Brahms and the need for God to be a part of everything we do

December 1, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

Advent is here again, a new Church year has begun, summer is approaching fast, the years spin by and "now is the hour for us to rise from sleep", "denn alles Fleisch es ist wie Gras", "for all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of men as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away".

These words of Scripture (I Pet. 1,24) were chosen by the famous classical composer, Brahms, for the second chorus of his "German Requiem", written in the 1860's to commemorate the death of his master and friend, Robert Schumann. The chorus is a mighty piece, with the melody for these words expressing a mighty sadness. It was well chosen as background music for a video-tape recently made on the desolation of the battle of Verdun, where in 1916 hundreds of thousands of the bravest young Frenchmen and Germans slaughtered one another to no apparent purpose. The desolation within one musician's breast in 1866 had become the desolation of half a million soldier's lives fifty years later. Thus life follows art. Why? Because both follow religion. In his "German Requiem" Brahms deliberately omitted any mention of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Thereby hangs the tale.

The music of Brahms may be unknown to many of you. Generally it is liked or disliked for a similar reason, because of its autumnal cast. Always solid and well-carpentered, often sombre, like a late Victorian house of the same period, it appeals to those who, like the poet Keats, enjoy the;

"Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness,
Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun..."

but whoever resents the season of the dying of the year will prefer less dark-hued music, music that maybe ripples with spring or pretends that life is an endless summer's morning, or prattles of an endless beautiful feeling that everything's going my way.

There is no such superficiality in Brahms who in his Requiem squarely confronts the great problem of life and death by means of a series of texts chosen by the composer himself from Holy Scripture. Indeed the Requiem contains some of his darkest music, and yet the climax comes in the sixth chorus with the setting of I Corinthians XV 52-55: "For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall rise incorruptible: and we shall be changed ...then shall come to pass the saying that is written, `Death is swallowed up in victory, O death, where is thy sting?"' And the music is full of heart, with melodies of warmth and consolation — then did Brahms believe in the Resurrection, and if he did, how could his music at other moments be so dark?

Interesting question. Asked once about his choice of texts, Brahms replied that it was meant to be a human, not a Christian, Requiem. How, then, texts of the Resurrection? - "I have selected many things because I am a musician, because I needed them, because I can't argue with the venerable writers or cross out their `hereafter'. I say no more..." However, at the end of his life he said the more: "Neither when I wrote my Requiem (1866) did I, nor now (1896) do I, believe in the immortality of the soul". The quotation from Corinthians referring to the resurrection of body and soul had merely "made a deep impression" on him, "as a symbol that could be set to music".

Clearly, by his own testimony, Brahms was a humanist with no faith in the Light of the World, which explains the darkness in his music, and Scripture was for him not a book of real truth but a quarry of texts to serve as vehicle for noble sentiments in music. On the other hand equally clear from the music is that his sentiments were noble. When death cuts men down like the grass of the field, Brahms presents no facile solution - how he would have despised the Novus Ordo with its white-vested funerals! Death is as tragic as life is grand, but the music feels their meaning: grief and desolation, consolation and calm.

"Oh, Brahms," said his fellow composer Auton Dvorak, "What a great man, and he does not believe!" Dvorak might have said, what a warm heart for such coldness in the head. In Brahms' head is the darkness of unbelief, but carrying over from his heart into his music is the after-glow of the light and warmth of the belief of preceding generations.

However, the heart is not designed to stay warm indefinitely when the head is in darkness. That is why Brahms has been well called, as far as classical music is concerned, the last of the Caesars. Directly after him come Schoenberg and moderns, empty heads and empty hearts, because "the fish rots from the head", says the proverb, and as the head is today, so the heart is tomorrow. Disbelieved Scripture could still tell the sentiments of Brahms, but not those of his successors. Where a head would no longer lead, the feelings were bound to run out. Unless Germany returned to believing, the emptiness and coldness were bound to come out in something like the battlefield of Verdun. Life follows art follows religion.

Thus war and peace, politics and music, all activities of man as man and not just as an animal, are done by man's faith or his lack of it, and that does not mean, just any faith. It is an insult to man to hold that just so long as he fills his head with some nice convincing delusion, then everything will come out fine. Yet how many people think that just so long as one believes in something, or Someone, it matters little what or who one believes in. All such people have a low opinion of men. No. Men need the truth. They can recognize it. They may refuse it But it is what it is, independently of them, it is what they need and upon it they flourish, whereas upon a diet of lies, however flattering and cozy, men wither.

Now there are certainly truths within the reach of man's reason, which he needs and cannot live without, for instance water is not gasoline and gasoline is not water. But if it turns out to be true also that the main truths are above the reach of his reason — not contrary to it, but above it — then he will have to reach for them with something more than just reason, but they will still have to be truths and not just withering delusions.

Now Catholics know by their reason that there is one Supreme Being, God, just as they know by their Faith, with an absolute certainty of possessing the truth, that he is three Persons in one Being, that the second of these Persons took flesh, that he founded one church (not two, let alone two thousand), and that within that Catholic Church the divine condescension to men that began with his Incarnation continues in the most incredible manner in the sacraments, so that for instance he who in his human life handed himself over once into his enemies' hands in the Garden of Gethsemane, now in his sacramental life puts himself - now literally! - into their hands times without number every day whenever he is for instance mistreated in the Holy Eucharist

Nor is this view of the Master of the Universe a comforting delusion, kidology, feel-goodery or sentimentality. It is rock-solid supernatural fact. Whoever denies it, Protestant or Jew or Communist or atheist or Hindu or whoever, the Catholic knows with an absolute certainty that they are wrong, and he prays to be ready to shed his blood, if necessary, to witness to the truth, for their sake. Upon no less solid a foundation of truth was built the musical tradition and the noble culture to which Brahms was heir. The tradition and the nobility he in turn handed down, but no longer with their foundation, Like the grin of the Cheshire cat without the cat, of the same period. It could not last. It did not last. To think that it could have lasted is to insult man. That it did not last is a testimony to man, to his need of truth. Wreckers like Schoenberg were bound to arise who would pull the house down for its lack of foundation. Today's world is full of such wreckers who at least testify to the demand for truth and to the refusal of illusion.

So what are the wreckers clamouring for? Clear. The foundational Truth, fully and clearly professed. They need witnesses to the fullness of the Faith. Blood-witnesses may be the only ones that can convince them, because there are too many words out there already, most of them lies. It will take blood to coagulate such a hemorrhaging of the truth

Brahms did not return to the foundation of the warmth of which and off which he composed. Nor did his countrymen, in general. They were given a terrible lesson at Verdun, but instead of returning to God, they fumed to national socialism, only to be given an even more terrible lesson in World War II. Chastened for a while, under Catholic Chancellor Adenauer the Germans rebuilt, but misled like everyone else by Vatican II they mostly gave up the Faith and Church of Adenauer and so they are now again rending one another in search of the solution on which they turned their backs - the situation comes daily closer to a cosmic re-run of Verdun, Cosmic, because of course the problem is not confined to the country of Brahms (but maybe some readers needed to see some other country than theirs coming under fire!) - the problem is universal. Dear, dear Catholic readers, the solution is in our hands, as Catholics. It is in nobody else's.

Here is Advent again, the season to prepare for the coming of the Light into the world. He must have entry into our hearts and lives, into our music and politics. How can he solve their problems if we shut him out? He belongs in our homes, in our schools, in our hospitals, in our music, in our politics. We say no to the separation of Catholic Church and State, no to the promotion of filth in the arts, no to that hypocritical refusal of censorship which vigorously censors and cuts out any thought of God, let alone mention of the divine name.

The latest election in the U.S.A. surely shifts the programme of the wreckers from forward to fast forward. It is up to every one of us that has the true Catholic Faith to put back into circulation by our example that truth, purity and transcendence of Jesus Christ which alone can persuade the wreckers that they are making a mistake, and if it has to be with our blood, so be it! They have the prison-camps ready for us in the Dakotas? So help us God, we will be ready for them: Today's music is in our hearts, and tomorrow's is in the Faith in our minds.

One preparatory session for men, boot-camp of the spirit, St. Ignatius' Spiritual Exercises, will be held here at the Seminary from December 26 to 31. Make use of the opportunity. The date of the priestly ordinations this summer wavered for a moment, but is now confirmed on Saturday, June 19.

