmuseum of a 17th century Dutch artist from Holland's golden age, Aelbert Cuyp. What a contrast between his Holland of sailing ships in golden sunsets, and today's Holland of six lane freeways! Yet even from the freeway one recognizes by moments Cuyp's landscape, and, truth to tell, even Cuyp could idealize with his paint brush what he saw with his eyes. Is the camera then more truthful than the artist? Not necessarily...
Another aerial monster lifted me for the third stop to Malaysia, former British Malaya, where I had never been before, and where I wanted to visit in particular a historic town of lesser importance today, but made famous amongst Catholics for having been made by St. Francis Xavier the base of his Far Eastern missionary journeys in the mid 1500's, Malacca. Today's important city of Malaysia where the aerial monsters land is Kuala Lumpur, modernized capital of one of those nations known as the "Asian tigers" for their recent material prosperity. One may wonder for how much longer the United States' huge imports from Asia will continue to found this prosperity, but in the meantime Kuala Lumpur boasts a pair of towers taller than the Twin Towers that were dynamited in New York.
Malaysia is not a Catholic country, and never has been, yet still Catholic Tradition has a footing there. The co-ordinator and his family are English speakers of Chinese extraction. With Fr. Daniel Couture, Asian District Superior from French Canada, they showed me the Society's handsome chapel hewn out of a commercial building, with delightful stained glass windows of Asian colouring painted by the co-ordinator. Some 30 souls attend Mass celebrated twice a month by a Society priest coming up by bus from Singapore. A rest, three Confirmations, and then the visit to Malacca, two hours south by car on a splendid freeway.
Malacca, strategically located on a Strait shielded by the Island of Sumatra opposite, mid-way between the East (India) and the Far East (China and Japan), achieved prominence as a major center of shipping and commerce well before it was conquered in the early 16'" century by the Portuguese to act as a major base for their own running of the lucrative spice trade. To establish their rule of Malacca, the Portuguese (1511 to 1641) built a stone fortress around the hill dominating the port, which the Dutch (1641 1795) strengthened, and the British (1795 1957) destroyed, except for one gateway, now a delight of tourists. How empires come and go! Presently, the "Asian tigers" are part of the American Empire's comings and Boeings, but these two will one day be gone with the wind ....
St. Francis Xavier's five stays in Malacca belong to the time of the Portuguese. Readers of his life will remember how he attempted to convert those he found there, so that their bad example would cease to alienate from the Faith so many "natives", a word politically incorrect but saying what it needs to say. One ponders on the ways of Providence: why did God send a Xavier to the pagan East and Far East in the 16th century, and not before? And why is Asia not now converted? Men are to blame. Today, the museums in Malacca reflect a scorn for the Europeans who once brought the Catholic Faith. Alas, if in the streets of Malacca one sees someone sloppily dressed and lacking all dignity, sure enough, it will be a Westerner. If I was today an Easterner, I would despise these moneyed tramps and their past colonialism and their supposed Faith. How we need an army of Xaviers, if souls are to be saved!
Little trace remains of Xavier in today's Malacca. There is a statue of him outside the walls of St. Paul's Church still standing atop the fortified hill, where Xavier would stay on his visits, and there is the vault beneath ground within the church where his body rested for a few month's between Shangchuan Island off China, where Xavier died his mysteriously cold and lonely death in 1552, and Goa, the then Portuguese enclave in India where it rests to this day. But Xavier would never have cared for physical monuments. His true monument is the implanting of the Faith all over the East and Far East, and hundreds of thousands of souls safely garnered for Heaven then and since. And his dazzling example! St. Francis Xavier, pray that Westerners come to their Catholic senses! Pray that your Company of Jesus become once more Jesuit conquerors of the world for Heaven and God!
Fourth stop was Australia, actually the main destination of the entire journey, for the purpose of ordaining at home amongst his own large family Winona's Australian seminarian for the last three years, Rev. Mr. Brendan now Father Brendan Arthur. For pictures from his ordination and first Mass in Melbourne, see the enclosed "Verbum".
In Melbourne the question of the camera came up again when Fr. Kevin Robinson (known to many of you) took two of us to see a film which he highly recommended on the ministry and death among Hawaii's lepers in the mid 19th century of Fr. Damien. Indeed the film was well done as films go, especially on a Catholic subject, but still it left one with a dissatisfaction. Why? Surely because just as the cinema has such power to make the unreal seem real, so it is bound to make the real seem unreal, including Fr. Damien. Surely it would be truer to say that the camera always lies than that it never lies. But that is another story.
Last stop on this on-Boeing world tour was Japan, a small island or collection of islands, but a world giant, economically speaking, not by its physical resources but by the ancient natural virtues of its people. These virtues are today being eroded, as everywhere, by the modern up-rooting from a natural way of life, yet the Japanese people remain those that Xavier came to love in his brief but decisive missionary visit in the 1540's. Here as in other Asian countries, the Society has a foothold significant not by numbers but by Truth.
My host was Fr. Thomas Onoda, himself Japanese, another young Society priest with a lonely ministry when he visits his homeland each month, but with a happy heart. Into a tiny tenth floor apartment serving as Society Chapel in down town Osaka, Japan's second city after Tokyo, two dozen souls crowded for nine of them to receive Confirmation, and in Tokyo itself a similar number attended Sunday Mass in surroundings more spacious but still without chairs. These are replaced by prayer mats and one's own haunches!
Praise be to God for the gift and survival of the Catholic Faith in these distant lands! Honour and prayers for the isolated priests in their far flung ministry! May Our Lord send more workers into his harvest! They have a happy life if they are faithful.
Most sincerely yours in Our Lord Jesus Christ,
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
Say what one will about monster machines, there is no denying that today's gigantic aeroplanes make possible, as I can remember Archbishop Lefebvre once remarking, long and accurate apostolic journeys. Between the end of June and mid July they enabled me for the third time to travel around the world for the Society of St. Pius X.
First stop was for the priestly ordinations at the end of the school year in the Society's main seminary in Ecône, Switzerland, where 15 new priests were ordained, mostly French, for postings all over the world. Since the first major ordination of priests by Archbishop Lefebvre for the Society in June of 1976, this made the 27th ordination in 27 years in the tent erected each year in the meadow beneath the seminary. For a canvas cathedral, that is a remarkable stability and source of strength for the Faith!
The event being now annual routine, the crowd attending the ordinations in Ecône was less than double the crowd attending ordinations in Winona five days beforehand, but in Ecône no fewer than 159 priests helped Bishop Tissier to lay hands on the ordinands. Of the many priestly friends I can remember that used to come from outside the Society to lay on hands in the early days, few are still living. To replace them, each year now more and more of the Society's own priests come to the ordinations for this purpose, and it is interesting to watch these men swiftly growing older, or maturing, under the steady pressure of the priesthood. With each year that passes, the Society's priests become less and less a mere collection of youngsters, as one can have thought of them a little while back. They are becoming with God's grace a formidable phalanx in defence of the Faith. Pray we never betray!
Second stop was Holland, to provide a Sunday Mass and two Confirmations in the Society's one and only floating chapel, which is in The Hague. Property is so expensive in this city of Europe's International Court that years ago Fr. De Merode (now based in St. Louis, serving Cincinnati) purchased a retired barge moored by the side of one of Holland's multiple canals. Here he established an attractive and perfectly workable chapel. It may be faintly disconcerting for the preacher to watch the chandeliers gently swinging over the congregation's heads during Mass, but after all Our Lord Himself used a boat for a pulpit (Lk. V, 3)!
Holland is very liberal, and it is a difficult country for Catholic Tradition today (see Verbum # 77). But the Society priest who looks after The Hague, Fr. Robert Schmitt from neighbouring Germany, is a happy young man nevertheless. To celebrate the tenth anniversary of his priesthood, amongst other things we visited an exhibition in Amsterdam's renowned Rijksmuseum of a 17th century Dutch artist from Holland's golden age, Aelbert Cuyp. What a contrast between his Holland of sailing ships in golden sunsets, and today's Holland of six lane freeways! Yet even from the freeway one recognizes by moments Cuyp's landscape, and, truth to tell, even Cuyp could idealize with his paint brush what he saw with his eyes. Is the camera then more truthful than the artist? Not necessarily...
Another aerial monster lifted me for the third stop to Malaysia, former British Malaya, where I had never been before, and where I wanted to visit in particular a historic town of lesser importance today, but made famous amongst Catholics for having been made by St. Francis Xavier the base of his Far Eastern missionary journeys in the mid 1500's, Malacca. Today's important city of Malaysia where the aerial monsters land is Kuala Lumpur, modernized capital of one of those nations known as the "Asian tigers" for their recent material prosperity. One may wonder for how much longer the United States' huge imports from Asia will continue to found this prosperity, but in the meantime Kuala Lumpur boasts a pair of towers taller than the Twin Towers that were dynamited in New York.
Malaysia is not a Catholic country, and never has been, yet still Catholic Tradition has a footing there. The co-ordinator and his family are English speakers of Chinese extraction. With Fr. Daniel Couture, Asian District Superior from French Canada, they showed me the Society's handsome chapel hewn out of a commercial building, with delightful stained glass windows of Asian colouring painted by the co-ordinator. Some 30 souls attend Mass celebrated twice a month by a Society priest coming up by bus from Singapore. A rest, three Confirmations, and then the visit to Malacca, two hours south by car on a splendid freeway.
