FEATURED POSTS – Articles and Texts section

Bishop Carlo-Maria Vigano

admin conciliar Church, FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section

Bishop Carlo-Maria Vigano

  A Bishop Who Tells the Truth on the Church of Vatican II

Msgr. Carlo Vigano, former apostolic nuncio to the USA from 2011 to 2016, has for a few weeks been publishing increasingly clearer texts showing his awareness of the errors of the Second Vatican Council and the reforms that followed.

He denounces the desire of Freemasonry to institute a “universal religion that is humanitarian and ecumenical”, as well as “the responsibility of the highest levels of the Church in supporting these anti-Christian ideologies”.

He also shows the failure of the Hermeneutic of Continuity.

What supporters of the current pope “affirm with impunity, scandalizing moderates, is what Catholics also believe, namely: that despite all the efforts of the Hermeneutic of Continuity which shipwrecked miserably at the first confrontation with the reality of the present crisis, it is undeniable that from Vatican II on wards a parallel church was built, superimposed over and diametrically opposed to the true Church of Christ. This parallel church progressively obscured the divine institution founded by Our Lord in order to replace it with a spurious entity, corresponding to the desired universal religion that was first theorized by Masonry.”

Look at his declarations on:

— Chiesa et Postconcilio

— Trinity Communications, 2020

In a World Falling Apart

admin FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, Meditations

In a World Falling Apart

  Editorial of Le Sel de la Terre 4

  (Spring 1993)

  Published again on our French Website in April 2020

We hear from various places that the world is going to experience a serious crisis soon. For those who have read and meditated a bit on the Apocalypse, there is no reason to be surprised. The world has abandoned God; God will leave the world to fend for itself…

Pope Pius XII said that our world had to be remade right down to its foundations 1. If the world collapses in front of us, we must be able to offer it a solid foundations for recovery. In other words, it is essential to reflect seriously on the principles of the temporal and supernatural orders. One does not hold up a building about to fall by restoring its facade.

Only the Catholic Church has the remedy for this great crisis that threatens us. This remedy is Our Lord Jesus Christ and His divine grace, “gratia sanans et elevans 1”. Only He can heal human nature broken by original sin. He is the only salvation for individuals and institutions, as Pope Pius X said:

“No! It must be energetically recalled in these times of social and intellectual anarchy where everyone poses as a doctor and a legislator; we will not build the city otherwise than how God built it; society will not be rebuilt if the Church does not lay the foundations and direct its work. No! Civilization is no longer to be invented, nor is the new city to be built in the clouds. It was, it is: it is Christian civilization; it is the Catholic city. It is only a question of unceasingly establishing and restoring it on its natural and divine foundations against the ever-reappearing attacks of an unhealthy utopia, revolt, and impiety: omnia instaurare in Christo1.”

But who today is going to give us these principles of the natural and Christian orders, these natural and divine foundations as Saint Pius X says? Unfortunately, we should not expect them from the current Roman authorities. Let us quote cardinal Ratzinger:

“It would be absurd to want to go backwards, to return to a system of political Christianity. But it is true that we have a responsibility in this world and wish to bring our contribution as Catholics to it. We do not want to impose Catholicism on the West, but we want the fundamental values of Christianity and the dominant liberal values in the world today to be able to meet and enrich each other 1.”

It couldn’t be clearer: the Conciliar Church made the principles of liberalism its own, and we would vainly ask for the principles of a Christian social order.

We have to look for these principles in the Common Doctor, Saint Thomas Aquinas, as Pope Pius XI taught:

“Since he is the perfect theologian, as we said, he gives certain rules and precepts of life not only for individuals, but also for the family and civil society, which is the object of domestic and political morals. Hence, these magnificent chapters found in the second part of the Summa Theologica on the paternal or domestic regime and legitimate power in the city or the nation; the natural law and international law; peace and war; justice and property; laws and obedience; the duty to watch over the good of individuals and public prosperity, both in the supernatural and natural orders. If, in particular and public affairs and in international relations, these precepts were religiously and inviolably observed, they would suffice to establish among men that “peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ” that the entire world so ardently desires. We must therefore hope that one studies more and more the teachings of Aquinas on the law of nations and the laws which govern the mutual relations of nations, because these teachings contain the foundations of a true League of Nations, as we say today 1.”

While the Freemason takes in hand his square and compass to build a New World Order, a modern Tower of Babel, we must study, in the infallible doctrine of the Popes before Vatican II, and in the works of saint Thomas Aquinas, the immutable principles capable of guiding those who want to rebuild a Christian world.

Thus, there is no question of being discouraged by the heap of ruins and the seemingly insurmountable difficulties that stand before us! This is not a time for discouragement, but for work. Humble and obscure work perhaps, but deep, tenacious work, offered in homage to the Holy Trinity, from Whom we know that success will come on the day that He, in His eternal Wisdom, has set.

A Solely Pastoral Rupture? Part 2

admin conciliar Church, FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section

A Solely Pastoral Rupture?

(Part 2)

A Commentary of the book Ecclesial dissensions, a challenge for the Church.

Written by Fr Pierre-Marie Berthe, SSPX

From La Simandre, January/February 2020

Bulletin of the Fraternity of the Transfiguration

Mérigny – France

In this period of the year during which the Church asks us to pray, from January 18 to 25, for the return to Catholic unity of separated Christians, we read in the aforementioned book, written recently, (p. 800) in Chapter I: How to prepare for future reconciliations (p. 794) and in paragraph C: Laws which manifest and arouse the desire for unity between Christians, the following words:

So that the desire for unity between Christians has a concrete form, it is up to the legislator to plan meetings, exchanges, prayers. When Catholics and non-Catholic Christians address prayers together, they must ask for the grace to strive to overcome their differences in order to be united in faith and charity around the successor of Peter. In addition, these common prayers of supplication must be done far from the altar to recall the distance that remains to be covered, before considering a formal reconciliation.

These lines are still surprising despite emanating from a priest of Tradition, because, until the conciliar revolution, Catholics were asked not to associate with non-Catholic Christians and, all the more so, not to pray with them.

The encyclical Mortalium Animos of Pius XI specifies the opposite of what is written above: So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ.

But then, since there is a contradiction between the words of our author and those of Pope Pius XI—which is nevertheless the expression of the perennial magisterium of the Church—we are entitled to ask the question: Where did our author find the inspiration for what he wrote? Would the answer not be found in two documents:

> In Unitatis Redintegratio of November 21, 1964 (text of Vatican Council II):

§ 8: In certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers ‘for unity,’ and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. Such prayers in common are certainly an effective means of obtaining the grace of unity.

> In the encyclical of John Paul II Ut Unum Sint of May 25, 1995, in the section on the priority of prayer:

§ 21: This love finds its most complete expression in common prayer. When brothers and sisters who are not in perfect communion with one another come together to pray, the Second Vatican Council defines their prayer as the soul of the whole ecumenical movement.

Besides, our author also proposes dialogue as a means of resolving dissension (p. 781-782-783-784). Now this is precisely the same dialogue that Pope John Paul II proposed in Ut Unum Sint under the title Dialogue as a means of resolving disagreements. (§ 36 to 39).

Note that dissension, divergence, or other similar terms are expressions used so as not to offend non-Catholic Christians, our author specifies, contrary to schism or heresy (pp. 13-14, 25).

Let us remember that the current ecumenism, officially advocated since Vatican II until today, is a false ecumenism which breaks with the attitude that the Church has always held. It rejects the principle of returning to the Catholic Church.

It is therefore extremely surprising to discover from the pen of an author, who is supposed to refuse the last atypical Council and its innovative side, propositions which would seem to stem from Vatican II and its developments.

Translation by A.A.

A Solely Pastoral Rupture?

admin conciliar Church, FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, The Fight for the Faith

A Solely Pastoral Rupture?

La Simandre, bimonthly bulletin of the Fraternity of the Transfiguration (Maison Saint-Joseph, Le Bois, F. 36220 Mérigny), in its November-December 2019 issue, published a very remarkable opinion on a recent book by the Rev. Fr. Pierre-Marie Berthe (SSPX).