With all good wishes and blessings for Christmas and a Happy New Year, with our unusual Christmas card enclosed, a summary of the Epistle to the Romans,

Sincerely yours by the cradle of Bethlehem,

Argentinian ceremonies, Christopher Columbus, religious liberty

November 5, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

Enclosed is a Verbum dated from last spring when we published the Columbus Verbum instead. That was to tell some of the truth about Christopher Columbus in advance of much untruth that might be told about him around October 12, the day itself of the Discovery of America 500 years ago.

In the Superior General's letter #43, also enclosed, there is a brief description of the Society's Commemorative Congress held in the Argentine from October 9 to 12. This Congress was a great success. On the Friday afternoon and all day Saturday a series of conferences was given in a hall in central Buenos Aires before an audience of a few hundred people including visitors from all countries of South America except Ecuador and Venezuela. The conferences ranged over a variety of aspects of the Discovery of America, and were well received. Your servant's conference on "Columbus and the Millennia" should be appearing in the December "Angelus". It surveys the providential role of Columban Christendom over the last quarter of Christianity's 2,000 years.

On Sunday October 11 a large number of participants in the Congress traveled out of Buenos Aires the 30 odd miles to the, Society's Seminary in La Reja, where in the morning there was a ceremony of receiving the cassock Tonsure and Minor Orders for younger seminarians. This was followed by the traditional Argentinian "asado", or roast, chunks of beef roasted on an open fire from an animal or animals slaughtered for the occasion. At La Reja as at Winona, not all guests for lunch could be brought inside, but in the afternoon everyone was outside for the Argentinian sports, a small-scale rodeo and soccer.

Sunday evening, coming close to 2 a.m. Monday which was the very hour of Columbus' ships sighting land 500 years ago, the seminarians and their professors put on stage scenes from a French play on Columbus from the beginning of this century by Paul Claudel. The seminarians acquitted themselves well, but the star of the evening was no doubt the Rector, Fr. Dominique Lagneau, who displayed remarkable talent as a kind of combined Impresario, Commentator and Master of Ceremonies.

The Seminary had few materials and can have had little time to put together a theatrical production, but if one has a real story to tell and conviction with which to tell it, it is astonishing how any material deficiencies drop out of view. When Marshall McLuhan said in the 1960's, "The medium is the message", surely he meant that in today's world the message is so non-existent that the medium has to try to replace it, hence today's obsession with the means or paraphernalia of communication. However, put back a real message, like the epic of Columbus, and believe in it, and all problems of the means of communicating resolve themselves. "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you" (Mt. VI, 33).

On the day of the 12th itself, the Quincentennial celebrations ended with a pilgrimage on foot from the Seminary in the morning to arrive at the famous Argentinian shrine of Our Lady of Lujan in the evening. Hundreds of footsore but happy pilgrims, mostly youngsters, covered the 20 miles in time for a Solemn Mass celebrated not of course in the Basilica but under pine-trees in the nearby garden of a friend. The Superior General gave the sermon, and after Mass the District Superior, Fr. Xavier Beauvais, said a few words of encouragement to the pilgrims before leading them on-a brief-incursion into the Basilica, where the "Lefebvrites" were not welcome, but where Fr. Beauvais nevertheless managed to make the intended Consecration of the Society's South American District to the Mother of God. Then the pilgrims dispersed.

"If thou knewest the gift of God..." The Society had commemorated God's immense gift to souls and to the Church, of the Catholic Discovery of America. Two more thoughts, from before and after the Discovery –

Before, Christopher Columbus had no extraordinary feats to his credit, and had he not persevered in crossing the Atlantic, or had he not succeeded in returning, surely he would have remained unknown to history. For the great part of his life, he had quietly done his professional and religious duties, making himself a devout Catholic and a highly competent sailor. To that devotion and competence, the subsequent fame was like accidental, indeed he died abandoned and disregarded. Moral of the story: to imitate Columbus, we cannot do better than our daily duty. The rest is in God's hands. He may well be arranging heroic fame for a number of souls today quietly pursuing devotion and competence, but the fame is not the point.

Notice similarly after the Discovery that it would have been nothing if after Columbus himself there had not been a host of soldiers, priests, administrators to follow in his wake and construct a Catholic empire for the salvation of millions of souls. The overwhelming majority of these soldiers, priests and administrators are unknown to history, their perseverance, achievements and sufferings are unsung, yet without them Columbus would merely have made an interesting sight-seeing trip... Like a series of zeroes which are nothing in themselves but put behind the figure one of a Columbus, make ten or a hundred or a thousand million, the one without the zeroes is insignificant, the zeroes without the one even more so. Moral of the story? The substance of the Discovery lay in countless unknown Catholics quietly doing the daily task laid by Providence before them.

So the Quincentennial has reminded us of a great human achievement, a heroic Catholic exploit, an unparalleled feat of God and man, yet at its heart lies something beyond none of us, but within our daily reach: our daily duty.

Of course that duty alone is set fair to become each day more heroic if the newly elected American President lives up to his campaign promises, for instance to allow (read, to force) homosexuals into the armed forces. Or to allow (read, to force) federally funded clinics to promote abortion as a means of birth control. Poor pro-lifers!

In Maryland on November 3rd, straight abortion, yes or no, was on the ballot, and Marylanders voted 61 % in favour to 39% against! We cannot deceive ourselves any longer: democracy, the ballot box, public opinion, the Constitution, decent Americans, even the Supreme Court after 12 years of conservatives" in control, are not going to get rid of abortion. The people have spoken. The people want abortion. The people want a President who will make the rafters ring with defiance of any supposed limitation upon their liberties, a President who will show the world that man can dodge any drafts. With the election of Bill Clinton, the liberal dream has taken another significant step forward towards the Brave New World "I have a dream" — we have a dream — yes, indeed you have a dream!

And the Lord God? With a divine patience He is not missing one gram of our wickedness but He is respecting our free will, leaving us to our own devices, and relying on events to prove to us how foolish these devices are. Alas, only a minority will let themselves be woken from their dream. And when the Lord God is finally reduced to cleaning out, with fire and brimstone, there will be many shaking their fist at Him and crying out, "You dare do this to ME? You think you have the right to tell ME what to do? Who do you think YOU are? God Almighty?" (Apoc. XVI, 21).

So where did the American dream go wrong? Catholics should be able to grasp the argument, hinted at in the enclosed Verbum, that the trouble with the Puritans' City on the Hill goes back to King Henry VIII in a poor land darkened by heresy almost one century before the shores of North America were a gleam in a Puritan sailor's eye. After all, if the true Faith is important, then heresy contradicting it is important; whereas if heresy is not important because religious liberty is the ideal, then religious liberty and not Catholicism is the real religion.

"Ah, but without religious liberty the nation could never have been unified!" Grand, but the price to be paid was that religious liberty was bound to become the real religion of that land, that is to say, the ideological basis on which the land would be built, more important than any one religion in that land, including Catholicism. But not even the Catholic Church can be built on religious liberty, witness how great sections of the Church have crumbled since Vatican II proclaimed religious liberty through the ecclesiastical land with the Decree "Dignitatis Humanae." It is not possible at one and the same time to cast adrift from rock and to build on rock.

The in-depth study of doctrinal problems, especially religious liberty, will be the substance of two courses to be offered for men at Winona this summer. The Society of St. Pius X now has two fully-fledged Ignatian Retreat Houses, up and running in Connecticut and California, so the Seminary here is going to give fewer Ignatian Retreats. Note the following general dates if you are interested (precise details will follow): June 19, 1993, priestly ordinations; week of June 21, course of Gregorian chant; week of June 28, women's five-day Ignatian Retreat; week of July 12, men's five-day Retreat; week of July 19, men's doctrinal course; week of July 26, women's five-day retreat; week of August 30, men's doctrinal course. And there is a men's retreat, December 26 through 31.