Malacca, strategically located on a Strait shielded by the Island of Sumatra opposite, mid-way between the East (India) and the Far East (China and Japan), achieved prominence as a major center of shipping and commerce well before it was conquered in the early 16'" century by the Portuguese to act as a major base for their own running of the lucrative spice trade. To establish their rule of Malacca, the Portuguese (1511 to 1641) built a stone fortress around the hill dominating the port, which the Dutch (1641 1795) strengthened, and the British (1795 1957) destroyed, except for one gateway, now a delight of tourists. How empires come and go! Presently, the "Asian tigers" are part of the American Empire's comings and Boeings, but these two will one day be gone with the wind ....
St. Francis Xavier's five stays in Malacca belong to the time of the Portuguese. Readers of his life will remember how he attempted to convert those he found there, so that their bad example would cease to alienate from the Faith so many "natives", a word politically incorrect but saying what it needs to say. One ponders on the ways of Providence: why did God send a Xavier to the pagan East and Far East in the 16th century, and not before? And why is Asia not now converted? Men are to blame. Today, the museums in Malacca reflect a scorn for the Europeans who once brought the Catholic Faith. Alas, if in the streets of Malacca one sees someone sloppily dressed and lacking all dignity, sure enough, it will be a Westerner. If I was today an Easterner, I would despise these moneyed tramps and their past colonialism and their supposed Faith. How we need an army of Xaviers, if souls are to be saved!
Little trace remains of Xavier in today's Malacca. There is a statue of him outside the walls of St. Paul's Church still standing atop the fortified hill, where Xavier would stay on his visits, and there is the vault beneath ground within the church where his body rested for a few month's between Shangchuan Island off China, where Xavier died his mysteriously cold and lonely death in 1552, and Goa, the then Portuguese enclave in India where it rests to this day. But Xavier would never have cared for physical monuments. His true monument is the implanting of the Faith all over the East and Far East, and hundreds of thousands of souls safely garnered for Heaven then and since. And his dazzling example! St. Francis Xavier, pray that Westerners come to their Catholic senses! Pray that your Company of Jesus become once more Jesuit conquerors of the world for Heaven and God!
Fourth stop was Australia, actually the main destination of the entire journey, for the purpose of ordaining at home amongst his own large family Winona's Australian seminarian for the last three years, Rev. Mr. Brendan now Father Brendan Arthur. For pictures from his ordination and first Mass in Melbourne, see the enclosed "Verbum".
In Melbourne the question of the camera came up again when Fr. Kevin Robinson (known to many of you) took two of us to see a film which he highly recommended on the ministry and death among Hawaii's lepers in the mid 19th century of Fr. Damien. Indeed the film was well done as films go, especially on a Catholic subject, but still it left one with a dissatisfaction. Why? Surely because just as the cinema has such power to make the unreal seem real, so it is bound to make the real seem unreal, including Fr. Damien. Surely it would be truer to say that the camera always lies than that it never lies. But that is another story.
Last stop on this on-Boeing world tour was Japan, a small island or collection of islands, but a world giant, economically speaking, not by its physical resources but by the ancient natural virtues of its people. These virtues are today being eroded, as everywhere, by the modern up-rooting from a natural way of life, yet the Japanese people remain those that Xavier came to love in his brief but decisive missionary visit in the 1540's. Here as in other Asian countries, the Society has a foothold significant not by numbers but by Truth.
My host was Fr. Thomas Onoda, himself Japanese, another young Society priest with a lonely ministry when he visits his homeland each month, but with a happy heart. Into a tiny tenth floor apartment serving as Society Chapel in down town Osaka, Japan's second city after Tokyo, two dozen souls crowded for nine of them to receive Confirmation, and in Tokyo itself a similar number attended Sunday Mass in surroundings more spacious but still without chairs. These are replaced by prayer mats and one's own haunches!
Praise be to God for the gift and survival of the Catholic Faith in these distant lands! Honour and prayers for the isolated priests in their far flung ministry! May Our Lord send more workers into his harvest! They have a happy life if they are faithful.
Most sincerely yours in Our Lord Jesus Christ,
Well Done, Young Parents
July 1, 2002 from Holland
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
So one more school year at the Seminary came to a glorious end, with the ordination of four new priests, three Americans and a Canadian, at Winona on June 22. On the day before, a violent storm and wind had begun to tear apart the tent erected for the occasion, and a large part had to be replaced, as you will read in the August "Verbum", but everything was repaired in time for the ceremony which took place in lovely weather.
Some two thousand souls attended, from all over North America and beyond. How many familiar faces! People come back now year after year for the special graces that go with the birth of new priests, and with the celebration of their first Masses. Colleagues at the Seminary commented on how the congregation this year seemed especially recollected and joyful.
There were plenty of little children, as I had hoped for, and a corresponding number of young parents. What a delight it always is to see the young mothers, truly fulfilled by doing God's will in the home, and rewarded with a gracious femininity which the feminism of worldlings quite destroys! In support of these young mothers and their children and their homes, let me quote at length from an article by a colleague in France who runs a retreat house, and who must then have every year many young fathers and mothers coming through his hands.
Fr. Delagneau begins by lamenting how many households he sees, either breaking up or preparing to break up, with spouses destabilized and placed in great spiritual danger, with children disturbed for life. Such breaking up may seem no problem to worldlings, but it must give Catholics pause to reflect: these break ups do not happen overnight so what am I doing in my own home now which may be leading in that direction?
Following St. Paul, his article is divided into two parts: "Husbands, love your wife" (as Christ loved the Church, giving himself up for her Eph. V, 25), and "Wives, be submitted to your husband" (as to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the Head of the Church, his Body Eph. V, 22). The complementarity of man and woman, the undertaking of which is the key to understanding marriage, and the living of which is the key to living a happy marriage, is a marvel of nature built by God into the design of the two sexes. Notice, however, the reference to Christ and his Church in the two quotes above, taken from the Epistle for the Catholic Church's Wedding Mass. This reference means that only grace, or supernatural Faith in Christ and his Bride, the Church, can take the full measure of, and if need be protect, the natural marvel.
Fr. Delagneau notes that whereas in the old days the wife could and would endure a great deal in order to save the home, today it is often she who initiates the process of separation because life at home has come to seem unlivable. Yet separation is a non solution, so Fr. Delagneau begins by addressing the husbands:
"Remember firstly that by nature the wife is more sensitive, more emotional, which is why certain worries or problems in the home weigh on her more heavily. And if she stays at home, she has little by way of conversation or activity outside the home to take her mind off these upsets which thereby take on an importance her husband can hardly understand, which wears on her nerves.
"The sensitive side of woman likewise explains how, once she has lost trust in her husband, everything weighs upon her. She becomes tense and withdrawn, and goes on the defensive, increasing her nervous fatigue.
"To regain her trust is a long process and the husband will need to show great delicacy to prove that he really means to change. But that is the price he must pay, because without trust the marriage is going nowhere. Without trust, decisions are never taken together and relations become heavy and superficial while flare ups and unkind words become more frequent.
"Realize also that, by her nature, woman can for a long time take things upon herself and endure difficulties without showing it, but if one day she cracks, it can be very difficult to repair. She then goes into a nervous depression, or she gets fixated on some problem.
"Finally, realize just how wearying work in the home can be. Many husbands think that keeping house and rearing children is no heavy burden. But while house keeping may not seem much, it requires time, effort and organization. Rearing children requires in addition a mother's full attention, self control, and readiness to put everything else aside. Such obligations also give rise to a real nervous fatigue. Mother has not the same authority as father to settle problems. Fortunately she has more gentleness, patience and understanding, so she is more selfless. But all of that wears on her nerves.
"Bearing children, especially when they follow closely on one another, while still having to keep house, is for mother an extra burden on her health that must be taken into account.
"If the husband bears all this in mind and much else besides, he will love his wife with a quite different love, and he will exercise his authority as head of the house with more care and gentleness. Here are a few suggestions:
"Firstly, he will make a real effort not to let his work take over his life so that he is never at home to take any active part in family life (children's homework, games, conversation, helping around the house or with the washing up to make life more pleasant for his wife).
"Next he will make time to talk with her, to listen to the major events of her day, to encourage and congratulate her and make a few suggestions. Forgetting his own weariness he will also speak of his own day and of current events, remembering that she has often had no adult conversation all day long, and needs something to open her mind.
"He will keep an eye open for his wife's nervous fatigue, and he will be realistic. That way he can advise her how to organize things better, and to stick to essentials. With his manly authority he will help in the education of their children, so that she is not swamped by their running wild. He will also watch over her rest and health, and sometimes even change his own schedule to enable her to take a few necessary days off.
"The wife is sensitive and delicate, so she knows how to please. But she expects something of the sort in return. A little gesture, a little kindness, a little display of affection will make her forget many pains and much weariness, and will give her renewed energy for her work. What may cost him little effort can mean a great deal to her, so let him find out those little things that mean so much to her.
"The trust on her part which makes her gladly fall in with her husband's way of thinking, comes from two things; firstly, from her respect for his good qualities and for his success in what he undertakes, and secondly from his readiness to heed her wishes and her judicious advice, so that when he takes decisions, he does so in view of the welfare of the family as a whole.
"This trust is acquired at the beginning of a marriage, but it continues to be earned thereafter. Of course the husband is the head of the family, but he must learn how to exercise his authority firmly but gently. Clashes should always be avoided. Giving way need not mean he loses his authority, on the contrary it can show that he knows how to adapt it to circumstances. Authority can be undermined by his never making up his mind, or by his giving way every time.
"In fact, as St. Paul says so well, it is love for one's spouse that will discover the happy medium between being firm and being gentle.
"Under certain circumstances, one must know how to kneel down and pray for light to God, our Father.
"To conclude, let me point out that family problems do not arise only in other people's homes. Let the husband keep watch to preserve the union of harmony in his own."