Le Sel de la terre.

IS IT ACCURATE to write that “The rupture [between Archbishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Ratzinger in May-June 1988] occurred for pastoral reasons, but not for doctrinal and liturgical reasons” (Les dimensions ecclésiales, un défi pour l’Église catholique, Cerf, 2019, p. 711)?

This sentence, written by a priest, seems to reduce the conflict existing since Vatican II to a human side, to “a lack of mutual trust”.

It is true that this sentence introduces another: “It [the rupture] leaves the Protocol of Accord intact, which constitutes a solid basis for a future reconciliation”.

Father, if there was a rupture between Archbishop Lefebvre and the Roman authorities at the time, it was not for psychological reasons, but for doctrinal reasons. You go so far as to write that “Cardinal Ratzinger was unable to dispel the concerns of the Archbishop”.

— The fight for the Mass of all Ages and against the New Mass is doctrinal. I hope you are convinced of this. Archbishop Lefebvre declared this New Ordo “equivocal” and “dangerous for the faith”.

— The fight against the errors of Vatican II is doctrinal. Again, I hope you are convinced of this.

So please, if you do not see that, do not pretend to be the spiritual son of Archbishop Lefebvre. He is the one who ordained the first priests of our Fraternity, and as long as we have a clear head, we will not accept the soul of his fight being misrepresented.

Perhaps it would be better that you leave your community for a quick recognition, which you will easily obtain, given your ideas, in a diocese or in Rome.

Ah! These canonists who want an agreement at all costs and who are ready for all compromises, even if they are doctrinal. For them there is no crisis in the Church and, therefore, no state of necessity.

LE SEL DE LA TERRE N° 111, WINTER 2019-2020

continued: A Model Catholic Wife and Mother: Anna-Maria Taïgi

admin FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, Spirituality

A Model Catholic Wife and Mother:

Anna-Maria Taïgi (1769-1837)

  (continued) 

  By Dom Bernard Maréchaux, O.S.B.

  Published in Le Sel de la terre 62, Autumn 2007

Patience for any trial

Testimony of Domenico Taigi, her husband

“Fairly frequently, I would return home in a bad mood. She had the talent of calming me. She knew well when to be silent, but she also knew even better how to speak and when she should do so.”

Another witness reported:

“Fairly often, Domenico would return home in a bad mood after a day of squabbles among his fellow servants; but he always found in Anna-Maria the consolations that he needed. She always studied him so as to better understand his tastes and to please them, and his sorrows so as to lighten them. As soon as he arrived at the door, she sensed if he was in distress and she would pleasantly say, “Is it true that you had many stresses today? Yes, it is so! Well, then, do sit down and rest freely because here everything is going well 1.”

She arranged that her little family would have various innocent pastimes. Most often it was to attend an event at a church in the city; other times it was to enjoy the country. On such occasions, Anna-Maria would relax her austerity a little so as to take part in the communal enjoyments. Once on a certain Friday, she allowed herself to take a bit of food between her meals. She was corrected from above for her indulgence.

But there were certain boundaries over which she should not transgress:

When her son found a bride, and her daughter became engaged, after all the relevant information was gathered and the parental consents granted, Anna-Maria did not want the engagement to be longer than one month. She insisted that the youths not be together except in her sight, and the religious ceremonies concluded with a simple family meal.

We like to show our blessed governing her family in the traditional Catholic principles that foster mutual love and nourish respect. Her home was a thus little paradise. Prayers were said together in a little oratory where she would spend part of her nights in prayer, or where sometimes Mass was celebrated.

To raise and care for a family with seven children was always a difficult task when supported only by resources earned by Domenico’s daily labor. In his service to the Chigi household that often kept him until late in the evenings, Domenico earned only the equivalent of 25 euros ($33) each month. Anna-Maria supplemented this very modest wage by her own personal labors undertaken during what would have been her times of rest.

There were complications. The mother and father of this saintly woman ended up under her oversight: she had to feed and care for them for several years, and the condition of her father required particularly burdensome and even unpleasant duties. Also, since the Chigi family left Rome during the French occupation, Domenico lost his income for a time. And a dreadful famine was declared in Rome. Squeezed on all sides, Anna-Maria did not lose heart. She learned how to make women’s corsets and shoes, which she would spend part of her nights doing. God came to her aid in ways that can be considered miraculous.

After her mother and father passed away in bona pace [good peace], Anna-Maria was able to breathe easier. But then we see that her daughter Sofia became a widow and came back home with six little children. The great heart of our blessed opened up to these innocent ones and she adopted them without hesitation. Sofia already knew the apostolic charity of her mother, but this admiration was to grow as she saw even more of Anna-Maria’s energy and confidence in God.

While poverty reigned in the household, so too did peace. The daughter-in-law of Anna-Maria, the wife of Camillo, who lived for a while in the Taigi home, had a particularly difficult character. The saintly woman endured these difficulties with an angelic patience.

We do not want to omit any of the character traits that show through in Anna-Maria’s actions, and so by uniting everything we can reconstruct a portrait that is worthy of the “Strong Woman of Solomon.” Here indeed was a great woman. And since Anna-Maria was from humbler conditions 2, this is the only difference that distinguishes the one woman from the other.

We will see that women of the highest rank and people in the Roman court all had relationships with the wife of the Chigi servant. Anna-Maria was able to obtain assistance for them in their times of distress. She made nothing of it. She distributed supernatural assistance all around her, and even miracles; she never accepted what was offered to her in exchange. It was not pride. It was simply the application of the Gospel maxim: what you have received freely, give freely. She pushed the enforcement of this even to scrupulosity.

Model of Mothers-in-law

Domenico relates:

“My wife always made peace reign, a heavenly peace in the family even though we were numerous, of different characters, and especially when Camillo my son came to live with us during the first years of his marriage. Our daughter-in-law had a very difficult personality. She wanted to command things, but the servant of God knew very well how to make everyone happy. Even if I were to speak of everything, it would not be sufficient.”

Fr. Bessieres comments:

“Model of spouses and mothers, here now is also the model for mothers-in-law! Can this masterpiece even be imagined? Anna-Maria imposed peace, under the rainbow of Noah, where to the right were situated spouses and in-laws, a daughter-in-law and two tribes of children, seven on one side and six on the other 3!”

The Contemplative and the Mysterious Sun

On the foundation of this humble life as wife and mother of a family, God was pleased to construct a spiritual palace of magnificent proportions. After her renouncement of the vanities of the world, there blossomed in Anna-Maria all the gifts and graces from above, her profound recollection, intimacy with God, ease of ecstasy, and her exercise of heroic virtues. And God crowned his heavenly generosity with a truly extraordinary favor: he took up His abode in a mysterious sun and so appeared in this way to the eyes of His servant who enjoyed the continuous presence of her Lord by this means for the duration of 47 years. Let us enter into some of the details of this phenomenon that we can say is unique in the lives of the saints.

It was in the early days of the conversion of the servant of God that this remarkable phenomenon manifested itself. She was in her oratory when the mysterious sun appeared before her eyes of flesh. It was the same size as the sun that shines on us every day. It was in flames, with its disk of a matte gold. Little by little, and following Anna-Maria’s progress in the spiritual life, it became increasingly resplendent — so much so that during the last period of her life it shone as seven suns. This sunburst did not overwhelm her view, even when she had a nearly lost eye that could not endure light.

The sun in itself contained representations that gave her mystical meanings. In its upper portion was a thick and tangled crown of thorns, and on each side a very long and harsh thorn was situated. These 2 thorns, appearing like 2 sticks, crossed into the lower part of the disk. Within the sun’s middle section, and a little to the right, a divinely beautiful woman was seated: from her forehead a double ray of light mounted up to heaven. Her feet rested toward the left on the edge of the sun. The images and smoke that rose out of the earth were propelled with force outside the disk. Sometimes symbolic figures passed before her without obscuring the disk.