As for Christmas fast approaching, we have some Christmas cards you can order from us to send to your friends or loved ones for them to be included in the Christmas Novena of Masses starting on Christmas night at the Seminary's main altar. May I also gently recommend a tape of 24 Catholic Songs for Children made in the 1950's and being reproduced with permission by friends of the Society, the Catholic Mothers Exchange. The songs form a catechism in music, which is no doubt a good way for children to learn. The content is completely orthodox, prior to Vatican II. The tapes are being sold at $10 each, as a fund-raiser for the Dominican Sisters in Post Falls. Make checks payable to "Catholic Mothers Exchange" and post to 1295 South Oakland Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91106. If I was a distracted mom surrounded with little ones, I am sure it is a present I would like.

As it is, I find myself a distracted Rector surrounded with seminarians due to be sent out as priests upon our "darkening scene," so we ask above all for the present of your prayers, and we continue to promise you ours. God will win, but between now and then, some china is going to be broken!

May He bless you and keep you through this month of the Holy Souls, for whom remember to pray.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Defending Archbishop Lefebvre against the accusation of schism

October 6, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

A very interesting article appeared recently in a twice-monthly paper out of Italy called "Si si no no", in its August edition, Anno XVIII, #14, pp. 4-6. The article itself is a little technical, dealing with matters of Church law, but perhaps it can be explained in not too difficult terms.

The anonymous author, signing himself "Churchman" (all articles in S.S.N.N. are under pseudonyms), is defending Archbishop Lefebvre against the accusation of schism which was levelled at him when he consecrated four bishops on June 30,1988. "Churchman" admits that Pope John-Paul II was right in calling the consecrations "a schismatic act" if those consecrations be judged by the New Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1983 in the wake of Vatican II; but he demonstrates that that Council and that Code, in order to condemn the Archbishop, have to depart from Catholic Truth and Tradition, and so the Archbishop is innocent of any real accusation: he may be in schism with that Code and that Council, but only in a matter in which they are themselves in schism with Catholicism. As he always used to say, "They have only thrown me out of their Conciliar Church to which I never belonged!" Let us go into detail.

By consecrating bishops against the Pope's orders, the Archbishop committed an act of disobedience, which if it was justified by the crisis of the Church was not real (or formal) disobedience but only apparent (or material) disobedience. In any case Catholic doctrine is, in the words of the great Dominican theologian Cajetan, that "however obstinate disobedience may be, it does not become schism so long as it involves no revolt against the function of the Pope or the Church". Now the Archbishop made it abundantly clear at the time that he was in no way revolting against the Papacy or the Church, so John-Paul II in "Ecclesia Dei" needed to back up his condemnation of the Archbishop's act as being schismatic. This the Pope did by saying that the Archbishop was in fact rejecting the primacy of the Pope because "the consecration of a bishop is the sacramental perpetuation of the apostolic succession". Hence the Pope's condemnation rests upon an episcopal consecration done against his orders being not only an act of disobedience, but also necessarily a rejection of his primacy. Is it?

Here is where the new doctrine diverges from Tradition. We must first explain a classic Catholic distinction, between power of orders and power of jurisdiction. A bishop or priest may have both powers, but they are quite distinct nevertheless. His power of orders is the sacramental spiritual power he received at his own consecration or ordination to confect the sacraments, for instance to ordain priests or to hear confessions. His jurisdictional power is his quite different power or authority to say what goes, in a given diocese or parish to which he is appointed. This power he received not necessarily when he was consecrated or ordained, but when he was put in charge of that diocese or parish. That at any rate is the Traditional teaching.

Now the Pope's primacy is not a sacramental primacy, or primacy of orders, because as Bishop of Rome he is, purely as a bishop, no more or less a bishop than any other bishop. If then as Bishop of Rome he has primacy over all other bishops in the world, as he does, it is a primacy of jurisdiction, meaning the Pope has the authority to say what goes throughout the Universal Church.

Clearly then, according to Tradition, there is no clash between a "disobedient" consecration, which confers the sacramental orders but no jurisdiction, and the Pope's primacy which is one of jurisdiction. That is why Archbishop Lefebvre, following Tradition, emphasized that he was, in consecrating, conferring Orders but no ordinary jurisdiction. That is why the Society bishops go out of their way to avoid even the appearance of taking up any such jurisdiction. That is why Traditionalists cannot understand the Pope accusing Archbishop Lefebvre of schism. Disobedience, if you wish to call it that. Schism, never. But the Pope in “Ecclesia Dei” is proceeding from a brand new doctrine.

At Vatican II, in accordance with that Council's drive to democratize the Church, the document "Lumen Gentium" introduced the famous doctrine of "collegiality". It declared that "the order of bishops is the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church" (#22), in other words the Pope shares with the "college" of bishops his supreme jurisdiction over the Church. Moreover their sharing in his jurisdiction is conferred on them by their mere consecration as bishops! Text of Lumen Gentium, #21: "Episcopal consecration, together with the office of sanctifying" (power of orders), "also confers the offices of teaching and of governing" (power of jurisdiction)!

This astonishing departure from Catholic Tradition (Our Lord never said "You (plural) are Peter", but "Thou (singular) art Peter", etc.) raised a storm of protest from the Traditionalists at the Council, and a corrective Note was affixed by Paul VI to "Lumen Gentium", but that did not prevent the democratic novelty from being carried over into the new Code of Canon Law: Canon 330: " ....The Roman Pontiff, successor of Peter, and the bishops, successors of the Apostles, are joined together." Canon 336: "The college of bishops, whose head is the Supreme Pontiff is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church." And for consecration conferring jurisdiction, Canon 375: "By the fact of their episcopal consecration bishops receive along with the function of sanctifying" (power of orders) "also the functions of teaching and of ruling..." (power of jurisdiction).

In fact the New Code of Canon Law goes further yet: Canon 331: "The bishop of the Church of Rome…. is" (notice, firstly) head of the college of bishops," (notice, secondly) "the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the universal Church on earth;" (notice) "therefore, in virtue of his office he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church...", as though it is being head of the bishops' college which confers on him his power, as though not the Pope empowers the bishops, but the bishops empower the Pope!

On the basis of this new anti-Traditional doctrine, small wonder Pope John-Paul II condemned the Archbishop as schismatic! Firstly, by the mere fact of consecrating bishops the Archbishop was impinging on matters of jurisdiction, and he could not be, as he claimed in accordance with Tradition, merely conferring the fullness of Holy Orders. And secondly, by consecrating uncollegial and undemocratic bishops he was putting himself and them right outside the Spirit of Vatican Two and the spirit of the new Canon Law, proudly codified by John-Paul II in the wake of his beloved Vatican Two (see his preface to the New Code). At least nobody can ever accuse him of being unfaithful to Vatican Two!

But Paul VI with his Vatican Two and John-Paul II with his New Code can be accused of having, in that marvellous modern expression, moved the goal-posts. According to the old goal-posts, it is the Archbishop who scores, but according to the new goal-posts, it is the liberal Popes who score.

But cannot the Popes change the Church's goal-posts? Answer, not those that were put in place by Our Lord Jesus Christ himself. Now it is Our Lord who instituted the Catholic Church not as a democracy but as a monarchy, in which the Pope governs the bishops: Mt. XVI, 16: "Thou art Peter..."; Lk. XXII, 32: "...and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren" (fellow-Apostles, fellow-bishops); Jn. XXI, 15-17: "Feed my lambs" (laity), "...feed my lambs" (priests) "...feed my sheep" (bishops). And nearly two thousand years of Church history faithfully continued Christ's monarchy down to Vatican Two, after which Archbishop Lefebvre was its outstanding defender. Therefore it is the Liberalism of these Popes which is in schism, and not the Archbishop.

Poor John-Paul II! When he finds somebody resisting his Church democracy, then he comes down on them like a Church monarch! A tyrannical imposition of democracy! But that is your liberal's deep-down contradiction: — "Freedom for everyone — except for the enemies of freedom"! We continue to pray regularly and sincerely for the Pope here at the Seminary.

He is in fact coming to the New World any day now to commemorate the 500^th anniversary of the dawning of the Light of Christ in a whole hemisphere of our globe, an event which he genuinely appreciates. Let us hope his visit is not too disrupted by the revolutionaries spawned by his own liberal democratism.

We have re-printed the Columbus "Verbum". By all means order more copies if you wish. In it we should have acknowledged that the text owed much to the Big Rock Paper on Columbus written in the 1970's by Solange Hertz out of R. 2 Box 158, Leesburg, VA 22075. Many of the Big Rock papers present a fascinating Catholic perspective on modern history, not to be found elsewhere. Recommended, but prepare to be shocked, or delighted.