Thus far Fr. Delagneau's recommendations to husbands. There is no space left for much to be quoted from his presentation of the need and way for wives to submit to their husbands. Here are a few extracts:
"By becoming a wife, woman enters into a hierarchical society, the family, in which by the will of God man is the head. Just as Christ as man submitted to his Father, so the woman as wife submits to her husband. Neither did Christ lose in dignity by submitting to his Father, nor does the wife by submitting to her husband. On the contrary, obedience makes the soul noble because it makes the greatest sacrifice of self for God, the sacrifice of one's own will...
"Wives, do not listen to the vile propaganda of the anti culture all around us, which is deliberately anti Christian and is trampling upon the law of God. Listen to Pope Pius XII, addressing women in 1941: 'Numerous voices will make out to you that submission is in some way unjust. They will suggest that you be more proudly independent, that you are in all respects the equal of your husbands and that you are in many ways their superior. Watch out for such words of the serpent, temptations, lies. Do not follow in Eve's footsteps, but keep to the only path that can lead to happiness, even here below. . .'
"In practice, the wife collaborates in all family decisions by her judicious advice, and then she falls in with her husband's opinion in view of the family welfare, God's will for each and all. She learns how to use the power that her looks and words have over her husband so to enter into his soul as to bring him round to the good of the family. And he learns to take decisions gently influenced by his wife, without losing authority, but also without being weak or giving way to her charm when she is not seeking the common good. There is a whole art in the wife's influencing her husband for the good. What a misfortune for some wives to have no idea of that art! They openly oppose their husbands' will, and the result can only be a head on clash. At that point two self wills compete, and only brute force or blackmail can win out. How far we are then from close collaboration in charity."
I add my own conclusion to Fr. Delagneau's good sense: let a husband and wife, who both want to make their marriage work, never despair, despite everything the modern world throws at them. A happy home can be achieved. It is an incomparable strength for the children, an edification as on June 22 for one's fellow men, and it must be a joy for the angels and God to behold. May He bless all of you husbands and wives, young or old, who keep trying!
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
So one more school year at the Seminary came to a glorious end, with the ordination of four new priests, three Americans and a Canadian, at Winona on June 22. On the day before, a violent storm and wind had begun to tear apart the tent erected for the occasion, and a large part had to be replaced, as you will read in the August "Verbum", but everything was repaired in time for the ceremony which took place in lovely weather.
Some two thousand souls attended, from all over North America and beyond. How many familiar faces! People come back now year after year for the special graces that go with the birth of new priests, and with the celebration of their first Masses. Colleagues at the Seminary commented on how the congregation this year seemed especially recollected and joyful.
There were plenty of little children, as I had hoped for, and a corresponding number of young parents. What a delight it always is to see the young mothers, truly fulfilled by doing God's will in the home, and rewarded with a gracious femininity which the feminism of worldlings quite destroys! In support of these young mothers and their children and their homes, let me quote at length from an article by a colleague in France who runs a retreat house, and who must then have every year many young fathers and mothers coming through his hands.
Fr. Delagneau begins by lamenting how many households he sees, either breaking up or preparing to break up, with spouses destabilized and placed in great spiritual danger, with children disturbed for life. Such breaking up may seem no problem to worldlings, but it must give Catholics pause to reflect: these break ups do not happen overnight so what am I doing in my own home now which may be leading in that direction?
Following St. Paul, his article is divided into two parts: "Husbands, love your wife" (as Christ loved the Church, giving himself up for her Eph. V, 25), and "Wives, be submitted to your husband" (as to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the Head of the Church, his Body Eph. V, 22). The complementarity of man and woman, the undertaking of which is the key to understanding marriage, and the living of which is the key to living a happy marriage, is a marvel of nature built by God into the design of the two sexes. Notice, however, the reference to Christ and his Church in the two quotes above, taken from the Epistle for the Catholic Church's Wedding Mass. This reference means that only grace, or supernatural Faith in Christ and his Bride, the Church, can take the full measure of, and if need be protect, the natural marvel.
Fr. Delagneau notes that whereas in the old days the wife could and would endure a great deal in order to save the home, today it is often she who initiates the process of separation because life at home has come to seem unlivable. Yet separation is a non solution, so Fr. Delagneau begins by addressing the husbands:
"Remember firstly that by nature the wife is more sensitive, more emotional, which is why certain worries or problems in the home weigh on her more heavily. And if she stays at home, she has little by way of conversation or activity outside the home to take her mind off these upsets which thereby take on an importance her husband can hardly understand, which wears on her nerves.
"The sensitive side of woman likewise explains how, once she has lost trust in her husband, everything weighs upon her. She becomes tense and withdrawn, and goes on the defensive, increasing her nervous fatigue.
"To regain her trust is a long process and the husband will need to show great delicacy to prove that he really means to change. But that is the price he must pay, because without trust the marriage is going nowhere. Without trust, decisions are never taken together and relations become heavy and superficial while flare ups and unkind words become more frequent.
"Realize also that, by her nature, woman can for a long time take things upon herself and endure difficulties without showing it, but if one day she cracks, it can be very difficult to repair. She then goes into a nervous depression, or she gets fixated on some problem.
"Finally, realize just how wearying work in the home can be. Many husbands think that keeping house and rearing children is no heavy burden. But while house keeping may not seem much, it requires time, effort and organization. Rearing children requires in addition a mother's full attention, self control, and readiness to put everything else aside. Such obligations also give rise to a real nervous fatigue. Mother has not the same authority as father to settle problems. Fortunately she has more gentleness, patience and understanding, so she is more selfless. But all of that wears on her nerves.
"Bearing children, especially when they follow closely on one another, while still having to keep house, is for mother an extra burden on her health that must be taken into account.
"If the husband bears all this in mind and much else besides, he will love his wife with a quite different love, and he will exercise his authority as head of the house with more care and gentleness. Here are a few suggestions:
"Firstly, he will make a real effort not to let his work take over his life so that he is never at home to take any active part in family life (children's homework, games, conversation, helping around the house or with the washing up to make life more pleasant for his wife).
"Next he will make time to talk with her, to listen to the major events of her day, to encourage and congratulate her and make a few suggestions. Forgetting his own weariness he will also speak of his own day and of current events, remembering that she has often had no adult conversation all day long, and needs something to open her mind.
"He will keep an eye open for his wife's nervous fatigue, and he will be realistic. That way he can advise her how to organize things better, and to stick to essentials. With his manly authority he will help in the education of their children, so that she is not swamped by their running wild. He will also watch over her rest and health, and sometimes even change his own schedule to enable her to take a few necessary days off.
"The wife is sensitive and delicate, so she knows how to please. But she expects something of the sort in return. A little gesture, a little kindness, a little display of affection will make her forget many pains and much weariness, and will give her renewed energy for her work. What may cost him little effort can mean a great deal to her, so let him find out those little things that mean so much to her.
"The trust on her part which makes her gladly fall in with her husband's way of thinking, comes from two things; firstly, from her respect for his good qualities and for his success in what he undertakes, and secondly from his readiness to heed her wishes and her judicious advice, so that when he takes decisions, he does so in view of the welfare of the family as a whole.
"This trust is acquired at the beginning of a marriage, but it continues to be earned thereafter. Of course the husband is the head of the family, but he must learn how to exercise his authority firmly but gently. Clashes should always be avoided. Giving way need not mean he loses his authority, on the contrary it can show that he knows how to adapt it to circumstances. Authority can be undermined by his never making up his mind, or by his giving way every time.
"In fact, as St. Paul says so well, it is love for one's spouse that will discover the happy medium between being firm and being gentle.
"Under certain circumstances, one must know how to kneel down and pray for light to God, our Father.
"To conclude, let me point out that family problems do not arise only in other people's homes. Let the husband keep watch to preserve the union of harmony in his own."
Thus far Fr. Delagneau's recommendations to husbands. There is no space left for much to be quoted from his presentation of the need and way for wives to submit to their husbands. Here are a few extracts:
"By becoming a wife, woman enters into a hierarchical society, the family, in which by the will of God man is the head. Just as Christ as man submitted to his Father, so the woman as wife submits to her husband. Neither did Christ lose in dignity by submitting to his Father, nor does the wife by submitting to her husband. On the contrary, obedience makes the soul noble because it makes the greatest sacrifice of self for God, the sacrifice of one's own will...
"Wives, do not listen to the vile propaganda of the anti culture all around us, which is deliberately anti Christian and is trampling upon the law of God. Listen to Pope Pius XII, addressing women in 1941: 'Numerous voices will make out to you that submission is in some way unjust. They will suggest that you be more proudly independent, that you are in all respects the equal of your husbands and that you are in many ways their superior. Watch out for such words of the serpent, temptations, lies. Do not follow in Eve's footsteps, but keep to the only path that can lead to happiness, even here below. . .'
"In practice, the wife collaborates in all family decisions by her judicious advice, and then she falls in with her husband's opinion in view of the family welfare, God's will for each and all. She learns how to use the power that her looks and words have over her husband so to enter into his soul as to bring him round to the good of the family. And he learns to take decisions gently influenced by his wife, without losing authority, but also without being weak or giving way to her charm when she is not seeking the common good. There is a whole art in the wife's influencing her husband for the good. What a misfortune for some wives to have no idea of that art! They openly oppose their husbands' will, and the result can only be a head on clash. At that point two self wills compete, and only brute force or blackmail can win out. How far we are then from close collaboration in charity."
I add my own conclusion to Fr. Delagneau's good sense: let a husband and wife, who both want to make their marriage work, never despair, despite everything the modern world throws at them. A happy home can be achieved. It is an incomparable strength for the children, an edification as on June 22 for one's fellow men, and it must be a joy for the angels and God to behold. May He bless all of you husbands and wives, young or old, who keep trying!