According to plausible interpretations of theologians, the solar disk represented the Incarnate Word; the seated woman represented Eternal Wisdom; the thorns and crossed sticks represented the Sacrifice of the cross to which the Word-made-Flesh submitted.

The marvel was that the sun reflected for the eyes of Anna-Maria all the events that were happening in the entire world: plots of secret societies, conspiracies in the process of being carried out, wars, deaths of famous people, floods and cataclysms. Our Blessed Anna-Maria announced these before anyone could have had any natural knowledge. Weeks later, news of the events would arrive, and never was the clairvoyance of our seer incorrect. But still more remarkable was this: she read consciences with an absolute confidence; she knew the eternal fate of souls after their deaths and she followed them whether they were in heaven, purgatory or hell. With views of the present she joined prophetic announcements of the future; other times it was events from the past that took on life before her eyes and thus did she inform Pius VII of a particular incident from his childhood. In a word, the book of divine knowledge opened for her in this mysterious sun: as saints see everything in God, she saw everything in this mirror.

In the presence of such a constant and ongoing phenomenon, our dear blessed held herself as annihilated: Who could thus endure such a spectacle? Of herself, the servant of God never dared to raise her eyes to the disk-sun. It was necessary that she be urged to do so by a strong interior inspiration or her charity for the needs of another that constrained her. The Savior evidently proposed that she make of herself a victim. When she saw a deluge of evils ready to converge upon the Church, she offered herself to prevent this. When she saw a soul on the edge of its eternal damnation, she immolated herself to save it.

She had wanted to keep silence regarding all the heavenly favors of which she was the recipient, but as an obedient daughter she had to open herself to her confessor, who himself consulted with high ecclesiastic dignitaries. These men recognized the veracity of the information given by Anna-Maria concerning events that were outside the realm of normal knowledge. They determined that her phenomena was useful for the Church and for souls. They permitted that the humble woman was consulted, and they themselves consulted her. Numerous times she had to give heavenly warnings and to reveal divine secrets. It became very clear that she had become a victim and her life henceforth was a martyrdom.

And while the sorrow caused by the view of her mystical sun was severe enough to make her a victim, this was not all of her martyrdom. The devil, furious that his plans were revealed by a poor woman, rushed upon her with a veritable rage. He struck her cruelly, as he had done previously with St. Frances of Rome. She submitted to the most woeful maladies and to the most complicated infirmities. She had an eye that suffered as if it had been pierced by a thorn; she felt the stench of the sins of the world; she tasted in her mouth an intolerable bitterness. At any given moment, she was assailed with temptations against the faith; deprived of all sweetness and consolation, surrounded by darkness, and thus consigned to a hell-like imprisonment. She endured these spiritual trials, worse than death, with an invincible patience.

The devil tried to induce her to thoughts of despair; Anna-Maria wondered tearfully whether she would be saved. But here Our Lord intervened: He gave the most formal of assurances to his beloved victim.

The evil spirit raised up evil people to overwhelm her with calumnies, which came back upon the evildoers themselves. Our Lord declared that He would send upon them the injuries that were hurled against His servant and that He would punish them severely and even mercilessly in this world and in the next. And, in fact, these people became insane or were reduced to poverty and died sadly. It was only due to the strength of Anna-Maria’s self-immolation that several of these were rescued from their eternal damnation.

Those on the contrary who showed her sympathy obtained graces of conversion or advancement in the ways of God.

Apparitions, Gift of Miracles

The portrait of our Blessed’s sufferings that we have outlined has been frightening. One wonders how a human being could have endured an entire lifetime thus tortured in all her members, both body and soul. But among those who are familiar with the lives of the saints, one is certainly aware that ineffable consolations alternate with heartbreaking sufferings, and that if at times a saint has been lowered to the depths of hell’s entrance, they are also sometimes lifted up to the threshold of heaven. And even more than this, something humanly impossible happens wherein there develops a coexistence within the saints between their ravishments of divine intimacy and their violent sufferings. And this was true of Anna-Maria.

Her spirit did not cleave to the earth, but was always ready to fly away. In thousands of small incidents, she perceived the indications of the goodness of God that are poured out upon all His creatures but which carnal people do not recognize. The song of a bird, the perfume of a flower, the breath of a light breeze could be sufficient to send her into an ecstasy. And even more so would a circumstance of the life of Jesus Christ or an interior touch of the Holy Spirit. And these ecstasies would occur everywhere: in her home, or during meals, in the streets of the city, or in churches. She would say to Jesus, “Leave me be, as I am a mother of a family!”

From time to time our Blessed heard heavenly voices. The Madonna spoke to her from the apse of the Ara-Coeli Church (Santa Maria in Ara-Coeli, Rome). The Child Jesus appeared to her (in the church with this title) in great beauty, in a Host, and said to her: “I am the flower of the fields, I am the lily of the valley. And I am totally yours.” At Sant’Andrea della Valle Church, the Savior revealed Himself to her amidst a resplendent light and with a majestic mantle. Her Holy Communions were typically accompanied by raptures of ecstasy; and when she was in a church she was able to “feel” where the Eucharist was located.

One apparition of our Savior that is notable among all others occurred when she lived on the “via del Sdrucciolo” near the Chigi palace. Anna-Maria was gravely ill and during the night people feared for her life. Toward dawn, Jesus appeared such as is typically attributed to Him as the Nazarene: with a violet garb and with a magnificent blue mantle with folds and layers. He was as imposing as a king, but tender as a spouse. He took Anna-Maria’s right hand in His and held it tightly for a long time He told her that He was taking her as His spouse and that he was bestowing upon her hands the gift to cure sick people. When He disappeared – He Whose grace and beauty ravish hearts – Anna-Maria experienced a great sadness and let out a loud cry. People ran near to her bed, but she reassured everyone and announced that she was cured. She got up, washed and went about her ordinary business.

One time she saw the globe of the earth as if surrounded by flames that threatened to consume it. On one side, Jesus on the Cross poured out streams of blood; the Virgin was at His feet, weeping and casting aside her mantle, calling out to Heaven on behalf of sinners and offering the Blood of her divine Son to appease the wrath of God. Anna-Maria melted into tears and supplications, and God pardoned.

Nevertheless, miracles burst forth from contact with the hand of this humble woman. We will relate but a few of these marvels only, and one among many worked upon her granddaughter Pepina, which were in reality numberless. Anna-Maria never wanted to receive anything from the sick that she cured.

The conversions brought about by her prayer and by her intervention were actually even still more surprising. Some freemasons or carbonari came back to God and made honorable amends because the Servant of God took an interest in them; likewise, devoted priests consoled the Church by their return. In general, her prayers for a soul, supported by her penances, obtained their effect; however in the cases of souls who had abused the mercy of God, she could not prevent the divine just judgments from falling upon such sinners.

Deeply Involved in the Life of the Church

From her conversion in 1790 until her death in 1837, by means of her miraculous sun, Anna-Maria was deeply involved with the life of the Church. She entered into relationships with important people in the Roman Court, and through them she was known by the pontiffs who reigned on the chair of Peter in her lifetime. For example, Cardinal Pedicini would consult with her. This prince of the Church introduced her process of beatification.

Our humble blessed predicted point by point the details of the return of Pius VII (prisoner in Savone) to Rome during a time when nothing could have foretold such a happy event. She recalled to him a detail of his childhood that only God could have revealed to her, and she predicted his noble death.

She prayed for the successor of Pope Pius VII, Leo XII. She announced the former pope’s death and saw the state of his soul as a beautiful diamond when it departed this world, already in light but still imperfectly purified. She foretold the short reign of Pius VIII. When he was ill, she declared that he would recover but then fall ill again and then quickly die. She then announced the elevation to the papacy of Maur Cardinal Cappellari, who took the name of Gregory XVI. She had the greatest veneration for him and sent several communications regarding the dangers that were threatening the Church.