May Our Lord Jesus Christ reign over the nations, may he reign over the New World in particular. Christopher Columbus, Queen Isabella, we thank you for 500 years of a continent's Faith. Pray for us!

Most sincerely yours in Christ the King,

The validity of Archbishop Lefebvre's ordination and consecration

September 13, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

If one looks around one today for examples of insanity, there is not exactly a poverty of choice, but one of the choicest specimens within our ken must be the notion that Archbishop Lefebvre was invalidly ordained as a priest, and/or invalidly consecrated as a bishop.

It is an old piece of insanity which has been around for several years. It first appeared soon after the Archbishop rose to prominence in defense of Catholic Tradition. It has been firmly refuted, but every now and again it still gets wheeled out on stage by enemies of the Archbishop on the right, like an old cardboard cannon, to be fired off amidst theatrical effects with a tremendous pop of a bang, whereupon it disappears back-stage, waiting to be trundled out again for its next dramatic appearance.

Now people who love pops and bangs are thoroughly entitled to a bang for their buck. The only thing is that too many bangs are liable to damage the ear-drums so that one can no longer listen to reason. However, since there are interesting points of doctrine involved in this case, then for all those whose hearing is not too impaired, here are some arguments, drawn in large part from an article written on the question by Michael Davies in "Approaches" #71, November 1, 1980.

Archbishop Lefebvre is supposed to have been an invalid priest and/or bishop because he was both ordained priest and consecrated bishop by Cardinal Lienart, who was a Freemason, and who therefore cannot have had the sacramental intention necessary to perform validly the ordination or consecration of Marcel Lefebvre.

Michael Davies replies, firstly, it is not proved beyond doubt that Cardinal Lienart was a Freemason. Secondly, even if he was a Mason, he did not necessarily have an invalid sacramental intention in confecting a sacrament. Thirdly, every time he externally used the proper sacramental rite in a normal way, he may and must be presumed to have had internally the intention necessary for validity. Fourthly, even if the Cardinal both at the ordination in 1927 and at the consecration in 1947, secretly withheld the necessary sacramental intention, nevertheless Marcel Lefebvre became a valid bishop and priest by either or both of the two bishops co-consecrating him in 1947 with the Cardinal. Let us take each of these points in turn.

Firstly, it is not proved Cardinal Lienart was a Freemason. Michael Davies says that when he wrote his book on "Pope John's Council", he would have liked to show key figures of the Council, like Cardinal Lienart, to have been Masons, but when he examined the evidence, he found it insufficient: one French writer's allegation in one book, without supporting documentation. Whoever affirms Lienart to have been a Mason must bring his proof.

However, secondly, let us assume Lienart was a Mason. In that case, say the anti- Lefebvrists, Lienart cannot as a Mason have validly received and/or bestowed the sacrament of Holy Orders. Such a statement betrays a grave ignorance of Catholic doctrine of the sacraments. To receive or bestow a Catholic sacrament validly, the right sacramental intention suffices, an upright moral intention is not necessary. Just as, in the eating of an apple, whether I morally bought it or immorally stole it makes no difference to the validity of eating it — it fills my stomach just the same — so in the giving or receiving of a sacrament: whether my moral intention is lawful or unlawful makes no difference to the validity of my giving or receiving it so long as I fulfill the necessary sacramental conditions.

Thus as far as intention goes, to receive validly the empowering character of Baptism or Holy Orders, I need only intend in undergoing the rite to receive the sacrament; to bestow validly the character I need only (as a qualified minister) intend in putting together the requisite words and acts to do what the Church does. This is because the sacraments' primary cause is God, and the human minister need only do the minimum necessary to make himself God's instrument.

Thus immorality of intention need not invalidate the sacrament. Thus an unbeliever can validly baptize, an apostate priest can validly say Mass, and a Freemason can validly ordain or consecrate. Hence even if Lienart was a Freemason, he need not have given invalid Holy Orders to Archbishop Lefebvre.

Ah yes, thirdly, but even if Cardinal Lienart could have validly ordained and consecrated Marcel Lefebvre, still he will not in fact have validly done so, because although in 1927 and 1947 he went through all the correct external motions by saying the necessary words and performing the necessary acts, still, as a Mason who must wish to harm the Church, he will have invalidated the Holy Orders he bestowed by secretly holding back the necessary internal intention to do what the Church does.

Reply: in theory such a purely internal withholding of the necessary sacramental intention is possible whenever a bishop or priest or minister of a sacrament goes through the correct external motions, and any such withholding would indeed invalidate the sacrament. But since any such withholding can by its nature be known to God alone, then the Catholic Church teaches that whenever a sacramental minister correctly performs the externals, he can and must be presumed to have had the corresponding internal intention unless and until there is clear proof to the contrary.

Now in general nothing proves that all Masons believe that the best way to hurt the Church is by invalidating any Orders they bestow (for instance they may well believe they will hurt her more by gaining higher positions inside the Church by gaining all the Catholics' confidence by the most perfect performance of their sacramental functions); and in particular, it is certain that Cardinal Lienart in 1927 and 1947 correctly used the proper external rite. Therefore the burden of proof is on the anti-Lefebvrists to prove that this Cardinal on these occasions withheld the necessary intention. What evidence do they have? None. They cannot even prove he was a Mason, let alone that he withheld an intention on this or that occasion.

But again, fourthly, let us assume that Lienart was a Mason and let us assume that he deliberately invalidated the Orders he conferred on Marcel Lefebvre. The Anti-Lefebvrists have still not won their point, because, as Michael Davies quite correctly argues, Marcel Lefebvre would still have become bishop and priest in 1947 at the hands of either or both of the two bishops co-consecrating him then with Cardinal Lienart: he would have become bishop, because out of the three bishops performing the. rite of his consecration, one alone needs to have had the correct intention for the sacrament to have been valid, and the odds against all three having secretly withheld their intention are simply astronomical; he would have become a priest because as the greater contains the lesser, so bishopric contains priesthood. For to receive higher Orders without first receiving the preceding lower Orders is in the Catholic Church today unlawful, but as Michael Davies learnedly argues, the position of some theologians and canonists that it is also invalid is having to be abandoned. For instance, St. Cyprian was made a bishop without first being made a priest.

Now this fourth point, always assuming that Cardinal Lienart was a Mason and that he withheld the sacramental intention in 1927, does leave open the possibility that Archbishop Lefebvre was not a priest until 1947.

To which one can only reply, fifthly, that the most elementary Catholic common sense, going by the fruits as our Savior commanded us to do, observes the marvellous fruits of Fr. Lefebvre's priestly ministry in French Central Africa and concludes that these could not have come from a non-priest. Still less could the fruits of the Archbishop's episcopal ministry in all French Africa, and then his defense of Tradition throughout the world, have come from a non-bishop.

But our cardboard canonists stand this argument on its head: since Archbishop Lefebvre's so-called defense of Tradition is in fact a sham and a sell-out to Rome, they say, then he cannot be a real bishop, and this is why they grasp after the Lienart argument. To which the only reply left is that they may not be sedevacantists, but they surely are mentevacantists!

Archbishop Lefebvre's work continues to bear fruit. Fourteen new candidates for this Seminary are due by the end of this month to join 34 seminarians from last year. We enclose a Seminary Continuous Support Fund, or S.C.S.F., card, which if you fill it out and send it back to us, will make it easier for you to contribute regularly to the Seminary, because each month you will receive with the Seminary Newsletter a return envelope, and as your incentive or reward within the United States you will receive the letter by first class instead of by bulk mail. That is why some people receive the Newsletter ahead of others. All you need do is sign up to contribute!

We are steadily grateful to our regular contributors. The S.C.S.F. each month provides a substantial part of the Seminary's income. We are especially grateful when we think that the increasing difficulties of the economy in the USA must be making it less easy for many to contribute. But what happens to the USA - and to the world - if there are no priests? Also we must pray for vocations. What would the material seminary be if no young men came forward? Thank God for a steady flow of vocations here at Winona, but if this flow were twice the size, how many more of you would be happy in a few years' time!