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Campos - What went wrong?
June 1,2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
ln February this letter presented the fall, finalized in January, of the Traditional bishop and priests of Campos back into the clutches of neo-modernist Rome. That fall was a disappointment for the Society of St. Pius X, whose lone stand for Truth they had shared for 20 years. To explain that fall, I think it is worth further presenting to you an analysis sent to me recently by a priest stationed in Brazil, who is a friend of the SSPX, and who was for a long time a friend of those Campos priests. Here is what he wrote to me: -
“I had already prepared to put in the post an essay by one of our priests on Campos, or rather on the last statements coming out of Campos as compared with what they used to teach. However, this comparison does not go to the heart of the problem. In my opinion, the heart of the problem is to be found in the lofty vision of Archbishop Lefebvre, a lofty vision lacking in Campos.
"The Archbishop achieved a well-balanced overview of the whole problem in the Church, which was the fruit of his experience and spirit of prayer, his virtues and gifts received from God. Bishop de Castro Mayer drew closer to the Archbishop in his last years, but it seems that the Campos priests did not have their own bishop's wisdom or, perhaps, his humility. ln my opinion the Campos priests have gone backwards because they had a different way of looking at the crisis of the Church.
"Let me explain: up until the consecrations of 1988 Bishop de Castro Mayer's reaction to the crisis was curious. On the one hand he was legalistic, tending to stick to the letter of the law. For instance after ceasing to be the diocesan bishop of Campos, he ordained no more priests except one that he ordained after the 1988 Consecrations. On the other hand he had a tendency towards sedevacantism, as when he would say of John Paul Il, 'Whoever does not belong to the body of the Church cannot be its head'.
"Archbishop Lefebvre was aware of this twofold tendency in Bishop de Castro Mayer, which is why he would say concerning the bishop's legalism, 'Bishop de Castro Mayer must understand that today we have to "go illegal", if necessary' (a remark to be understood, obviously, in the present context), and concerning his sedevacantism, Archbishop Lefebvre said, 'Were it not for me, Bishop de Castro Mayer would be sedevacantist, but in order not to separate from us, he holds back from sedevacantism'.
"I think the Archbishop was right. There were in Bishop de Castro Mayer the two tendencies of legalism and sedevacantism. The bishop's friendship with Archbishop Lefebvre moderated these two tendencies and enabled Bishop de Castro Mayer to take courageous and well-founded positions. However the Campos Priests seem never to have completely shaken off these two false ways of posing today’s problem, because they seem to me to argue like the sedevacantists: 'If John Paul Il is Pope, we must obey him. If we do not obey him, we must declare that he is not Pope'...
"The Campos priests, in my opinion, are lacking in vision. They are taking too simple a view of this crisis. What is the cause of this turning back of theirs? Either they never judged the crisis in the way that the Archbishop did, or, under the influence of some of their own number, they slipped back, and left the good road on which Bishop de Castro Mayer had set out before he died... For sure and certain they always kept a certain distance between themselves and the Society".
End of analysis of the fall of Tradition in Campos by the Society's priest-friend in Brazil. It is an analysis rich in lessons, or in reminders, of how this 40-year old crisis of the Church does its damage.
Firstly, let us relativize the criticism of Bishop de Castro Mayer implicit in this analysis by recalling his enormous achievement which the analysis was not designed to bring out. Catholic Tradition has few enough heroes today, and this bishop is certainly one of them.
He was 56 years old, and the normal Catholic bishop of the little diocese of Campos, three hours by car north of Rio de Janeiro, when the Second Vatican Council opened in 1962. During the Council he was a steady opponent of the neo-modernists' Revolution overthrowing the Church, and after the Council he would not let his diocese follow the new religion. When Pope Paul VI imposed the New Mass in 1969, Bishop de Castro Mayer most respectfully resisted him to his face, and allowed his own priests to continue celebrating the true Mass. The good bishop was followed in this faithfulness to the old religion by the large majority of his priests and people, so that amidst the thousands of Church dioceses throughout the world which were (at least objectively) letting themselves be led into apostasy, his diocese alone stayed essentially Catholic.
ln 1981 at age 75 he had to retire. For his successor, the Newchurch sent in a chain-and-wrecking-ball bishop to smash the Traditional diocese. That is when Bishop de Castro Mayer and his faithful priests began publicly to associate with the Society of St. Pius X in its policy of re-building alongside the mainstream church, but not outside the Catholic Church. Under his leadership, his priests built for the true Mass a series of brand-new churches alongside their former parish churches, now hijacked for the new religion.
And so Bishop de Castro Mayer's heroic defence of the Faith continued in Campos until he died in April of 1991, with his faithful priests clustered around his death-bed. Had he lived longer, there can be no doubt that he would have stayed on the course he had set between 1981 and 1991, and there can be little to no doubt that his priests would have continued to surround him. As it was, it took ten years for them to fall back into the powerful magnetic field of "obedience to Rome".
It was necessary to recall this unique fidelity and achievement of Bishop de Castro Mayer lest anyone should think that the priest's analysis, quoted above, was meant to pull him down. Not at all. But what the analysis does is to remind us of the incredible power of the apostasy of the 1960's, which had even an excellent bishop wavering between the twin false solutions of legalism and sedevacantism through the 1970's, until thanks to a still greater archbishop he steadied his Catholic balance through the 1980's.
That an apostasy should carry away millions of Catholics, thousands of priests and hundreds of bishops, well, that is what apostasies do. But that - as the analysis quoted above suggests, and I think it is right - even a churchman of the quality of Bishop de Castro Mayer tottered in the wake of Vatican II is testimony both to the volcanic force of all that was behind that Council and - here again I think the analysis is correct - to the extraordinary gifts and wisdom of Archbishop Lefebvre.
Far be it from me to indulge in a cult of personality, or to declare that the Archbishop was infallible or impeccable. However, the fruits are there to tell us how much God gave us in him, or, what a gift of God to us he was: the guidance of his example enabled a wise fellow-bishop to keep the heads above water of the Campos priests around him, but now that both bishops are dead, those priests slip back beneath the waters of apostasy - may they rest in peace!
But they cannot. Already they are taking positions that contradict everything they said and did for the last 20 years. They will soon be bearing little more Catholic fruit than the rest of the Conciliar Church, and meanwhile they have scandalized and alienated all Catholics of Tradition.
Whereas the Society, continuing along the lines of Archbishop Lefebvre, continues to bear Catholic fruit, as I have been able to see from recent journeys to the Philippines and to Germany. In the Philippines, we now have a dozen Mass-centres, all weil attended by Catholics joyfully picking up, or picking up again, on the true Faith, while in our German centres families are at last re-appearing with large numbers of children. It has taken Germany time, because the anti-birth "culture" has been so strong, but the Faith wins out in the end. In death-dedicated Europe this flourishing of children is like a miracle, but nobody who knows the power of the Faith can be surprised.
And so death-dedicated Rome continues to harass the Society, and will cripple if, if it can. To the Italian press Cardinal Castrillion Hoyos recently spoke of the Society as being composed of a majority of reasonable bishops, priests, laity, etc., who want to re-join Rome, while a "difficult and fanatical" minority will perhaps continue "in schism, believing that they possess the truth, and forgetting that where there is Peter, there is the Church". And then the Cardinal denies that he is trying to split the Society!
One may pray for the Cardinal, as for the priests of Campos, but humanly speaking, one may fear they will only increase in blindness. Lord, have mercy - upon us all!
At the Seminary's Doctrinal Session from July 30 to August 3 these Encyclicals will be studied - From TAN's "The Popes Against Modern errors", "Diuturnum Illud", "Rerum Novarum", "The Sillon", "Lamen- tabili" and the Anti-Modernist oath; from TAN's "A Light in the Heavens", "Satis Cognitum". Sign up, men, to see that the Society of St. Pius X is only standing for what the Catholic Church has always stood for.
Priestly ordinations take place here at Winona on Saturday, June 22. The more numerous you are, to come and show your joy and appreciation of four new "Lefebvrist" priests, the more vocations God will surely incline to awaken. Come, and fill our meadows with your children, so as to fill your seminary with seminarians!
Sincerely yours in the Sacred Heart of Jesus,
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
ln February this letter presented the fall, finalized in January, of the Traditional bishop and priests of Campos back into the clutches of neo-modernist Rome. That fall was a disappointment for the Society of St. Pius X, whose lone stand for Truth they had shared for 20 years. To explain that fall, I think it is worth further presenting to you an analysis sent to me recently by a priest stationed in Brazil, who is a friend of the SSPX, and who was for a long time a friend of those Campos priests. Here is what he wrote to me: -
“I had already prepared to put in the post an essay by one of our priests on Campos, or rather on the last statements coming out of Campos as compared with what they used to teach. However, this comparison does not go to the heart of the problem. In my opinion, the heart of the problem is to be found in the lofty vision of Archbishop Lefebvre, a lofty vision lacking in Campos.
"The Archbishop achieved a well-balanced overview of the whole problem in the Church, which was the fruit of his experience and spirit of prayer, his virtues and gifts received from God. Bishop de Castro Mayer drew closer to the Archbishop in his last years, but it seems that the Campos priests did not have their own bishop's wisdom or, perhaps, his humility. ln my opinion the Campos priests have gone backwards because they had a different way of looking at the crisis of the Church.