During this time period, there was a particular group of holy people in Rome: the blessed (and now Saint) Gaspar de Bufalo; Mgr. Strambi, Passionist bishop of Macerata; Msgr Menocchio, Sacristan of His Holiness; Dom (Saint) Vincenzo Palloti, and Felix de Montefiascone, Capuchin. Anna-Maria was involved with all of these and when they came to visit, her sun shone with an extraordinary brilliance. She saw brother Felix rise straight up to Heaven; she saw Mgr. Strambi do likewise after a period in purgatory.

It was given to her to unmask several falsely pious people who sought to acquire a reputation for holiness. She was not surprised to see souls being lost that people thought were on the road to salvations — priests, ecclesiastic dignitaries, religious sisters and brothers – as they had forgotten that it is not the religious habit that saves, but humility, charity, and fidelity to God.

On one occasion, two priests were discussing in her presence their thoughts on the number of the elect. One asserted that the number was great, while the other maintained that according to the words of Our Lord Himself (Mt.7:13) it was a small number. Both men had recourse to our blessed and asked her to consult her sun. God then gave her to know the fate of the souls who had died in the last 24 hours: very few, not even ten, went straight to heaven; a certain number went to purgatory; and the rest all fell into hell like flakes of snow. Assuredly this is terrible and is due to the perversion of ideas and the general corruption of morals everywhere, in spite of the advances that a merciful God extends.

Nevertheless, there were some consoling aspects in Anna-Maria’s revelations. She saw, for example, how God takes a fatherly care of the souls that He wants to save, helping provide occasions for them to do good works, or drawing them little by little in the way of penance and salvation. Alms given to the poor or pardon granted to an enemy can be decisive in determining the balance of the scales of divine judgments.

In sum, Anna-Maria’s revelations drawn from the mysterious sun could penetrate a soul with a profound fear of God – the fear that is so necessary to Catholic life. Likewise, the visions could excite souls to a true vigilance over themselves, and to a great humility because people would see that deficiencies in uprightness and purity of intention were severely punished in purgatory. Lastly, the revelations convey confidence when we see all the astounding favors with which the humble and loving Anna-Maria was blessed by God, the efficacy that He gave to her prayers and immolations, and the great number of souls whose salvation was due to her. Oh, God, please give us similar saints!

Death and Beatification of Anna-Maria

She died of a chest inflammation on June 9, 1837, after announcing her death several days previously and having endured with the greatest patience the pains of a malady that lasted seven months. An order from Heaven prohibited meat, and she became bedridden on October 24, 1836. She was not, however, deprived of Holy Communion, as Mass was celebrated each day in her domestic chapel. Pope Gregory XVI permitted her to receive Communion without any Eucharistic fast. The Monday before her death, after receiving both Holy Communion and a Heavenly apparition, she announced clearly that she would die on the Friday of that week.

It is impossible to convey the expression of happiness that shone on her face. She asked for her husband, thanked him for his solicitude, and had with him a final and private conversation. She called for her children, exhorted them to fidelity to God, devotion to the Blessed Virgin, and daily recitation of the Rosary together. Lastly, after blessing her children and bidding her final goodbye to her husband, she recollected herself so that she could think solely of Heaven.

Her sickness worsened in the following days and she received Viaticum and Extreme Unction. A Trinitarian Father gave her the indulgences of his Order, as she was a tertiary. And although she suffered horribly, God permitted that she was abandoned by everyone during the three last hours of her agony. It was not until the very last moment that two priests came running to recite the prayers for the dying. She died during an invocation to the Precious Blood of Jesus, at 12:30 am.

The death of this holy woman made for a sensation in Rome. No one was indifferent, from the average man all the way to the sovereign pontiff. On instructions from Gregory XVI, Cardinal Odesalchi had Anna-Maria buried in a special section of the Agro Verano, the great cemetery in Rome near Saint Lawrence Outside the Walls. The coffin was sealed and the tomb was marked with an inscription in marble.

Miracles exploded through her intercession. Introduction of her cause took place under Pius IX, January 8, 1863. In 1865 the body of the servant of God was found to be incorrupt and transported to Blessed Mary of Peace. It was then buried in the church of the Trinitarians at Saint Chrysogonus. Pius X proclaimed her heroic virtues on May 4, 1906 and the two miracles required for beatification were approved by Benedict XV on January 8, 1919. The beatification took place at Saint Peter’s on May 20, 1920, Feast of the Holy Trinity.

Our Lord had said to Anna-Maria: “I have chosen to place you among the ranks of the martyrs.” Likewise, He said: “I have destined that you be known throughout the entire world as an example of penance and as the model of married women.” The humble woman was confused to have to repeat such words to her confessor, to whom she was obliged to tell everything. But today, these words have been proven true.

Annex:

Anna Maria Taigi (1769-1837) and Napoléon (1769-1821)

Napoleon and Anna Maria Taigi never met. Yet Providence has established mysterious bonds between them – links of opposition, but also intercession and compensation – throughout their lives:

*Both were born the same year (1769), both of Tuscan parents.

*Since 1790 (she and Napoleon are 21 years old), Anna Maria Taigi is favored with the mysterious sun, in which she can follow the progress of the French Revolution, but also the rise of the young Bonaparte, who is appointed general at 24 and commander-in-chief of the Army of Italy at 26 years.

* 1798: On the orders of Napoleon, and thanks to his brother Joseph, the Roman Republic is proclaimed. Pope Pius VI was kidnapped by Massena and imprisoned in Vienna, then in Valencia – where he died in 1799. From Rome, Anna Maria follows and describes his agony. But she also announces the coup d’etat on Brumaire 18: Bonaparte will reopen France to the priests. The concordat of 1801 will allow the renewal of French Catholicism.

* Austerlitz (1805), Iena (1806), Eylau (1807): the mysterious sun shows in real time – or even in advance – to the eyes of Anna Maria the fresco of the events of the world. She sees the successive victories of the Emperor, and, at the same time, the Masonic convents, the mass graves of Europe, where thousands of soldiers die without priests, Spain on fire, the Church administered by the Emperor like a regiment, daily crushed, open to schism, bishops prone to resistance, imprisoned, the Pope threatened… And a voice repeats to Anna Maria: You must fulfill in your flesh what is lacking in my passion, for my Church and my vicar.

* February 2, 1808: the troops of Napoleon occupy Rome and point their artillery on the Quirinal where Pius VII lives. The Papal States are united to the Empire, the pope is arrested and incarcerated. Anna Maria long since announced these events and their unfolding. God explained to her that he left the ungodly free to act, but that he would stop them at the moment when they thought they were about to triumph, provided that she, on her part, satisfied his justice. As soon as she sees in her sun the threats that Napoleon makes to the Church, she reminds God of her promise and offers herself to suffer “so that the arms of the impious are broken and their power dispersed.”

* 1809: While Napoleon wins the Battle of Wagram, Pius VII, thrown into a locked carriage, is dragged from Florence to Turin, then from Turin to France, from where it is brought back to Savona, and finally to Fontainebleau, where he seems to be dying. For five years Anna Taigi followed his tribulations hour by hour and informed the cardinals about them. But she also predicts his deliverance. Our Lord explains to her: “For what purpose have I raised up Napoleon? – He is the minister of my anger to punish the iniquity of the wicked and to humble the proud. An impious one destroys other ungodly people.” Napoleon himself declared, on his part: “I feel myself pushed towards a goal that I do not know. When I have reached it, as soon as I am no longer useful, then an atom will be enough to knock me down.” Anna Taigi announces from the beginning that the pope’s captivity will last five years. She describes in advance to Cardinal Pedicini and Bishop Natali the future campaign of Russia, the abdication of the emperor, and the return of Pius VII to Rome.

* 1814: Anna Taigi predicts a year in advance that Pius VII will officiate in St. Peter’s Basilica on the day of Pentecost 1814. This is fulfilled literally. On April 4, Napoleon signed his abdication at Fontainebleau in the same palace where he imprisoned Pius VII. May 24, 1814, is the triumphal entry of the Pope into the Eternal City.