Enclosed too is a flyer on praying the Rosary. Please God all of you readers know how to pray the Rosary, but keep the flyer to pass on to somebody else at the right moment, especially to a soul of good will that has never prayed the Rosary before. When the bombs start flying, Our Lady will be recruiting! Prepare to be her recruiting-agent!

Sincerely yours in her service,

The futility of the battle of Verdun, and life, without God

August 1, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

In the course of a five-week tour of centres of the Society of St. Pius X in Germany, Austria and France, I was able two weeks ago to visit a fascinating historical site not apparently religious but without doubt designed by the Lord God to teach us all an immense lesson: the battlefield of Verdun. Alas, the lesson is not being learned.

Verdun is a little garrison town in North-eastern France tucked close under the southern frontier of Belgium and Luxemburg, and only 50 miles from the present South-western frontier of Germany. When France lost the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-1871, the cession to Germany of Alsace and part of Lorraine brought the German frontier much closer to Verdun, which is why over the next forty years the French built a ring of underground forts amidst the hills to the west, north and east of Verdun. When the next war between France and Germany broke out in 1914, World War I, the powerful German armies broke into France (the French had hoped to invade Germany) but were stopped at the Battle of the Marne (with the help of an intervention of the Mother of God). Both armies dug in, so that a long line of trenches reached from the North Sea to the northern frontier of Switzerland. Trench warfare began, waged mainly by infantry on the ground being continually exposed to enemy shells from overhead.

Through the year 1915, Verdun held for the French. However, the Germans had pressed hard-both to the North-west of Verdun and to the South-east, so that it formed like a salient or bulge in the front-line. In 1916 the Germans decided on an all-out attack to carry Verdun, as being the centre-piece of French resistance on the whole front.

The attack was launched on February 21, 1916, with an extraordinarily heavy artillery onslaught designed to wipe out the French front-line. Thanks to their far superior organization and war-supplies, the Germans did succeed in advancing some miles in a few days, but thanks to some heroic fighting by the French soldiers, the Germans failed to make the decisive breakthrough they had hoped for.

So from March to December of 1916, as the Germans refused to back off while the French refused to give way, both great nations funneled the wealth of their resources and the cream of their man-power into the 75-square mile battlefield. Estimates vary as to the number of casualties in those ten months, but one estimate is of 420,000 men dead, and another 800,000 gassed or wounded. In any case the monumental Ossuary of Douaumont, built on the battlefield after the war was over by the Catholic bishop of Verdun to give decent housing to the anonymous bones of the thousands of corpses being continually discovered on the battlefield after the war, presently houses the bones, visible through the Ossuary's ground-level windows in heaps stacked by sectors of the battlefield, of 130,000 soldiers, and bones are still being disinterred.

Twentieth century wars may by now have hardened us to such statistics, but not even the 20^th century has any other such concentrated carnage to compare with the Battle of Verdun. For if the First World War in general saw warfare become horrible as never before with the deployment for the first time in war of the full might and ingenuity of modern industrialism, eg aerial bombardment, flame-throwers, poison gas, etc., nevertheless these new horrors were particularly concentrated by the ferocity of the fighting at Verdun.

An estimated 60 million shells, grenades, mines and bombs so thrashed and whipped and poisoned the 75 square miles of battlefield-that for tens of years after the battle nothing would grow on the desolate lunar land-scape, littered with all kinds of military scrap-iron. Nature is now reclaiming her rights, and today green woods have mostly covered over the horror of desolation, but still today a glance amidst the trees in any direction for miles upon miles shows the tortured ground pockmarked with hillocks and pits and mounds and shell-holes for as far as the eye can see. Nine inhabited villages were wiped off the map, leaving not even ghost villages behind, the village of Fleury having been taken and re-taken fourteen times. They will not be re-built. There are too many unexploded shells remaining in the ground.

Upon the men who survived the fighting, the horrors of Verdun had a profound effect. The savagery of the industrialized weapons, the weight of slaughter and mutilation, and the littleness of the results achieved — by the end of the ten-month battle the front-line was much where it had been at the beginning — left the soldiers with a deep sense of futility and discouragement. The French army was never the same again — in 1917 it suffered from grave mutinies within its ranks and the German army was also fought to a stand-still at Verdun. True, the French had held Verdun, but at what cost! In 1917 the British had to take over the weight of the counter-attack, and when the Battle of the Somme also became a relatively fruitless mutual slaughter-house, then both French and British had to wait for the arrival of fresh armies from the U.S.A. before the war could be brought to an end.

To an end? The Treaty of Versailles concluding in 1919 "the war to end all wars" was, as clear-sighted observers immediately saw, so designed as to make sure there would be another war. It broke out in 1939 as “the crusade for democracy”, and resulted mainly in the great advance of Communism, enslaving Eastern Eruope!

But in that case, one might ask, the senselessness is not confined to the slaughter of Verdun, but extends to World War One as a whole, and to World War Two? Then it really was in vain that all those young men filled the Ossuary of Douaumont with their bones? Yes, if one leaves God out of the picture. And that is why the horrors of World War One drove many a young man without God to despair, and blew all lingering pleasantness of the Edwardian age to smithereens. The world was never the same again.

But as soon as one brings God into the picture, everything comes into clear focus. Firstly, as to the individuals, many of the young men who died amidst the heroism and sacrifice of war will have saved their souls which they could easily have lost if they had lived on into the corruption of the inter-war peace (lesson to be borne in mind for tomorrow's Chastisement). Secondly, as to the nations, to mention only the combatants at Verdun, France had ever since the 1789 Revolution been more and more defying God with her Freemasons and their secularism, while Germany had likewise been persecuting the Catholic Church with Bismarck's "Kulturkampf'. Both nations, before God, thoroughly deserved to be punished, and He would not have loved them had He left them unpunished (Heb. XII, 6). As it was, He tried twice in mid-war to mitigate the punishment, firstly by His Vicar Benedict XV offering to all the warring nations to mediate between them, an offer which they united in turning down; secondly by a special messenger, Claire Ferchaud, requesting France in particular to put the Sacred Heart on its flag, request likewise turned down but which, if accepted, would have brought a speedy end to the war, with Catholic justice instead of the treachery of Versailles.

Thus the godless nations had only themselves to blame for the false peace of 1919, for the ensuing hot war of 1939 to 1945, for the ensuing Cold War of the next several decades, for its sham resolution of a few years ago, and for its real resolution which we still await. On one thing the nations are all agreed - they want nothing to do with God.

Thus the battlefield exhibits at Verdun, well done though they are, hardly mention Him. His wrath alone makes sense of them, but He is the Great Absentee. Instead, the exhibits are made to teach the lesson of internationalism: Let us just get rid of the patriotism which set the French at the Germans' throats and vice versa, let nationalism and national borders vanish, let us on the basis of economic union establish political unity and thus we will build an international paradise, with peace and plenty for all!

Fond illusion! Godless internationalism will not solve , but will only compound, the problems of godless nationalism. Frenchmen and Germans fought so bitterly at Verdun not because they loved their country, but because they loved their country unwisely, with a love not moderated by a superior love of God and of His one true Church. The problem was not patriotism, but an unwise patriotism. For as long as all Europeans were Catholic, Christendom (that was its name) was essentially united, and wars within it were relatively minor affairs, at least when compared with modem wars. Had France and Germany in 1917 been more Catholic, they would have stopped the slaughter by accepting Benedict XV's offer, in fact they could have avoided war all together by asking Pope Pius X to mediate between them in 1914, before war broke out. As it was, they declared war, whereupon the British Foreign Secretary made his famous quote: "The lights are going out all over Europe and we shall not see them lit again in our generation". Within days Pope Pius X died of a broken heart. And by way of a solution to scorning our God, we are now being prepared and instructed to scorn also our country!

How blind men are when they do not have Jesus Christ and the light of the Catholic Faith! "I am the light of the world; whosoever followeth me walketh not in darkness but shall have the light of life" (John VIII, 12). What illumination in these few words of Our Lord! —Those who do not follow him walk in darkness, and will not have the light of life. Poor Europe!

But he consoled, the lights have not gone out entirely over Europe, a very few have been lit again in our generation, I mean at least the centres in France and Germany and Austria of the Society of St. Pius X, and in other countries of Europe which I did not this time visit, but which are all growing, not in spectacular fashion, but slowly and quietly.