"Let me explain: up until the consecrations of 1988 Bishop de Castro Mayer's reaction to the crisis was curious. On the one hand he was legalistic, tending to stick to the letter of the law. For instance after ceasing to be the diocesan bishop of Campos, he ordained no more priests except one that he ordained after the 1988 Consecrations. On the other hand he had a tendency towards sedevacantism, as when he would say of John Paul Il, 'Whoever does not belong to the body of the Church cannot be its head'.
"Archbishop Lefebvre was aware of this twofold tendency in Bishop de Castro Mayer, which is why he would say concerning the bishop's legalism, 'Bishop de Castro Mayer must understand that today we have to "go illegal", if necessary' (a remark to be understood, obviously, in the present context), and concerning his sedevacantism, Archbishop Lefebvre said, 'Were it not for me, Bishop de Castro Mayer would be sedevacantist, but in order not to separate from us, he holds back from sedevacantism'.
"I think the Archbishop was right. There were in Bishop de Castro Mayer the two tendencies of legalism and sedevacantism. The bishop's friendship with Archbishop Lefebvre moderated these two tendencies and enabled Bishop de Castro Mayer to take courageous and well-founded positions. However the Campos Priests seem never to have completely shaken off these two false ways of posing today’s problem, because they seem to me to argue like the sedevacantists: 'If John Paul Il is Pope, we must obey him. If we do not obey him, we must declare that he is not Pope'...
"The Campos priests, in my opinion, are lacking in vision. They are taking too simple a view of this crisis. What is the cause of this turning back of theirs? Either they never judged the crisis in the way that the Archbishop did, or, under the influence of some of their own number, they slipped back, and left the good road on which Bishop de Castro Mayer had set out before he died... For sure and certain they always kept a certain distance between themselves and the Society".
End of analysis of the fall of Tradition in Campos by the Society's priest-friend in Brazil. It is an analysis rich in lessons, or in reminders, of how this 40-year old crisis of the Church does its damage.
Firstly, let us relativize the criticism of Bishop de Castro Mayer implicit in this analysis by recalling his enormous achievement which the analysis was not designed to bring out. Catholic Tradition has few enough heroes today, and this bishop is certainly one of them.
He was 56 years old, and the normal Catholic bishop of the little diocese of Campos, three hours by car north of Rio de Janeiro, when the Second Vatican Council opened in 1962. During the Council he was a steady opponent of the neo-modernists' Revolution overthrowing the Church, and after the Council he would not let his diocese follow the new religion. When Pope Paul VI imposed the New Mass in 1969, Bishop de Castro Mayer most respectfully resisted him to his face, and allowed his own priests to continue celebrating the true Mass. The good bishop was followed in this faithfulness to the old religion by the large majority of his priests and people, so that amidst the thousands of Church dioceses throughout the world which were (at least objectively) letting themselves be led into apostasy, his diocese alone stayed essentially Catholic.
ln 1981 at age 75 he had to retire. For his successor, the Newchurch sent in a chain-and-wrecking-ball bishop to smash the Traditional diocese. That is when Bishop de Castro Mayer and his faithful priests began publicly to associate with the Society of St. Pius X in its policy of re-building alongside the mainstream church, but not outside the Catholic Church. Under his leadership, his priests built for the true Mass a series of brand-new churches alongside their former parish churches, now hijacked for the new religion.
And so Bishop de Castro Mayer's heroic defence of the Faith continued in Campos until he died in April of 1991, with his faithful priests clustered around his death-bed. Had he lived longer, there can be no doubt that he would have stayed on the course he had set between 1981 and 1991, and there can be little to no doubt that his priests would have continued to surround him. As it was, it took ten years for them to fall back into the powerful magnetic field of "obedience to Rome".
It was necessary to recall this unique fidelity and achievement of Bishop de Castro Mayer lest anyone should think that the priest's analysis, quoted above, was meant to pull him down. Not at all. But what the analysis does is to remind us of the incredible power of the apostasy of the 1960's, which had even an excellent bishop wavering between the twin false solutions of legalism and sedevacantism through the 1970's, until thanks to a still greater archbishop he steadied his Catholic balance through the 1980's.
That an apostasy should carry away millions of Catholics, thousands of priests and hundreds of bishops, well, that is what apostasies do. But that - as the analysis quoted above suggests, and I think it is right - even a churchman of the quality of Bishop de Castro Mayer tottered in the wake of Vatican II is testimony both to the volcanic force of all that was behind that Council and - here again I think the analysis is correct - to the extraordinary gifts and wisdom of Archbishop Lefebvre.
Far be it from me to indulge in a cult of personality, or to declare that the Archbishop was infallible or impeccable. However, the fruits are there to tell us how much God gave us in him, or, what a gift of God to us he was: the guidance of his example enabled a wise fellow-bishop to keep the heads above water of the Campos priests around him, but now that both bishops are dead, those priests slip back beneath the waters of apostasy - may they rest in peace!
But they cannot. Already they are taking positions that contradict everything they said and did for the last 20 years. They will soon be bearing little more Catholic fruit than the rest of the Conciliar Church, and meanwhile they have scandalized and alienated all Catholics of Tradition.
Whereas the Society, continuing along the lines of Archbishop Lefebvre, continues to bear Catholic fruit, as I have been able to see from recent journeys to the Philippines and to Germany. In the Philippines, we now have a dozen Mass-centres, all weil attended by Catholics joyfully picking up, or picking up again, on the true Faith, while in our German centres families are at last re-appearing with large numbers of children. It has taken Germany time, because the anti-birth "culture" has been so strong, but the Faith wins out in the end. In death-dedicated Europe this flourishing of children is like a miracle, but nobody who knows the power of the Faith can be surprised.
And so death-dedicated Rome continues to harass the Society, and will cripple if, if it can. To the Italian press Cardinal Castrillion Hoyos recently spoke of the Society as being composed of a majority of reasonable bishops, priests, laity, etc., who want to re-join Rome, while a "difficult and fanatical" minority will perhaps continue "in schism, believing that they possess the truth, and forgetting that where there is Peter, there is the Church". And then the Cardinal denies that he is trying to split the Society!
One may pray for the Cardinal, as for the priests of Campos, but humanly speaking, one may fear they will only increase in blindness. Lord, have mercy - upon us all!
At the Seminary's Doctrinal Session from July 30 to August 3 these Encyclicals will be studied - From TAN's "The Popes Against Modern errors", "Diuturnum Illud", "Rerum Novarum", "The Sillon", "Lamen- tabili" and the Anti-Modernist oath; from TAN's "A Light in the Heavens", "Satis Cognitum". Sign up, men, to see that the Society of St. Pius X is only standing for what the Catholic Church has always stood for.
Priestly ordinations take place here at Winona on Saturday, June 22. The more numerous you are, to come and show your joy and appreciation of four new "Lefebvrist" priests, the more vocations God will surely incline to awaken. Come, and fill our meadows with your children, so as to fill your seminary with seminarians!
Sincerely yours in the Sacred Heart of Jesus,
The Newchurch against Nature
May 1, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
For months now, the mass media in the United States have been hammering the Catholic Church for the grave misbehaviour of a certain number of her priests, over the last 30 to 40 years, towards young people in their congregations. Therefore much has been written and said on the problem, much more than I myself know or have read. However, some important truths which bear on the question I have seen mentioned little, or not at all. Let them surface here.
By way of preliminary, let us say where the blame does not essentially belong. It does not essentially belong with the media. This letter frequently calls the media "vile", and their vileness shows up in this case in their using the word "pedophilia" rather than "homosexuality" to name the problem. The word "pedophilia" refers properly to the molestation and abuse of children, let us say under the age of 10, whereas according to numerous reports the overwhelming majority of the crimes of which the priests are being accused involve adolescent boys, over 10 years old, activity which would normally be called by the h— word.
But for years now the media in their vileness have been conducting a consistent and persistent campaign to legitimize in the popular mind the sin of h—, also called the sin against nature, one of the four sins crying to Heaven for vengeance. How then could the media have glorified h— activity for so long, and then turn around and condemn it in priests? Hence their pretence that the problem is pedophilia, because most people are — still — horrified by the molestation and abuse of small children, whereas they are being — in large part by the media — desensitized to the horror of that sin against nature, crying to Heaven.
The media can also be blamed for co-ordinating what is surely a world-wide campaign to exploit to the full this present weakness of the Church. Having been taken largely into the hands of Mother Church's enemies, by the lack of vigilance or care on the part of Mother Church's friends, the media are no friends of the Church, and so they are naturally using to the full this opportunity to pull the Church down. However, there is no smoke without fire, says the proverb. How could the media make smoke unless there was some fire within the Church? If there was no such widespread misbehaviour amongst churchmen, and known to the people, what could the worst of media do? Essentially, the churchmen committing or covering for the sins cannot blame the media.
Nor can they blame the people for being unreasonable, because in at least two respects popular reaction within the United States is seeming to be reasonable.
Firstly, while every Catholic priest should at all times and in all places, by the sublimity of his calling, behave like an angel, nevertheless he carries the treasure of his priesthood in that weak vessel of clay which is fallen human nature (II Cor. IV, 7), so that none of us who knows human weakness is entirely surprised to find even its worst outbreaks recurring within the priesthood, alas. Reasonably, the American people today are showing themselves less shocked by the lower clergy committing the sins than by the higher clergy covering for them, which is no longer a weakness (however grave) of the flesh.
And secondly, to the people's credit, when they blame the higher clergy for covering for the sins of the lower, they do seem to some extent to be recognizing a prior right of the Church over the State to discipline men of the Church. The people seem to be saying less that priestly crimes are a matter for the State, than that the Church should keep order in her own house, which, as long as the Church does so, is ancient good sense.