* May 5, 1821: Napoleon dies in Sainte-Hélène. The news will not arrive in Rome until two and a half months later, but on the very day of her death, Anna Taigi describes it to Msgr. Natali. She sees the exile’s bed, arrangements, to­mb, ceremonies, funeral, and destiny in eternity.

* February 1st, 1836: Letizia Bonaparte, mother of Napoleon, dies in Rome, where she took refuge. The funeral takes place in the church Santa Maria in Via Lata, right in front of the house of Anna Taigi. She will have her mass of burial in the same church, a year later (June 11, 1837). During her last four years, Anna Maria met Napoleon’s uncle, Cardinal Fesch, several times. It is not known whether he echoed their conversations in passing this judgment on the fallen emperor: “God did not break him; he humbled him, and this is the way of salvation.”

Translated by Mrs M.F.

1 — – Cited by Albert Bessieres, SJ, Blessed Anna-Maria Taigi, Mother of a Family. Paris, DCB, 1936, p. 79, 84-86.

2 — In fact, Anna-Maria held a certain “rank.” Her husband was a servant, but in a princely home. He wanted his wife herself to have a servant girl that she would treat as a child of the house. This brought embarrassment for Anna-Maria.

3 — Albert Bessieres, SJ, Blessed Anna-Maria Taigi, Mother of a Family, p. 85.

Synod on the Amazon

admin FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, The Fight for the Faith

Synod on the Amazon

Commentary on the Instrumentum Laboris
by Professor Matteo d’Amico
a document published in Le Sel de la terre 110, autumn 2019
* Presentation by Le Sel de la terre

The preparation of the synod on the Amazon has provoked many reactions in the Church. Several conservative cardinals and bishops criticized the working document (Instrumentum Laboris) to the point of publicly demanding its suppression.

Professor Matteo D’Amico took the trouble to methodically analyze this text in the Courrier de Rome 1. We reproduce here the main passages from his introduction and conclusion.

* Analysis of Professor Matteo d’Amico (it’s only an extract)

[…]

The text of the Instrumentum Laboris […] is divided into three sections :

— the first part entitled “The voice of the Amazon”,

— the second part entitled “Integral Ecology : The Cry of the Earth and of the Poor”,

— and the third part : “Prophetic Church in the Amazon : Challenges and Hopes.”

The Method of the Pope

Before starting a brief analysis of the text, let us first make an observation of the method: one will notice that the choice has been made to follow a plan starting from below, i.e., to arrive at the final document starting from the compilation of the questionnaire and a series of innumerable preparatory meetings.

The Pope has already accustomed us to this method in previous synods, such as the one on the family, and the one on the youth. We are faced with a kind of radical ecclesiastical democracy, with a continual appeal to the people and their solicitation to compile “notebooks of grievances” in which one must say what he expects of the Church, and what changes he expects of it. Basically, it is the method of all revolution, starting precisely from the French Revolution of 1789.

It is a dangerous and completely unnatural method for the Church, and unprecedented in all its history 2. The Catholic Church is essentially “magistra”: it possesses the truth in its entirety; it guards an immutable and clear doctrine that it has the duty to teach all peoples; it is not a mere human agency or institution that must conduct surveys on how to adapt a service to the requirements of its customers. Given the relationship between the Teaching Church (the Pope and the episcopate united to him and subordinate to him) and the Church Taught, it makes no sense to reverse the terms of the relationship and think that the Church Taught should teach the Teaching Church what to do or what to teach. We are facing an antichristic reversal of the right relationship that we should have with the Authority: we will see that this is the heart of the document, and in reality this is the heart of the very personal and heterodox interpretation that the Pontiff gives of the role and duties of the Church.

The Amazon

But it is useful to ask one last question: 34 million people live in the Amazon, of which more than 3 million are Indios, Indian natives (on a territory of 7.5 million square kilometers). It is a derisory number of inhabitants, equivalent to a little more than half of the inhabitants of Italy, but spread over a territory almost 22 times larger than that of Italy.

So why such an emphasis on the fate of Catholicism in this so particular but quantitatively insignificant region, regarding membership to the Catholic Church?

Are there not more urgent problems, such as the very profound de-Christianization of European Catholic States for centuries?

Are there not gigantic problems in the field of bioethics that would require extraordinary synods, such as the problems of abortion, euthanasia, homosexual unions?

Therefore, it does not seem rash to assume that the anxiety for 3 million Amerindians scattered in the vast Amazonian forest has another origin, and comes from ecological strategies put forward by the strong powers in the whole world, and that the Church must be the spokesperson and the sounding board, given its role of moral authority, certainly tamed and controlled but still influential on many, useful to give a varnish of spirituality to the global dictatorship that is slowly taking hold. In short, the Pope is used as a luxury Greta, for the use of dazed peoples who are slowly crushed. […]

Conclusion

It may be necessary, in conclusion, to summarize the structure of the document we have analyzed, highlighting its very serious flaws.

1. Firstly, all the laborious discourse that the Instrumentum Laboris develops is made without ever clarifying the situation of the Church in Amazon: it does not reconstruct its history, nor give data on the distribution, development, or the number of baptisms and marriages. Its style is thus totally abstract and, ultimately, not very serious. One does not understand, by reading this text, what it is talking about and what the situation of Catholicism in the Amazon is.

There is no rigorous and serious evaluation of the moral situation, e.g., respect for the conjugal bond, the frequency of the sacraments, etc. The situation could be good or very bad, but we do not know.

2. The confusion is increased by the fact that it is never clear whether it refers to the evangelization of the already baptized and converted Amerindians, or if it also speaks of the evangelization of Amerindians far from Gospel and who have never received the Good News. The “ancient” culture and beliefs of Amerindian “ancestors” are exalted to such an extent that it seems they are still pagans.

The worldview of the Amazonian Indians is ridiculously exalted as a vision of life of depth, beauty, harmony, and unmatched delicacy: an even superficial knowledge of these peoples suffices to show that it is a world far from being idyllic. The whole text is crossed and made absurd by this ambiguity.

3. The subject of the salvation of souls, eternal life, and the immortality of the soul is never mentioned in any part of the text. We are faced with a Christianity between the sentimental and the ideological, to be corrected to better favor harmony with nature. The text presents a faith completely emptied of its kernel of eschatological and soteriological force.

It never speaks of sin and, at the same time, there is not the slightest allusion to the Cross of Jesus-Christ and the economy of salvation based on the Cross. As sin is completely absent, so too is the theme of salvation absent, and not by chance: what salvation is needed if there is no sin? The very name of Jesus-Christ is mentioned only a very few times, and neither is this a coincidence.

Logically, there is no reference to the life of grace and the need to nourish it with the sacraments and prayer: all life of piety is dissolved in a nebula of continual exaltations of the original spirituality of the Indians of the Amazon, the new “good savages”.

There is […] almost no reference to the Blessed Virgin Mary. And this is very suspicious and raises a lot of doubts about the faith of those who wrote this document.

The document presents an idea of completely false and distorted inculturation, which ends up asking the Church to convert to Native American spirituality.

The aim is to alter the priesthood and the liturgy and to clear the way for ordained women in one way or another (even if one does not yet dare to say openly for what purpose exactly).

The doctrinal and scriptural references are minimal, and we are only faced with a flood of references to the texts of Francis, whose jargon is used shamelessly, repeating like parrots his typical expressions (and especially a “Church that goes forth”).

4. The whole text is frankly modernist in all its aspects, and especially in its way of pleading the cause of the most frantic “dogmatic mobilism”: where doctrine and morality must not be rigid or oppressive, but flexible and able to adapt to the concrete reality and needs of the Amazonian Indians.

The « Instrumentum Laboris » that we have commentated is not a Catholic document, but a breeding ground of heresies. It is a scandalous text, and it is the duty of every Catholic, but especially of every bishop, to publicly condemn it and demand that it be withdrawn, by publicly denouncing its falseness and its pitfalls.