For instance in Stuttgart, Germany, the Society's German District Headquarters is replacing its present allelujah-garage (German expression!) with, if you please, in a typical grey suburban-industrial area of a modem big city, hemmed in on all sides — with a brand-new pre-fabricated baroque church! Pre-fabricated baroque! Have you ever heard of such a thing? Well, go and see it in Stuttgart! And you may see up on the scaffolding young workmen — not workpersons but workmen — with dinkum blond pig-tails, happily painting baroque, with their ghetto-blaster on one side of them and a coca-cola bottle on the other!

Ah, dear readers, not all is lost. Pray hard, and we might even make seminarians out of young men with pig-tails and ghetto-blasters!

Have happy summer days, but do not take a vacation from loving God. He takes no vacations in looking after us!

With all good wishes and blessings, in Christ,

Columbus founded America, by integrating Faith and politics

June 5, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

To commemorate the Quincentenary or 500^th Anniversary of Christopher Columbus' Discovery of America, the Seminary is offering you the enclosed "Verbum" in colour. If you are tempted to ask how Columbus' feat can be considered Seminary news, the answer must be that without what he did, there would be no North American Seminary at all, so we are commemorating the common ancestor of all of us on this side of the Atlantic Ocean.

His feat was stupendous. Today, with satellites spinning round the world in 90 minutes, with telephone calls reaching to the other side of the globe at the speed of light, and with every square yard of the earth both surveyed and lying wide open to aerial surveillance, it is difficult to recreate the sense of what it must have felt like east of the Atlantic, since all known centuries in all then known countries of the civilized world, for the gates of the Ocean to be locked. On land at that time it might take days to reach the visible horizon, and the same at sea. Sailors had ventured no further westward than Portugal's Azores Islands. What lay further west? Nobody knew. Columbus had himself collected all scraps of information from all previous mythical or possible westward voyages, but they amounted to no certainty. It was Columbus and nobody else who unlocked the gates of the ocean and discovered a New World, and made the unknown known.

Surely, it is more than anything else the aeroplane that has extended our sense of the horizon and diminished our sense of the limitations that always used to hem in explorers. However, in flying today over the Caribbean, one can still recapture a sense of the magic of the world into which Columbus sailed for the first time: the bright blue sea, the scattered islands, the lush vegetation, the balmy climate. Columbus himself was enchanted, as are today millions of — holidaymakers!

But the Caribbean is much more than just a playground. Starting with Columbus, it has been the geographic hinge of North and South America, and the cockpit of the continent's history down to this day. Following the Spaniards who came with Columbus, there have been, down the 500 years, incursions of the French (still in Martinique and Guadaloupe where the Society of St. Pius X has large and growing parishes) the Dutch (ever heard of Curacao liqueur?), the British (British and French fleets used to play hide and seek in the Caribbean), the Americans (to whom Puerto Rico fell in 1898) and finally the Russians - President Kennedy tussled with Kruschev over Cuba in the 1960's and President Reagan had to deal with their latest effort in the 1980's to spread their errors from the island of Grenada.

Grenada! The very name is like a bell, to toll us back to Spain. The other European and world powers may have followed Columbus in and out of the Caribbean to play politics, but to Spain and Portugal alone fell the honour and the glory of following Columbus in planting the Cross and Catholic civilization throughout Central and Southern America. As shown in the Verbum centerfold, a Rosary of Catholic nations sprang up from the profound Catholic piety that impelled Queen Isabella of Castille to sponsor Christopher Columbus to cross the Ocean. To this day, more than half of the world's Catholics inhabit the countries to which these two incredibly great souls gave rise. Their role is duly acknowledged by the numerous statues, especially of Columbus, erected in Latin American cities, but as these countries today are losing their Catholic Faith in the worldwide apostasy, so Columbus and Isabella are losing their places of honour. In Bogota, Columbia, the pair of then statues have been moved out of the city centre towards the airport, and they are due to be moved further out still, I recall being told.

For indeed, the modem world is more and more estranged from everything Columbus and Isabella stood for. They were godly, it is secularized; they embodied a Catholic monarchy, it believes in pluralist democracy; they believed in hierarchy and obedience, it believes in equality and independence; they believed in spreading the Faith, it believes in religious liberty; they believed in missionaries, it believes in liberation theology. And so today throughout the Continent engendered by Columbus and Isabella, tens of thousands of Protestant vultures are feeding on the carcass of its decaying Catholicism, and the vile media rejoice in Isabella's successors apologising for her cornerstone policies...

But the chickens are coming home to roost. Catholic order is not an optional extra. Catholic order is not overthrown with impunity. Nations cannot rest on Protestant foundations. They can only rest on what still remains, or has been re-injected, of Catholic foundations, and when the vile media will have completed their work of uprooting those foundations, then chaos will come again.

Over one hundred and fifty years ago the missionary impulse of Columbus and Isabella was still expanding from Mexico up the western coast of North America, and in a line of Catholic mission-stations founded to evangelize the local Indians in what is today California, one was called "Nuestra Senora la Reina de los Angeles de Porciuncula". Within one hundred years the little mission-station was swamped within the modern megalopolis seething around it, to which it bequeathed its religious name, The Angels, but which was founded no longer upon Columbus' ancient religion but upon man's new-found religious liberty, enshrined in a Constitution guaranteeing freedom and equal rights for all. Unfortunately, by the beginning of our own decade the freedom had untied bonds of family, the equality had undermined school and authority, and the religious liberty, by equally protecting all churches contradicting one another, even churches of Satan, had made every church in effect look foolish. With family, school and church undermined, the delinquents began to roam the streets.

Now this was grave, but mush graver was the national media's ability so to play on liberty, equality and rights, on the public's veneration of citizens' liberty, racial equality and the individual's rights, that when the Los Angeles police force in the course of their duty to arrest a particularly menacing delinquent resisting arrest, used a measure of force judged to be reasonable by a jury exposed to all the facts and not just to the media's selection of them, nevertheless 83% of the public as measured in one poll judged that the jury had made a mistake. Actually, given the weight of the media onslaught, the astonishing thing is not that 83 % of the public were deceived, but that as many as 17% still kept their common sense about them. So the delinquent emerged a hero, the police were discredited and demoralized, and the media and professional agitators are free to plot their next — they no doubt hope, final — assault upon law and order.

"Excellency, when will you stop mixing our sublime religion with your contentious opinions on politics?" My dear friends, the exclusion of Catholicism, or of Christ the King, from ideas of how to run a nation is exactly the problem. The problem is neither delinquents nor the big cities nor even the media, but deeply anti-Catholic ideals being rooted in the mass of the people. The solution is not the Constitution. In fact the Constitution, especially when treated as the solution, is the problem.

Columbus was not a great sailor who happened to be a Catholic, but a great Catholic who happened to be a sailor. In 1992 we are commemorating his name but despising his ideas. America awes him its very existence, yet treats him as though he had no idea what he was really doing — his religion uniting State and Church was as quaint as his little ships whose replicas we parade up and down the coast!

My dear friends, if chaos is upon us we have only ourselves to blame. By integrating Faith and politics, Columbus founded America. Whoever separates them, is disintegrating America. Let this be the real lesson of the 500^th anniversary. I wish you enjoyment of the "Verbum", and a riot-free summer.

Most sincerely yours in Christ the Lord of Lords and King of Kings,

Private revelation and the message of Garabandal

May 8, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

How will it all end? Here in the U.S.A. the rioting in Los Angeles of one week ago resulting in 58 deaths (and the death toll is still rising) has reminded us of the question — how will it all end? In honour and love of Our Lady for her month of May, let me devote a whole letter to a prophecy coming, I believe, from her, which I will argue fits this situation of the world like a key fits a lock.

Now—this particular prophecy, or the framework-of apparitions supposedly of Our Lady within which it was made, has not yet received the official approval of the Church as being worthy of belief by Catholics, and to this extent we are on unsure ground. However, Our Lady appeared at Fatima in 1917 in apparitions whose worldwide importance will surely be questioned by no reader of this letter, yet only in 1930 were they officially approved by the Church. Between 1917 and 1930 was nobody to pay any attention? Had everyone shunned them from 1917 as being unapproved, would they have finally been approved in 1930? The message of Fatima had been neglected enough as it is — how much more would it have been neglected had there been no approval in 1930?