Therefore neither media nor people are essentially to blame. We come back to the churchmen. And if, as said, men who are Catholic priests have in all times and places given proof of their human weakness, then what is special about today's problem is its scale. The sin of h— amongst priests seems to be no longer scattershot but rather systemic. And, what angers so many people, it seems to have been systematically swept under the carpet by the higher clergy.
Alas, it is notorious that for tens of years now the Catholic Church has been infiltrated in the USA by h—s. Back in the 1980's, Fr. Enrique Rueda published his book "The h— network" to document this fact with a mass of evidence. Today one learns that the mainstream seminaries are riddled with h— professors and h— seminarians. As one bishop recently commented, a first step in cleaning up the present mess would be to "de-lavenderise" the seminaries. Another bishop commented how apprehensive are normal (i.e. "straight") young men of entering the U.S. seminaries today, for fear of being harassed by these perverts who are protected by the system!
But how can the system have reached this point? Here is where two systemic answers arise, neither of which is mentioned much today, if at all, and neither of which will be pleasing to today's Catholic hierarchy. That is exactly why there is a systemic problem. The first of these answers concerns the Mass, the second, still more generally, concerns the Ten Commandments.
As for the Mass, Archbishop Lefebvre always used to say that he could not have operated any of his seminaries with the Novus Ordo Mass (NOM). Everything possible was done by Rome in the 1970's and 1980's to make him introduce the NOM into his seminaries, but he said that had he done so, he might as well have put the keys in the seminary doors, and walked away! He himself never put it this way, but as far as he was concerned, a Catholic seminary without the true (Tridentine) Mass is like an atomic reactor without the uranium. There was no way he could make real priests with a dummy Mass.
For, he always said, priest and sacrifice are intimately related. There can be no ritual sacrifice without priest, no priest without sacrifice. The sacrifice is at the heart of the priest, and if you take away his sacrifice, you tear out the heart of the priest. So if you dummify the Mass, which is of course the Catholic priest's sacrifice, then you dumbify the priest. And if you dumbify the Catholic priest, then he is liable to turn in all kinds of dumb directions for substitute purposes and satisfactions, which will include h— activity. I think if Archbishop Lefebvre were alive today, he would say that, given that the Novus Ordo Mass has now been imposed on Catholic priests for 30-plus years, the astonishing thing is not how much h— activity there is amongst priests, but how little!
However, as in the whole of today's crisis of the Church, while the problem of the Mass is the outstanding symptom, the malady is broader and deeper. What the NOM is essentially tending towards is to put man in the place of God, direct violation of the First Commandment, "I am the Lord thy God, and thou shall not have strange gods before me" (Exodus XX, 2,3). In fact the whole Newchurch's essential drift and aim is the idolatrous putting of man in the place of God. Now what does St. Paul (word of God) say are the consequences of idolatry? See Romans I, 18-31. "Men who detain the truth of God in injustice (18)... changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man (23), wherefore [I underline] God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their bodies among themselves (24)".
St. Paul goes on to repeat this cause and effect connection between breaking the First and the Sixth Commandments with specific reference to the sin against nature: "Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator.... (24). For this cause [I underline] God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature (26). And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error (27)". And in case we have still not understood that idolatry is at the heart of the problem, St. Paul says it a third time! - "And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge [I underline], God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient (28)", and there follows a list of grave sins.
God forbid "Traditionalists" should throw stones at the weakness of mainstream priests, because we could be punished by His allowing us to fall into the same traps. But it is not Traditionalists who made two times two equal four. It is St. Paul, speaking for God, who puts his finger here on the systemic problem of the Newchurch. God uses this sin to highlight idolatry, and He seems now to be resorting to the secular authority to clean this sin out of His Church. Both moves are acts of mercy on His part. May He have mercy upon us all!
More positively, if I know a h—, and wish to get him (or her) out of it, let me do all I can to bring him back towards the true love and worship of the true God. It was when Augustine found the true God and began obeying the First Commandment, that he found the strength to obey the Sixth!
God bless us all, in Christ,
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
For months now, the mass media in the United States have been hammering the Catholic Church for the grave misbehaviour of a certain number of her priests, over the last 30 to 40 years, towards young people in their congregations. Therefore much has been written and said on the problem, much more than I myself know or have read. However, some important truths which bear on the question I have seen mentioned little, or not at all. Let them surface here.
By way of preliminary, let us say where the blame does not essentially belong. It does not essentially belong with the media. This letter frequently calls the media "vile", and their vileness shows up in this case in their using the word "pedophilia" rather than "homosexuality" to name the problem. The word "pedophilia" refers properly to the molestation and abuse of children, let us say under the age of 10, whereas according to numerous reports the overwhelming majority of the crimes of which the priests are being accused involve adolescent boys, over 10 years old, activity which would normally be called by the h— word.
But for years now the media in their vileness have been conducting a consistent and persistent campaign to legitimize in the popular mind the sin of h—, also called the sin against nature, one of the four sins crying to Heaven for vengeance. How then could the media have glorified h— activity for so long, and then turn around and condemn it in priests? Hence their pretence that the problem is pedophilia, because most people are — still — horrified by the molestation and abuse of small children, whereas they are being — in large part by the media — desensitized to the horror of that sin against nature, crying to Heaven.
The media can also be blamed for co-ordinating what is surely a world-wide campaign to exploit to the full this present weakness of the Church. Having been taken largely into the hands of Mother Church's enemies, by the lack of vigilance or care on the part of Mother Church's friends, the media are no friends of the Church, and so they are naturally using to the full this opportunity to pull the Church down. However, there is no smoke without fire, says the proverb. How could the media make smoke unless there was some fire within the Church? If there was no such widespread misbehaviour amongst churchmen, and known to the people, what could the worst of media do? Essentially, the churchmen committing or covering for the sins cannot blame the media.
Nor can they blame the people for being unreasonable, because in at least two respects popular reaction within the United States is seeming to be reasonable.
Firstly, while every Catholic priest should at all times and in all places, by the sublimity of his calling, behave like an angel, nevertheless he carries the treasure of his priesthood in that weak vessel of clay which is fallen human nature (II Cor. IV, 7), so that none of us who knows human weakness is entirely surprised to find even its worst outbreaks recurring within the priesthood, alas. Reasonably, the American people today are showing themselves less shocked by the lower clergy committing the sins than by the higher clergy covering for them, which is no longer a weakness (however grave) of the flesh.
And secondly, to the people's credit, when they blame the higher clergy for covering for the sins of the lower, they do seem to some extent to be recognizing a prior right of the Church over the State to discipline men of the Church. The people seem to be saying less that priestly crimes are a matter for the State, than that the Church should keep order in her own house, which, as long as the Church does so, is ancient good sense.
Therefore neither media nor people are essentially to blame. We come back to the churchmen. And if, as said, men who are Catholic priests have in all times and places given proof of their human weakness, then what is special about today's problem is its scale. The sin of h— amongst priests seems to be no longer scattershot but rather systemic. And, what angers so many people, it seems to have been systematically swept under the carpet by the higher clergy.
Alas, it is notorious that for tens of years now the Catholic Church has been infiltrated in the USA by h—s. Back in the 1980's, Fr. Enrique Rueda published his book "The h— network" to document this fact with a mass of evidence. Today one learns that the mainstream seminaries are riddled with h— professors and h— seminarians. As one bishop recently commented, a first step in cleaning up the present mess would be to "de-lavenderise" the seminaries. Another bishop commented how apprehensive are normal (i.e. "straight") young men of entering the U.S. seminaries today, for fear of being harassed by these perverts who are protected by the system!
But how can the system have reached this point? Here is where two systemic answers arise, neither of which is mentioned much today, if at all, and neither of which will be pleasing to today's Catholic hierarchy. That is exactly why there is a systemic problem. The first of these answers concerns the Mass, the second, still more generally, concerns the Ten Commandments.
As for the Mass, Archbishop Lefebvre always used to say that he could not have operated any of his seminaries with the Novus Ordo Mass (NOM). Everything possible was done by Rome in the 1970's and 1980's to make him introduce the NOM into his seminaries, but he said that had he done so, he might as well have put the keys in the seminary doors, and walked away! He himself never put it this way, but as far as he was concerned, a Catholic seminary without the true (Tridentine) Mass is like an atomic reactor without the uranium. There was no way he could make real priests with a dummy Mass.
For, he always said, priest and sacrifice are intimately related. There can be no ritual sacrifice without priest, no priest without sacrifice. The sacrifice is at the heart of the priest, and if you take away his sacrifice, you tear out the heart of the priest. So if you dummify the Mass, which is of course the Catholic priest's sacrifice, then you dumbify the priest. And if you dumbify the Catholic priest, then he is liable to turn in all kinds of dumb directions for substitute purposes and satisfactions, which will include h— activity. I think if Archbishop Lefebvre were alive today, he would say that, given that the Novus Ordo Mass has now been imposed on Catholic priests for 30-plus years, the astonishing thing is not how much h— activity there is amongst priests, but how little!
However, as in the whole of today's crisis of the Church, while the problem of the Mass is the outstanding symptom, the malady is broader and deeper. What the NOM is essentially tending towards is to put man in the place of God, direct violation of the First Commandment, "I am the Lord thy God, and thou shall not have strange gods before me" (Exodus XX, 2,3). In fact the whole Newchurch's essential drift and aim is the idolatrous putting of man in the place of God. Now what does St. Paul (word of God) say are the consequences of idolatry? See Romans I, 18-31. "Men who detain the truth of God in injustice (18)... changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man (23), wherefore [I underline] God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their bodies among themselves (24)".