Its application and use during the Synod on the Amazon can only bring about the ruin of the Church in the Amazon, first of all, and worldwide when its application will be expanded.

Translation by A. A.

1 — Le Courrier de Rome, no. 623 (July-August 2019). The issues of the Courrier de Rome can be found at www.courrierderome.org.

2 — It must be added that this alleged democracy is actually a manipulation—as in all Masonic regimes. The puppeteers who claim to listen to “the people” have taken all the necessary steps to hear exactly what they want. Augustin Cochin dismantled these manipulative techniques in the unfolding of the French Revolution, and Fr. Calmel repeatedly stressed that they had entered the Church with the the conciliar revolution. (Ed.)

Homage to Saint Vincent Ferrer

admin FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, Spirituality

Homage to Saint Vincent Ferrer

   Great prophet of the Last Judgment

(1350-1419)

For the six-hundredth anniversary of his return to God

Commentary on the texts of the Mass of Saint Vincent Ferrer on April 5th,

in the Dominican Missal

by Father Mortier O.P.

Introit:

“In the midst of the Church the Lord opened his mouth, and filled him with the Spirit of wisdom and understanding. — He clothed him with a robe of glory. — He heaped upon him a treasure of joy and gladness. ”

Collect:

“O God, who granted that multitudes of the Gentiles should come to the knowledge of Your name through the wondrous preaching of blessed Vincent, Your confessor; grant, we beseech You, that him whom he foretold on earth as the judge to come, we may be worthy to have as our rewarder in heaven.”

Vincent Ferrer “opened his mouth in the Church”, but he opened it under the inspiration of God, prophetically. He is the great prophet of the Last Judgment. To understand this unique mission, it is necessary to put oneself in the situation of Saint Vincent, in the midst of the calamities, terrifying for the faith, which produced the Western Schism. The Christian peoples no longer knew who was the legitimate Head of the Church. There were two, three Popes, who were fighting over the tiara. Who was Peter’s successor, the authentic Vicar of Jesus Christ? The unity of the Church was in danger.

Kings, cardinals, and saints were actively engaged in returning to this unity. But the reality was terrifying for the faith and Christian discipline. The Western Schism appears as one of the most painful and threatening calamities that has weighed on the Church’s destiny. As such, the schism is a devastating prophecy of the end of the world.

God prophesies by deeds and by words. And the supreme calamity of the end of the world is prefigured, announced by previous world calamities, as the capture and destruction of Jerusalem, which dispersed the Jewish people; as fall of the Roman Empire allowed the barbarians to transform the nations, so the Western Schism endangered the Church herself, symbol of the antichrist at the end of time…

Vincent appears during the most acute period of this schism, when everything seems hopeless. He enters into this prophecy; he is part of it; it is incarnated, so to speak, in him. And that is why Vincent preaches to all the coming of the sovereign Judge. Fear God, he says, for the hour of his judgment has come. Still a prophetic hour, but so threatening that the people, terrified by the emphases of the man of God, massively converted. One heard Vincent, followed him, and saw throughout Europe this “Company” which did not leave him, eager to hear him. That is why Vincent also converted to the faith so many Jews, whose return to the true Messiah added one more aspect to the prophecy of the Last Judgment.

The liturgy, too, officially consecrates this extraordinary mission of Saint Vincent Ferrer.

Epistle:

Reading from the Book of the Apocalypse of the apostle St. John, ch. 14:6-7:

“In those days, I saw another angel flying in midheaven, having an everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell upon the earth and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people, saying with a loud voice, “Fear God, and give Him honor, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made the heaven and the earth, the sea and fountains of waters.”

One day St. Vincent was preaching before a multitude in Salamanca; he depicted the Last Judgment and quoted these words of the Angel, when suddenly he stopped. An intimate, divine light overcame his intelligence; he became conscious of himself; and in a loud voice, with the assurance of the supernatural revelation which dominated him, he exclaimed, “I myself am the Angel seen by St. John”. The affirmation was bold. There were murmurs; the crowd became turbulent. Vincent, strong from the received light, does not retreat. A woman had died in a neighboring house, and the corpse being brought over, he said: “Arise and declare to this crowd whether or not I am the Angel who must preach to everyone the Judgment Day. — Father, you are this Angel”. The corpse had risen; he had spoken.

The Church has authenticated this providential mission both in the bull of Saint Vincent’s canonization and in the liturgy.

Gradual:

“The mouth of the just man shall meditate wisdom, and his tongue shall speak judgment. — The law of his God is in his heart, and his steps shall not be supplanted.”

Tract:

“He shone in his days as the morning star in the midst of a cloud, and as the full moon. — And as the sun when it shines, so did he shine in the temple of God. — And as the rainbow appearing in the cloudy sky, and as the flower of roses in the springtime. — And as the lilies that are on the brink of the water, and as the sweet-smelling frankincense in summertime. — As a bright fire, and frankincense burning in the fire. — As a massive vessel of gold, adorned with every precious stone.”

In Paschal time. “Alleluia, alleluia! O glorious father Vincent, famous son of the Order of Dominic, pour forth your prayers to the sovereign judge for all the nations who are devoted to you..”

Gospel:

“You are the salt of the earth, etc.” from the common of Doctors in the Roman Rite.

Offertory:

“You have given him his heart’s desire, O Lord, and have not withheld from him the request of his lips; You have set on his head a crown of precious stones.”

Secret:

“We offer to You, O Lord, these gifts of our love; and that they may be at once pleasing to You and helpful to us, may the blessed Vincent, Your confessor whom Your gifts made glorious before the world, become our devoted advocate with Your loving kindness.”

Communion:

“To Vincent [to him that overcometh] I will give (Vincenti dabo) to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of my God.”

Vincenti dabo… There is a play on words with the name of Vincent, which English cannot render.

Postcommunion:

“Filled with these divine gifts, we beseech You, O Lord, that through the glorious merits of blessed Vincent, Your confessor, we may taste the desired fruits of this saving victim”.

Fear the Lord, for his Judgment is near. The hour is coming, it sounds around us all the time. It reaches our neighbor: today for me, tomorrow for you! A personal but irrevocable judgment of which the supreme, universal, public one will only be its solemn confirmation. The book of our life, from which not one syllable is lost, will be opened before us, in the full light of truth. What will we have written on these pages? Our conscience itself will read and make the judgment. For at the Judgment of God we are, in short, under the implacable light of truth, its own judge. One sees oneself to the depths, at a glance, and one pronounces the sentence himself: worthy of God or unworthy. Everything is there. Worthy of God by His mercy which will have saved us, purified at least for the most part, the rest for Purgatory; but even with Purgatory, it is certain salvation, the eternal possession of God assured.

And then there is the other sentence, the awful one, the one where one says to oneself: I am lost!

Lost by my fault, because we see with cruel certainty that we are lost by one’s own fault. There, no remission. By one’s own weight, one goes down instead of going up; we descend into the eternal abyss. And each of us, often at the time when one least thinks of it, appears at the Judgment of God: Fear the Lord, for the hour of his judgment comes.

After twenty years of this incredible apostolate, to complete in his person the expressive figure of the end of time, on Wednesday, April 5, 1419, Vincent Ferrer died in Vannes, Brittany, France, the West of the world at that time. His death, like his life, retains the prophetic character of his mission.

(Fr. Mortier O.P., La Liturgie dominicaine ; Lille/Bruges, DDB, 1923, tome VII, p. 184 sq.)

(Translation of the Mass parts from the 1959 /Saint Dominic Missal: Latin ­– English)

Translation by A. A.

Consecration to the Most Holy Virgin

admin FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, Spirituality

Consecration to the Most Holy Virgin

General ideas about the True Devotion or Holy Slavery to Jesus through Mary

According to Saint Lewis-Mary Grignion-de-Montfort

By Fr Gabriel DENIS

1) What is the purpose of this devotion?