Of course the prime responsibility of approving or disapproving an intervention of Heaven lies with the official Church which is Heaven's appointed representative on earth. Nevertheless if Heaven does intervene, it provides evidence which is designed to suffice to persuade us that the intervention was from Heaven, and much of this evidence is made accessible not only to officials of the Church. How would Fatima have ever been approved if everyone had denied themselves access to the evidence so long as it was not approved? And had Fatima not been approved, where would we be now?

Truth to tell, some critics will scorn even Fatima on the grounds that to save our souls we strictly need to believe no truths outside the Deposit of Faith, all of which truths belong to what is called "public Revelation", closed a little after 100 A.D. with the death of the last Apostle, and anything else is "private revelation" which does not matter, including Fatima.

But each thing in its place. Take a comparison: marriage is good, the religious life is better. Marriage being good no more makes it equal to the vocation than the vocation's being better makes marriage bad. Similarly belief in public Revelation's being absolutely necessary to salvation no more makes private revelation useless than does private revelation's being useful make it — for any Catholic with any common sense — anywhere near as important as public Revelation. Each thing in its place.

Down the ages Mother Church has officially approved of numberless private revelations as being believably from Heaven. Shall Heaven be accused of having wasted its time? Obviously not! Obviously such "private revelations" have frequently given souls access precisely to public Revelation. For instance, how many hundreds of thousands of souls suffocating in modern materialism have not reinvigorated or rediscovered their Catholic Faith at or through Lourdes, a "private revelation" of our Lady in 1858? Authentic "private revelation" is the invaluable servant of public Revelation. Public Revelation may well be the one and only launching-pad for Heaven, still it would not be reached by many souls without the stepping-stones leading to it of "private revelations". Can these be reasonably dismissed as unimportant when without them many souls could, but would not, have been saved? Each thing in its place.

For precisely by its closedness, the Deposit of Faith, or public Revelation, can no longer change, whereas the Devil is constantly laying all around it fresh snares and diversions. Then it is to be wondered at that the Mother of God should in all ages obtain from her divine Son permission to lay down fresh stepping-stones? Not that we should open our arms to every new craziness passing itself off as apparitions of Our Lady, but that in St. Paul's words we should "Despise not prophecies. But prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (I Thess V, 20,21). If none of Our Lady's apparitions were true, what would the Devil have to imitate, and how could he get his forgeries into circulation?

Of stepping-stones to public Revelation, or to the Gospel, Fatima is a classic example. Just as Satan prepared in late 1917 to launch from Russia upon the whole world the unprecedented plague of Communism to blast or tear men away from the Gospel, so the Mother of God preceded him from May to October of the same year, providing men through her apparitions in Portugal with all they-would need by way of special antidote, if only they would use it. Alas, the Consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart has still not been done, and because her "private revelation" has been insufficiently heeded, the world is in the trouble it is in today.

Her last gift to mankind at Fatima was the famous "Third Secret", containing surely the antidote for today's even worse plague within the Church of neo-modernism. The Secret was due by her own instructions to be revealed in 1960 at the latest, that is, two years in advance of the opening of the devastating Second Vatican Council. Churchmen, alas, thought they knew better than the Mother of God, and her antidote was locked up in a papal drawer where it has remained ever since. Now is it not reasonable that the Mother of God would at this point, changing not her message but maybe her tactics, try again? And if she tried again, is it not reasonable that the same churchmen would do all they could to smother her voice once more?

This is the background of the officially still unapproved apparitions of Our Lady to four young girls from 1961 to 1965 in the little mountain village of Garabandal in northern central Spain. Let me not here go into the mass of external evidence, accompanying the apparitions, apparently to authenticate them, and upon which the Church will finally pronounce. Let me here merely make a case for the internal reasonableness of Garabandal's double message and triple prophecy, because it is my personal opinion that it is highly unlikely that Garabandal is false, and if it is true, I would like to avoid having people ask at some point in the future – “Did you know about this and not tell us?" With each day that passes more and more people are in agony over the question, "How will it all end?" With each day that passes the answer of Garabandal makes more and more tranquillizing sense. I believe Garabandal is true, but I am not here arguing it is true, still less imposing it on any readers, I am merely proposing that it makes sense of what might seem an otherwise senseless situation of world and Church.

Whether authentic or not, the two solemn Messages of Garabandal of October 1961 and June 1965 picked up where the Third Secret of Fatima, locked away in 1960, surely left off, namely with the crisis in the Church. In 1961, notice one year before the opening of Vatican Two, the lady of Garabandal said, "We must do much penance and make many sacrifices. We must often visit the Blessed Sacrament. But above all, we must be very good for, if we are not, we will be punished. The cup is already filling, and if we do not amend our lives there will come a great chastisement."

In her second longer Message, given a few months before the closing of Vatican Two, she was more insistent, saying amongst other things, “…Previously, the cup was being filled. Now it is overflowing. Many cardinals, Bishops and priests are on the road to perdition and are taking many souls with them…” So much for Vatican Two! Small wonder if the cardinals, bishops and priests were not in a hurry to approve of the lady of Garabandal!

Her triple prophecy made in the course of the same four years was of three great coming events: a Warning, a Miracle and, if mankind is not converted by these, a Chastisement to which the first two events point. Let us then begin with the Chastisement, spoken of in both Messages.

What it will consist in, the girls were not allowed to say, but they were shown it: on two successive nights they had of it a vision so horrifying that they let out such cries of horror that all the villagers within earshot went at the first opportunity to Confession. Said one of the girls, "It will be a result of the direct intervention of God, which makes it more terrible and fearful than anything we can imagine".

We look at the sins of the turn of the century, chastised by World War One. We look at the greater sins of the 1920's and 1930's, proportionately chastised by World War Two. We look at the far greater sins of the 1960's to 1990's — is it not reasonable that a merely human World War Three would not be enough by way of chastisement for mankind in its present state? Of course mankind can convert, but does that look likely? God exists, He cares, He is not powerless to intervene, He is just, so how could He not chastise? But he is also merciful, which is why it is reasonable — not obligatory on His part — that He provide beforehand a proportionately great Warning.

For indeed people today are so confused, all over the world, that like the inhabitants of Niniveh in Scripture, they cannot tell their left hand from their right (Jonah IV,11). Now for this stupidity men have nobody to blame but themselves, but how far can for instance the youngsters today be blamed when they are fed synchronized lies by their schools, politicians, universities, media, even churches and parents, in brief by everyone meant to know what life is about? Stop for a moment and think how deep the confusion is in people's minds and lives around us. Could not many of them almost go before God's judgement seat and plead ignorance? And where today is His true Church to guarantee them His existence, His love and His law? In which case does not the Warning as told of by the lady of Garabandal to the four girls fit, like a key fits a lock? —

"The Warning will come directly from God, like a fire from heaven visible to the whole world and from any place where anyone may happen to be. Immediately it will be transmitted into the interior of our souls where by its light everyone, believer and unbeliever alike, irrespective of whatever religion he may belong to, will see the state of his soul with complete clearness. He will experience what it is to lose God; he will feel the purifying action of the cleansing flame. Briefly it will be like having the Particular Judgement in one's very soul while still alive. It will last for a very little time, but it will seem a very long time because of its effect within us."

Does not such a warning fit? For a few (long) moments absolutely everybody without exception will see the complete truth about their soul and its state before God. Within a few hours, days, months, the enemies of God will no doubt be doing everything with their media to bend people's minds all out of shape once more, but everyone will have had a clear chance to know the truth and to choose it. What a grace! However, the lady of Garabandal told of God's mercy reaching still further.

At Fatima, the Second Secret had consisted of a great warning of what Russia would do (by 1992, has largely done) to the world, if the instructions of Our Lady were not carried out, and this warning, originally given in July of 1917, was solemnly ratified and confirmed by the miraculous dance of the sun which took place three months later before an awe-struck crowd of 70,000 people.