St. Paul goes on to repeat this cause and effect connection between breaking the First and the Sixth Commandments with specific reference to the sin against nature: "Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator.... (24). For this cause [I underline] God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature (26). And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error (27)". And in case we have still not understood that idolatry is at the heart of the problem, St. Paul says it a third time! - "And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge [I underline], God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient (28)", and there follows a list of grave sins.
God forbid "Traditionalists" should throw stones at the weakness of mainstream priests, because we could be punished by His allowing us to fall into the same traps. But it is not Traditionalists who made two times two equal four. It is St. Paul, speaking for God, who puts his finger here on the systemic problem of the Newchurch. God uses this sin to highlight idolatry, and He seems now to be resorting to the secular authority to clean this sin out of His Church. Both moves are acts of mercy on His part. May He have mercy upon us all!
More positively, if I know a h—, and wish to get him (or her) out of it, let me do all I can to bring him back towards the true love and worship of the true God. It was when Augustine found the true God and began obeying the First Commandment, that he found the strength to obey the Sixth!
God bless us all, in Christ,
Resurrection of the Arts
April 1, 2002
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
The arts today are dying or dead. What will it take to resurrect them? Eastertide may be the right time of year to consider a sequence of three museums in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which by presenting respectively art of past, present and future, may put us on the track of an answer.
The first of the three is the Frick Museum, a classical museum containing painting, sculpture and decorative arts by famous artists of past centuries. Completed in 1969 by Helen Frick, daughter of Pittsburgh coal millionaire Henry Clay Frick, it contains her collection of masterpieces, now bequeathed to her city and nation.
The second is the Andy Warhol Museum-,a museum of a different style which might be called a "factory", because that is the name that the famous American "Pop" artist of the 1960's, Andy Warhol, gave to his New York studio, out of which came the exhibits now filling the museum named after him in his home town of Pittsburgh.
The third museum is not called a museum at all, but goes by the name of the "Mattress Factory". It contains a series of exhibits - if one can call them that - put together by contemporary artists - if one can call them that - from various nations, but living and working in Pittsburgh to produce, as the publicity material calls it, "art that you can get into” (we will see what that means). Indeed the exhibits in the "Mattress Factory" are so different from those in the Frick museum that even to mention them in the same breath raises instantly the great question, what is art?
If to answer we start out from the exhibits, nobody would deny the name of "art" to the religious pictures, five to six hundred years old, which are the glory of the Frick Museum. Painted originally for purely religious purposes, they present Our Lord or Our Lady or Catholic Saints with a visual beauty springing from their spiritual depth. With no houses, buildings or landscapes in view (at least prior to the Renaissance), they offer almost no visualization of the outer world of matter, but there is, through the painters' pursuit of the spirit, a huge presentation of the inner world of the soul, or, a deep and noble vision of life. So if for the moment we define the artist as a man with an eye and a hand, then when souls were full of God, an eye saw and a hand moved to generate art of the highest kind.
We skid down half a millennium to the second museum, of Andy Warhol (1928-1987), who was certainly a man with an eye and a hand. He had no gigantic talent, like that in modern times of a Pablo Picasso, but he did have a real talent with which he achieved in the 1950's a very successful career as a commercial graphic artist. However in 1960 at age 32 he shed commercial work as such, and set out to conquer the prestigious art-world of New York. He believed in making money but he also believed in Art, so he would from now produce artefacts fit to be shown in museums.
Notwithstanding, the modern world with its commerce and consumer products was by now well into his bloodstream, besides surrounding him on all sides, as it surrounds all of us. So what would make him famous would be his resorting to an old-style medium to express a contemporary message, for instance a meticulous oil-on-canvas painting in black and white - of the front page of a newspaper! Or a screen made fit to hang on a museum wall, portraying a Campbell's soup-can. Or, to hold up the mirror to our industrialization and mass-production, a screen-print of one hundred such soup-cans in mechanical rows.
The interest of Warhol - and he does continue to interest people, as on-going exhibitions of his work prove - thus consists in his combining prestige with trash, or high-class presentation with low-class content, or, the noble art-in-a-museum framework from the past with the ignoble artefacts of our mechanized and throwaway present. Each time the prestige medium jars with the trash content, there is a little electric shock - the prestige gilds the trashy message even while the trash besmirches the prestigious medium.
ln the case of Warhol, there can still be seen in his use of colour and line the eye and hand of an artist at work, but are there spirit, or soul, or vision? Only just enough to enable him to hold up the mirror to our fragmentary and dislocated world which Warhol does not basically criticize, but accepts. In brief, the artist who believed in Art generates museums - Warhol produced enough product to fill dozens of them!
Finally we come to the third "museum", or the "Mattress Factory". Andy Warhol had called his New York studio the "factory" no doubt because he wished, instead of being scorned by our materialistic society as an "artist", to be admired by it as a "manufacturer". In this too he holds up the mirror to his age. So I would guess it was following Warhol's example that super-modern artists of Pittsburgh kept on the functional name of a disused mattress factory when they look it over to display their wares.
But how were they to out-Warhol Warhol? Go and see. On three or four floors, with a few rooms to each floor, most of the rooms are virtually empty! In one room, some wires run across the floor between little up-turned loud-speaker dishes which gently fizzle. ln another room there is at one end a false window lit with blue light from behind. Another long room is actually filled, with a jungle of barbed wire festooned with scraps of popped balloons. The title of this art-work is "Beautiful Violence". Get it? Barbed wire = violence, balloons = beautiful. Wow! In another room, three shop-display mannequins dressed in wigs and red paint-blotches stand on a correspondingly blotched floor amidst four mirror-walls and beneath a mirror-ceiling, so that if you get into the mirror-room (remember? - "art you can get into"), you see yourself amidst the mannequins multiplied for mirror-miles around!
ln brief, when men believed in God, they produced the highest art. When they ceased to believe in God but still believeved in Art (with a capital letter) as a spin-off from God, substituting for Him, then they produced imitation temples to house that Art, namely colonnaded museums (and concert-halls) to enshrine their substitute-religion. But when men moved so far from God as to lose all sense of what art is about ("Honey, you look at the pictures, and I'll read out the catalogue"), then Museums (by now with capital letter) became a shell-game, and they fill themselves with substitute-art, in fact with anyhing that goes, until the whole shell-game will collapse.
But do not think that the shell-game is yet collapsing! Fabulous "installation museums" (or whatever one cares to call them) are being built all over the world. Pittsburgh's "Mattress Factory" is famous amongst them, and has recently obtained funding to the tune of three quarters of a million dollars for its "in-residence" artists and its 27,500 annual visitors! "Wow! Where's the nearest mattress? Perhaps if I scattered a bunch of Seminary Letters over it, and called it "I Rest My Case", somebody would grant me $ 100,000? Can't wait! I sure no longer need an eye or a hand to be an "artist" - just plenty of B. Sc., without the c.
So what is art? Most broadly defined so as to include the exhibits of the "Mattress Factory", we might say it is the manipulation of more or less manipulable materials to express for others what is in the manipulator's soul. The more finely manipulable the material, the finer the art, which is why oil-on-canvas has had such a long and honourable career. However if barbed wire and balloons express something either for their manipulator, or for any visitor to the "Mattress Factory", then "Beautiful Violence" is also art in this broadest sense. The whole question comes back to what is in men's souls.
For some will deny that the soul even exists, but the sequence of our three museums, located in Pittsburgh but parallelable anywhere, demonstrates that the message (or soul) governs the medium. As the message ebbs or flows, so rises or falls the medium. God as message generated art as medium; Art as message generated museums as medium; museums as message generate barbed wire and balloons as medium - anything to get somebody to visit a Museum.
Coming as he does between the Frick Museum and the "Mattress Factory", Andy Warhol is especially valuable to illustrate this process. Between prestige and trash, he was pivotal. As he trashed prestige, so he gave prestige to trash. Filling the then prestige medium of museums with a trash message, he signaled the end of museums and their replacement by "factories", the end of Art and the arrival of Anything Visual Goes. He is as clearly the end of the Frick line as he is the beginning of the "Factory" line. Judged by the prestige standards preceding him, he is trash. Judged by the trash standards which he did much to establish, he is the prestigious Prince of Pop Art. When his work first gained admittance to a prestigious New York art gallery, the abstract artists previously shown there walked out as one man to demonstrate their disgust with his 'Pop Art". Yet Warhol's "Pop" is high art compared with much that has followed.
And the future of art? Clearly it depends on what will be in men's souls. If there is order, harmony and beauty in the souls, there will be order, harmony and beauty in the arts. If there is only ugliness and disharmony in the souls, there will only be ugliness and disharmony in the manipulation of materials, with medium to match.
And from where do up-lift and beauty come into the souls of men, weighted always downwards by original sin? From God alone. And in a world and a civilization that has known Jesus Christ, Son of God, whom to hate is to hate the Father (Jn XV, 23), from Jesus Christ alone. Ever since the coming of Jesus Christ, His Catholic Church has been a magnificent mother of the arts, and a just judgment upon the arts of the last half millennium must recognize that even artists in more or less rebellion against God have only been great as artists by what they were continuing of the Catholic heritage, and not by their rebellion, which fed on what it was destroying and destroyed what it fed on. Interestingly, Andy Warhol was a Catholic son of devout Czech immigrants, and a regular Mass-goer. Say what one will about the shallowness of his art (he himself said, "I am a deeply superficial person"), would he have any of the interest he has without that Catholic perspective?