The purpose of this devotion is to establish the absolute reign of the Blessed Virgin in our hearts, in order to make prevail in them the perfectly incarnated Wisdom, Jesus, Christ the King:

“If, then, we establish solid devotion to our Blessed Lady, it is only to establish more perfectly devotion to Jesus Christ, and to provide an easy and secure means for finding Jesus Christ. If devotion to Our Lady removed us from Jesus Christ, we should have to reject it as an illusion of the devil; but so far from this being the case, devotion to Our Lady is, on the contrary, necessary for us, as I have already shown, and will show still further hereafter, as a means of finding Jesus Christ perfectly, of loving Him tenderly, and of serving Him faithfully” (Saint Lewis-Mary Grignion-de-Montfort).

2) What does this devotion consist of?

It consists of:

1) giving yourself entirely to the Blessed Virgin to be wholly with Jesus Christ through her;

2) to live habitually and always in a complete, whole, and perfect dependence of her will, following the example of the Son of God in Nazareth.

3) Why dedicate yourself to the Blessed Virgin?

We thus devote ourselves to the Blessed Virgin:

1) to imitate the dependence of Jesus who, in order to save us, wanted to be subject to Mary for thirty years;

2) to recognize the rights of the Holy Virgin, who, being Mother of God, has power over all creatures;

3) to receive more graces, because with Mary being in charge of applying to us the merits of the Redemption, we will be all the more favored, living more subject and more united to the divine Mother.

4) How should you give your whole self and practice this absolute dependence to the Most Holy Virgin?

We must choose a remarkable day to give her, in an act of solemn consecration:

1) our body ;

2) our soul;

3) our earthly goods;

4) our spiritual goods ;

5) all the value of our good past, present and future deeds.

By virtue of this consecration and to live habitually in her dependence, we must do all our actions through Her, with Her, in Her and for Her, so that we always look at Her as acting together with us, and to destine to Her all the good that we can do.

5) What does it mean to act through Mary, with Mary, in Mary and for Mary?

— To act “through Mary” is never to go to our Lord without going through Her, to let yourself be led in all things by Her spirit;

— “with Mary” is to take the Holy Virgin as the model of all that one has to do, and endeavor to imitate Her;

— “in Mary” is staying within the beautiful Heart of Mary with complacency, remaining in peace, relying on Her with confidence, taking refuge in Her, and losing yourself without reservation;

— “for Mary” is doing all actions for Her, for Her profit and glory, in order to do them more surely for the glory of God.

6) How does this consecration differ from those that are made on the occasion of Baptism and in the Congregations of the Children of Mary?

On the occasion of Baptism and in the Congregations of Children of Mary, one is placed under the protection of the Blessed Virgin, as a child under the tutelage of his mother, or as someone poor under the protection of someone rich, in order to have a greater part of their kindness, favors, and love; but one does not sacrifice, for that, neither the value of one’s acts, nor the liberty to rely on yourself.

Here, on the contrary, by giving everything entirely to the Blessed Virgin, for no longer do we belong to ourselves, we abandon at the same time all the rights we naturally have from our good works. She can, therefore, dispose of them as She wills, as She deems fit, without intending anything but the honor of living in her dependence as slaves by love, in order to be by it slaves of Jesus; hence this title given by the Blessed Father Montfort to this devotion: Slavery of Jesus in Mary.

7) In what sense should we consider this abandonment of all our rights to the Blessed Virgin?

To clearly understand the answer to this question, it must be remembered that each of our works, made in a state of grace and by reasons of faith contains:

1) a satisfactory (atoning) or impetratory (begging) value that we can communicate to others, and which serves, to compensate for the penalty due to sin or to obtain some benefit particular;

2) a meritorious value which is our own, that we do not share with anyone, and which brings to our soul an increase of graces and merits.

Now, by this voluntary abandonment we make of all our rights, the Blessed Virgin becomes absolute headmistress: 1) of all of the satisfactory (atoning) and impetratory (begging) value of our good works, so She can apply them how She wants, as She pleases, according to the greatest glory of God;

2) of all their meritorious value, that is, to say of the graces of our merits. But because these graces and those merits of our own are incommunicable, She will want to guard them preciously, like a beautiful and rich treasure, to grant us enjoyment at the great day of eternity.

8) How can we help our parents, friends, and benefactors, both alive and deceased, if we are not free to dispose the value of our good works in favor of who we want?

Far from opposing that we come to the aid of those who are dear to us, or who commend themselves to us, this devotion authorizes us, on the contrary, to pray for them with more confidence than ever:

“Just as well as a rich person,” says the saint of Montfort, “who, wanting to show his esteem for a great prince, gives his entire fortune to him. Would not that man have greater confidence in asking the prince to help one of his friends who needed assistance? Indeed the prince would only be too happy to have such an opportunity of proving his gratitude to one who had sacrificed all that he possessed to enrich him, thereby impoverishing himself to do him honour. The same must be said of our Lord and our Lady.”

For those consecrated as slaves, it is of their kindness and power never to be outdone in gratitude.

While the application of our good works does not depend anymore on our will, Jesus and Mary “will assist, of our humble and submissive commendation, of our small spiritual merit, or by other ways, our parents, friends and benefactors” alive and dead, when they will be in need. It is even a duty of justice and charity that they will recognize and fulfill better than us.

9) What are the main benefits we find for ourselves in the slavery of Jesus in Mary?

We, being stripped of all that we have to give it to the Most Holy Virgin, are right to believe:

1) That the good Mother, having accepted our offering, is obliged at the same time to consider us always as her good, to protect us and defend us against our enemies, to give us the ways of salvation, and to obtain for us all of the graces we need in life;

2) That our good works, passing by her hands before arriving at God, are purified, augmented, embellished with its virtues, and presented by Herself to Jesus Christ, they will be favorably welcomed, and thus make them more meritorious in His eyes:

3) That, being shown to be generous and selfless, parting with our own goods to put them back in Her hands, she acquits our debts towards God in this life and will not permit that we stay a long time to suffer in Purgatory after our death.

Also, in the slavery of Jesus through Mary, a fervent, animated soul of special love for the Most Holy Virgin, arrives more surely and more promptly to a perfect sanctification than by any other spiritual way. “Show me a new road to go to Jesus Christ,” says the saint of Montfort, “pave it with all the merits of the saints, adorn it with their heroic virtues, illuminate and enhance it with the splendor and beauty of the angels, have all the angels and saints there to guide and protect those who wish to follow it. Give me such a road and truly, truly, I boldly say, and I am telling the truth, that instead of this road, perfect though it be, I would still choose the immaculate way of Mary. It is a way, a road without stain or spot, without original sin or actual sin, without shadow or darkness.”

10) What are the obligations of this devotion?

To be a slave to Jesus in Mary:

1) We must have made our consecration;

2) By virtue of this consecration, one must seek to live according to her spirit, that is to say, in union with Mary.

The act of consecration is a contract that always lasts unless it is formally retracted. The saint of Montfort asks us to renew it frequently, even if it is brief.

To help us do our consecration well and to live united with Mary, he also shows us a few particular external and internal practices.

11) Does this devotion oblige under pain of sin?

It does not oblige under pain of sin, but one could find in their negligence a lack of conformity to grace. It is a great medium of salvation and of perfection that we must neither despise should nor neglect.

12) What are the external practices of this devotion?

These practices are:

1) To prepare for the consecration in offering to God, for thirty days, one’s prayers, meditations and good works, with intention and in following way: twelve days to purge the spirit of the world, six days to get the knowledge of oneself, six days to get to know the Blessed Virgin, and six days to get to know Jesus Christ. This preparation completed, the consecration is done pronouncing the formula composed by the saint of Montfort himself 1;

2) To renew each year the act of consecration, after preparing for three weeks in the same way as the first time. This preparation can coincide with the month of May; it would be an excellent exercise for the month of Mary;

3) To make a small offering to the Holy Virgin, the day of the first consecration and the day of the renovation, as a mark of universal dependency towards Mary;

4) To recite every day some prayer in honor of the Most Holy Virgin; for example, the Magnificat, a chaplet, or the Holy Rosary, especially the Little Crown of the Blessed Virgin, praying three times one Pater, four Aves, and 1 Glory Be.