However, the sins and incredulity of this end of the 20^th century far surpass those of its beginning. If then a miracle is provided to overcome disbelief in a warning, might one not expect from Garabandal, if it is true, a Miracle far surpassing even the dance of the sun at Fatima? That is exactly what the girls were told of by the Lady of Garabandal: —

"Within one year of the Great Warning, on a Thursday evening at 8:30 p.m., on a feast of a Saint devoted to the Holy Eucharist, lasting for about a quarter of an hour and coinciding with a great event in the Church, will take place a Great Miracle visible to everyone in the village of Garabandal and in the surrounding mountain arena. It will be the greatest miracle that Jesus has ever worked for the world. There will not remain the slightest doubt that it canes from God and is for the good of mankind. It will take place at the site of the clump of pine trees overlooking the village, where it will leave a permanent sign that will remain until the end of time. This sign it will be possible to film or televise, but not to touch. All unbelievers present at the Miracle will be converted, and all invalids will be cured."

Now if one visits Fatima today, one finds of course no trace of the miraculous dance of the sun which did so much to help people believe in Fatima. The miracle came and went. But given the vastly greater disbelief of our own day, is it not, once more, entirely reasonable that, if Garabandal be true, greater help should be given to overcome disbelief in it? Modern men believe in their television? They will go nowhere without their video-camera? What could be more reasonable than to provide televisual man with a permanent televisible sign? “I will not believe until I can photograph it with my own video-camera!" — catch an aeroplane and go ahead!

There are various objections to the authenticity of the apparitions of Our Lady at Garabandal which I will not go into now, although I am sure they can all be answered without great difficulty. The official Church has made no final pronunciation upon Garabandal, as it has made upon Fatima to approve or upon Medjugorje to disapprove. The Society of St. Pius X has no official position either. For myself, I believe in it. All I have tried to do above is to make the case that if anyone has difficulty in fitting together in his head the insane facts of the modern world and the sane truth of his Catholic Faith, the lady of Garabandal provides an admirable solution. And if one day she were proved beyond doubt not to have been Our Lady, our Faith in public Revelation would not be shaken one bit, we should merely have to renounce one set of stepping-stones towards it. Meanwhile may Our Lady accept as homage offered to her this presentation of the triple prophecy of Garabandal. Our only intention has been to serve her and help her save souls. For more information, write to P.O. Box 606, Lindenhurst, NY 11757, U.S.A.

Make note in your calendars of the coming tour of Society Chapels in the U.S. Midwest and East by Fr. Fernando Rifan from the Diocese of Campos, Brazil. He will be giving a slide lecture on the heroic rescue of Catholic Tradition within the diocese, firstly at the Seminary here on the evening of the Ordinations, Saturday June 20^th; then at each location in the evening, June 21 Chicago; June 22 Detroit; June 23 Pittsburgh; June 24 Philadelphia; June 25 Farmingville, Long Island. Dr. David White's book on Campos is on its way to the printers. He is likely to be accompanying Fr. Rifan.

We look forward to seeing you at the Ordinations. The ceremony begins at 9 a.m.

God bless you, and may Our Lady keep you in her care.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

The rise of Archbishop Lefebvre one year after his death

April 1, 1992

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

One week ago was the first anniversary of the death of Archbishop Lefebvre. Before he died, the controllers of the modern world had pushed him as absolutely low as they could push him, but what man has abased, God is exalting. As quietly as he lived, the Archbishop's name is quietly rising, and will go on rising, until his name once again becomes a curse-word under the Antichrist — "Without him we could have had a situation of no opposition", they will then say.

But now he is safely home, nothing can touch his achievement. It is locked into history. His words and his deeds stand like a rock. More and more people are going to read his words, and more and more people are going to write about his deeds, and as the Devil well knows, there is nothing more he can do about it. All the punches in the book he threw at the Archbishop during his life, but after his death all the Devil can do is make the Archbishop prevail. For, the wilder the storm the Devil calls up in the world and Church, the more clearly it will stand out that the Archbishop was right, and the more people will turn to him, especially youngsters.

I pity decent teachers inside the Novus Ordo system recognizing the finest part of the young minds and souls in front of them turning towards "Lefebvrism" like young plants turn to the light, and then being obliged by the system to cut Lefebvre down again, and to keep cutting him down. Then either their decency goes under, or, in a few cases, they break with the system, but murder will out.

For a classic case of murder will out, see the recent film "JFK" by Oliver Stone, now circulating in the English-speaking world. In a world drowning in lies, it is a grand blow struck for the truth. It is not a religious film, indeed innocent and vulnerable eyes and ears had better watch a video-tape edited when it comes out, rather than now see certain scenes in the complete film. Nor was President Kennedy a religious hero, far from it, indeed in God's eyes his assassination may even have been something of a punishment for his sins — we shall know at the Last Judgment.

But in any case he had courage, he was intending to govern as he saw fit, with the increasing support of the American people, he was more and more threatening the powers-that-be behind the Establishment, particularly with certain moves he was making against the Federal Reserve, and so before he could break them, they used the Establishment to break him, to blow him away in what one might call the crime of the century, right out in public, in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, to demonstrate their power, and to warn any future President never again to take seriously the idea of governing by the people for the people.

This is the story that Oliver Stone begins to tell. He by no means tells the whole story, but whereas some viewers of the film or readers of this letter might be tempted to deny that the government of their democracy could ever be guilty of such a crime, I can assure you from direct Society contacts in Texas and Louisiana that as much as Oliver Stone does tell of the story is substantially true.

But, Excellency, stay out of controversial politics! Keep to religion! Dear readers, my concern is the Fifth, Eighth and above all First Commandments. The Fifth: the assassination in Dealey Plaza could not have been a more flagrant violation of "Thou shalt not kill"; the Eighth: the subsequent cover — up of the truth has been a continual denial of justice, murdering of true witnesses, parading of false witness; the First: it is because many people make an idol of democracy and a false god of their country that they refuse to believe that their leaders, their government, could ever do such a thing. Secularism is a religion of which the State is the Church, its Constitution is the Bible and its politicians are the priests. How could our President dip his hands in blood, or, cover over a trail of it?

Catholics should never fall for such idolatry, and many will protest that nothing could be farther from their thoughts than such foolishness. Really? And if the idolatry is skillfully intermingled with love of country? And if their country is founded on a principle of liberty and equality for all religions, in other words on the principle that truth in religion does not matter?

I do not know if Oliver Stone is a Catholic, in fact he has the reputation of being an out-and-out liberal, but in any case "JFK" is the film of a brave man who loves truth. See it, to see beneath the gloss and the glitter what the 20^th century really is. See it, to guess at the controllers of the modern world. See it, to be reminded of the truth of Jeremiah's words (XVII,5): "Thus saith the Lord: Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord."

On the contrary, continues the Prophet (XVII,7), "Blessed be the man that trusteth in the Lord, and the Lord shall be his confidence". Such was Archbishop Lefebvre. Had he not trusted profoundly in God, he would have given way to rage and despair at the power of men assassinating the Church, in the same diabolical early 1960's, long before he founded the Society. But, putting his trust in God alone, he started over again from nothing, and now his cause is advancing inexorably to its triumph, because it was and is God's cause.

A fitting first anniversary tribute to the Archbishop is the publication of our Superior General's letter to Cardinal Oddi of January 7 of this year within his enclosed letter to Friends and Benefactors. Read it to be assured that the Archbishop's mind continues to govern the Society: respect for Rome but no respect for apostasy; love of the erring but slaying of the error.

Also enclosed is a schema on television. I think its usefulness lies in its division into three parts: on the one hand, the enemies of television cannot deny that as a machine it is, like all machines, usable for good as well as evil (Part 1); on the other hand few even of the friends of television will deny that today's programs include horrors without number (part 3); but what often escapes notice is that even if the programming of the machine was angelic, still by its nature, once installed in an average modern home, TV's normal effect will be more or less gravely harmful in a variety of ways (Part 2). Like water and fire, TV is a good servant and a bad master, but given modern living conditions and original sin, TV turns much more easily than fire or water from good servant into bad master. Of course if one denies original sin, there is little problem - indeed those who have little-problem with TV must ask themselves if they believe in original sin. In theory, of course. In practice...?

The Seminary is looking for a chef. A single man or an older couple would be ideal, sharing our beliefs. Accommodation may be available. Major incentive : daily Mass.

May God bless you through Holy Week and Eastertide. The South may or may not "rahse again", bless it, but Mother Church certainly will!

Most sincerely yours in Christ,