Therefore only from the true Mass of the one Man-God has Western art any future. From loss of God the museums and concert-halls are dead or dying. But in, for instance, SSPX Mass-centres, the "Traditionalists" want music and decoration worthy of the great God they humbly worship. They start a choir. Then the fights start! But art is on the move again. Mother Church is once more mothering the arts. Thank you, great God! Let us only adore and worship and love You at Mass, and You will raise our arts from their graves.
Notice from the enclosed summer schedule that men could attend an Ignatian retreat and then a week of the Literature Camp, or a week of Literature and then a Session on Encyclicals. This summer offers unusual possibilities. Ladies, send your menfolk, and then draw out of them what you need when they get home!
Happy Eastertide! With my blessing, in Christ,
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
The arts today are dying or dead. What will it take to resurrect them? Eastertide may be the right time of year to consider a sequence of three museums in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which by presenting respectively art of past, present and future, may put us on the track of an answer.
The first of the three is the Frick Museum, a classical museum containing painting, sculpture and decorative arts by famous artists of past centuries. Completed in 1969 by Helen Frick, daughter of Pittsburgh coal millionaire Henry Clay Frick, it contains her collection of masterpieces, now bequeathed to her city and nation.
The second is the Andy Warhol Museum-,a museum of a different style which might be called a "factory", because that is the name that the famous American "Pop" artist of the 1960's, Andy Warhol, gave to his New York studio, out of which came the exhibits now filling the museum named after him in his home town of Pittsburgh.
The third museum is not called a museum at all, but goes by the name of the "Mattress Factory". It contains a series of exhibits - if one can call them that - put together by contemporary artists - if one can call them that - from various nations, but living and working in Pittsburgh to produce, as the publicity material calls it, "art that you can get into” (we will see what that means). Indeed the exhibits in the "Mattress Factory" are so different from those in the Frick museum that even to mention them in the same breath raises instantly the great question, what is art?
If to answer we start out from the exhibits, nobody would deny the name of "art" to the religious pictures, five to six hundred years old, which are the glory of the Frick Museum. Painted originally for purely religious purposes, they present Our Lord or Our Lady or Catholic Saints with a visual beauty springing from their spiritual depth. With no houses, buildings or landscapes in view (at least prior to the Renaissance), they offer almost no visualization of the outer world of matter, but there is, through the painters' pursuit of the spirit, a huge presentation of the inner world of the soul, or, a deep and noble vision of life. So if for the moment we define the artist as a man with an eye and a hand, then when souls were full of God, an eye saw and a hand moved to generate art of the highest kind.
We skid down half a millennium to the second museum, of Andy Warhol (1928-1987), who was certainly a man with an eye and a hand. He had no gigantic talent, like that in modern times of a Pablo Picasso, but he did have a real talent with which he achieved in the 1950's a very successful career as a commercial graphic artist. However in 1960 at age 32 he shed commercial work as such, and set out to conquer the prestigious art-world of New York. He believed in making money but he also believed in Art, so he would from now produce artefacts fit to be shown in museums.
Notwithstanding, the modern world with its commerce and consumer products was by now well into his bloodstream, besides surrounding him on all sides, as it surrounds all of us. So what would make him famous would be his resorting to an old-style medium to express a contemporary message, for instance a meticulous oil-on-canvas painting in black and white - of the front page of a newspaper! Or a screen made fit to hang on a museum wall, portraying a Campbell's soup-can. Or, to hold up the mirror to our industrialization and mass-production, a screen-print of one hundred such soup-cans in mechanical rows.
The interest of Warhol - and he does continue to interest people, as on-going exhibitions of his work prove - thus consists in his combining prestige with trash, or high-class presentation with low-class content, or, the noble art-in-a-museum framework from the past with the ignoble artefacts of our mechanized and throwaway present. Each time the prestige medium jars with the trash content, there is a little electric shock - the prestige gilds the trashy message even while the trash besmirches the prestigious medium.
ln the case of Warhol, there can still be seen in his use of colour and line the eye and hand of an artist at work, but are there spirit, or soul, or vision? Only just enough to enable him to hold up the mirror to our fragmentary and dislocated world which Warhol does not basically criticize, but accepts. In brief, the artist who believed in Art generates museums - Warhol produced enough product to fill dozens of them!
Finally we come to the third "museum", or the "Mattress Factory". Andy Warhol had called his New York studio the "factory" no doubt because he wished, instead of being scorned by our materialistic society as an "artist", to be admired by it as a "manufacturer". In this too he holds up the mirror to his age. So I would guess it was following Warhol's example that super-modern artists of Pittsburgh kept on the functional name of a disused mattress factory when they look it over to display their wares.
But how were they to out-Warhol Warhol? Go and see. On three or four floors, with a few rooms to each floor, most of the rooms are virtually empty! In one room, some wires run across the floor between little up-turned loud-speaker dishes which gently fizzle. ln another room there is at one end a false window lit with blue light from behind. Another long room is actually filled, with a jungle of barbed wire festooned with scraps of popped balloons. The title of this art-work is "Beautiful Violence". Get it? Barbed wire = violence, balloons = beautiful. Wow! In another room, three shop-display mannequins dressed in wigs and red paint-blotches stand on a correspondingly blotched floor amidst four mirror-walls and beneath a mirror-ceiling, so that if you get into the mirror-room (remember? - "art you can get into"), you see yourself amidst the mannequins multiplied for mirror-miles around!
ln brief, when men believed in God, they produced the highest art. When they ceased to believe in God but still believeved in Art (with a capital letter) as a spin-off from God, substituting for Him, then they produced imitation temples to house that Art, namely colonnaded museums (and concert-halls) to enshrine their substitute-religion. But when men moved so far from God as to lose all sense of what art is about ("Honey, you look at the pictures, and I'll read out the catalogue"), then Museums (by now with capital letter) became a shell-game, and they fill themselves with substitute-art, in fact with anyhing that goes, until the whole shell-game will collapse.
But do not think that the shell-game is yet collapsing! Fabulous "installation museums" (or whatever one cares to call them) are being built all over the world. Pittsburgh's "Mattress Factory" is famous amongst them, and has recently obtained funding to the tune of three quarters of a million dollars for its "in-residence" artists and its 27,500 annual visitors! "Wow! Where's the nearest mattress? Perhaps if I scattered a bunch of Seminary Letters over it, and called it "I Rest My Case", somebody would grant me $ 100,000? Can't wait! I sure no longer need an eye or a hand to be an "artist" - just plenty of B. Sc., without the c.
So what is art? Most broadly defined so as to include the exhibits of the "Mattress Factory", we might say it is the manipulation of more or less manipulable materials to express for others what is in the manipulator's soul. The more finely manipulable the material, the finer the art, which is why oil-on-canvas has had such a long and honourable career. However if barbed wire and balloons express something either for their manipulator, or for any visitor to the "Mattress Factory", then "Beautiful Violence" is also art in this broadest sense. The whole question comes back to what is in men's souls.
For some will deny that the soul even exists, but the sequence of our three museums, located in Pittsburgh but parallelable anywhere, demonstrates that the message (or soul) governs the medium. As the message ebbs or flows, so rises or falls the medium. God as message generated art as medium; Art as message generated museums as medium; museums as message generate barbed wire and balloons as medium - anything to get somebody to visit a Museum.
Coming as he does between the Frick Museum and the "Mattress Factory", Andy Warhol is especially valuable to illustrate this process. Between prestige and trash, he was pivotal. As he trashed prestige, so he gave prestige to trash. Filling the then prestige medium of museums with a trash message, he signaled the end of museums and their replacement by "factories", the end of Art and the arrival of Anything Visual Goes. He is as clearly the end of the Frick line as he is the beginning of the "Factory" line. Judged by the prestige standards preceding him, he is trash. Judged by the trash standards which he did much to establish, he is the prestigious Prince of Pop Art. When his work first gained admittance to a prestigious New York art gallery, the abstract artists previously shown there walked out as one man to demonstrate their disgust with his 'Pop Art". Yet Warhol's "Pop" is high art compared with much that has followed.
And the future of art? Clearly it depends on what will be in men's souls. If there is order, harmony and beauty in the souls, there will be order, harmony and beauty in the arts. If there is only ugliness and disharmony in the souls, there will only be ugliness and disharmony in the manipulation of materials, with medium to match.
And from where do up-lift and beauty come into the souls of men, weighted always downwards by original sin? From God alone. And in a world and a civilization that has known Jesus Christ, Son of God, whom to hate is to hate the Father (Jn XV, 23), from Jesus Christ alone. Ever since the coming of Jesus Christ, His Catholic Church has been a magnificent mother of the arts, and a just judgment upon the arts of the last half millennium must recognize that even artists in more or less rebellion against God have only been great as artists by what they were continuing of the Catholic heritage, and not by their rebellion, which fed on what it was destroying and destroyed what it fed on. Interestingly, Andy Warhol was a Catholic son of devout Czech immigrants, and a regular Mass-goer. Say what one will about the shallowness of his art (he himself said, "I am a deeply superficial person"), would he have any of the interest he has without that Catholic perspective?
Therefore only from the true Mass of the one Man-God has Western art any future. From loss of God the museums and concert-halls are dead or dying. But in, for instance, SSPX Mass-centres, the "Traditionalists" want music and decoration worthy of the great God they humbly worship. They start a choir. Then the fights start! But art is on the move again. Mother Church is once more mothering the arts. Thank you, great God! Let us only adore and worship and love You at Mass, and You will raise our arts from their graves.
Notice from the enclosed summer schedule that men could attend an Ignatian retreat and then a week of the Literature Camp, or a week of Literature and then a Session on Encyclicals. This summer offers unusual possibilities. Ladies, send your menfolk, and then draw out of them what you need when they get home!
Happy Eastertide! With my blessing, in Christ,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