5) To devoutly celebrate the Feasts of the Blessed Virgin, particularly the Annunciation, the main festival of the present devotion.

13) What are the interior practices?

These practices are:

1) Offering to Our Lord Jesus Christ, every morning, by the hands of his Holy Mother, all of our thoughts, desires, words, and actions, by pronouncing these words or other similar ones: “I am all yours, and all that I have, I offer to you, my kind Jesus, by Mary, your Most Holy Mother” or “I give myself up, I give myself entirely to you, my dear Mother.”

2) To live all day in union with Mary, seeking to act everywhere and always through Her, with Her, in Her, and for Her, as it was explained above (fifth question). For this, in the course of the day, do all works habitually with this thought: “My good mother, act in me…speak in me…work in me.” All this is to be done peacefully, gently, without effort, without restraint, but also with fidelity and perseverance.

14) What are the fruits of this devotion?

Souls who know how to enter the spirit of this devotion are happy, a thousand times happy. They find their consolation invoking and blessing Mary as their powerful Queen; their pleasure to obey their dear Headmistress without delay. They discover in contemplation of her virtues a ravishing beauty and, in the imitation of her, strength and incomparable joy. They live in their Mother’s company with the trust and abandonment of a child. They draw from the intercession of the Most Holy Virgin (becoming for them the conduit of all graces) such a great abundance of goods that they withdraw fast from sin to live fully according to God. It is Jesus and Mary who reign in their hearts and they do not delay not to reign there perfectly.

God alone!

Translation by J.F.

1 — You will find it in his « Treatise of the true devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary ».

To Say That A Canonical Recognition Is Not Feasible Before Rome Returns To Tradition, Is This A Schismatic Attitude?

admin -FEATURED POSTS - FRONT PAGE, conciliar Church, FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section

To Say That A Canonical Recognition

Is Not Feasible Before Rome Returns To Tradition,

Is This A Schismatic Attitude?

By Maubert

published in Le Sel de la Terre 107

Reasons for an Affirmative Response

  • First Reason

Refusing the jurisdiction that is offered to us amounts to denying all jurisdiction that comes from the pope. However, to deny the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff, is the characteristic of schismatics.

  • Second Reason

To deny communion with the pope and most of the faithful, during more and more years, has given us a schismatic attitude: we do not feel the need to integrate the “visible perimeter” of the Church, so we have lost the Sensus Ecclesiae.

  • Third Reason

To stand apart from Church authorities when they ask us to abandon faith and the liturgy of time immemorial, is understandable and excuses the schism; but since today we are accepted “just as we are,” our conduct would become unjustified and the schism would be formal.

  • Fourth Reason

The place of Tradition must be in the “official perimeter” of the Church so that it remains visible.

Opinions to the Contrary

To continue to profess the faith of all time and to celebrate with traditional worship, away from the conciliar Church has never been considered by Archbishop Lefebvre as a schism: “we truly represent the Catholic Church,” 1 he said, and that was even after the consecrations of 1988, just after John Paul II excommunicated him.

Why should we be now schismatic if we hold the same attitude towards modernist Rome?

In-Depth Response

  • What is schism?

Schism, says Cardinal Billot, opposes the unity of communion. […] It is incurred in two ways :

— First, if one directly refuses obedience to the supreme pontiff, not accepting what he commands, not precisely from the point of view of what is commanded (for that would amount to mere disobedience), but from the point of view of the authority that commands, that is, refusing to recognize the pope as head and superior.

— Secondly, if one separates directly from the communion of the Catholic faithful, for example by behaving like a separate group.2

At first sight, traditionalists seem to be schismatic in two ways:

— the absence of an effective link of dependence suggests that they do not recognize the authority of the pope;

— and they seem to form a sort of “little church” and are called “lefebvrists” or “integrists” while refusing to mingle with other faithful.

  • The bond of faith is first

However, Pope Leo XIII, in the encyclical Satis Cognitum, speaking on the unity of the Church, says this:

« Agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of this perfect concord amongst men, from which concurrence of wills and similarity of action are the natural results. Wherefore, in His divine wisdom, He ordained in His Church Unity of Faith; a virtue which is the first of those bonds which unite men to God, and whence we receive the name of the faithful. »

A few years later, in his magisterial encyclical condemning the false ecumenism, Mortalium Animos, Pius XI will resume the same idea:

« Since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. »

It emerges from these Pontifical teachings that there is in the Church a more fundamental unity than the unity of communion: it is the unity of faith. And for the unity of communion to be true, it is absolutely necessary for it to have the unity of faith. Hence, it is clear that the first schismatics are the heretics: “Heresy,“ says Cardinal Billot, “is a schism, for it directly opposes the unity of faith.” One can oppose the unity of communion without opposing the unity of faith, but one can not oppose the unity of faith without opposing the unity of communion, since the first is the foundation of the second.

  • It is those who deviate from the faith that commit schism

When we consider the situation of the Church since the Second Vatican Council, we see that people who occupy positions of authority are imbued with liberalism and modernism. They have imposed reforms that destroy the Church because they oppose traditional faith and worship. Thus, they broke with the Tradition of many centuries, that is to say, definitively, they broke with the unity of faith; and the unity of communion they are trying to achieve is only a pseudo-unity, because it has lost its true foundation. The modernist hierarchy, so long as it is modernist, is heretical: it opposes the unity of faith by preaching its errors and, consequently, to the unity of communion. In other words, it is the conciliar Church that is schismatic because it seeks to achieve a unity that is no longer the Catholic unity.

Archbishop Lefebvre said clearly:

« The conciliar Church is practically schismatic. [….] It is a virtually excommunicated church, because it is a modernist church. The pope wants to create unity without that of faith. It’s a communion. A communion to whom? to what? in what? It is no longer unity. This can only be done in the unity of faith. » 3

  • And the pope?

As Cardinal Journet explains, in The Church of the Incarnate Word, 4 the pope himself can sin against ecclesiastical communion by breaking the unity of direction, which would happen if he did not fulfill his duty. and refused to the Church the orientation it is entitled to expect from him, in the name of one greater than him, Christ, its founder and invisible leader. And it is unfortunately the painful situation in which we have found since the Council. If Archbishop Lefebvre was to stay away from the modernist hierarchy and the conciliar Church, it was by fidelity to Tradition, refusing to commit schism and break with the unity of faith, as it has always been done in the Church. « The Church, Father Calmel O.P. said, is not the mystical body of the pope, but of Christ ». 5 If, therefore, the pope fails in his office to the point of promoting heresy and schism, then it is better to obey Christ. and remain faithful to the Church of all time, even if it means enduring the wrath of the authorities in power. Archbishop Lefebvre preferred to stay away from this hierarchy and this false communion:

« To leave, therefore, from the official Church? To a certain extent, yes, of course. If the bishops are in heresy, it is necessary to leave the midst of the bishops if one does not wish to lose one’s soul. If we get away from these people, it’s absolutely the same as with people who have AIDS. We do not want to catch it. But they have spiritual AIDS, these contagious diseases. If we want to keep health, we must not go with them. » 6

  • Origin of our attitude

In practice, the Catholic must not desire and can not be in communion with a hierarchy that favors modernism, liberalism, and ecumenism which are condemned by the popes and direct the faithful in ways foreign to Tradition. It would be better to endure the persecutions, criticisms, epithets of “schismatics” and “excommunicated,” than to collaborate in the undertakings of this hierarchy and the loss of souls.

1 — Fideliter 70, p. 6.

2 — Cardinal BILLOT, L’Eglise, volume II, Publications of the Courrier de Rome, 2010, p. 69-70.

3 — Fideliter 70, p. 8.

4 — Cardinal JOURNET, L’Eglise du Verbe Incarné, Desclée de Brouwer, Fribourg, 1962, vol. II, p. 839 sq.

5 — Père Roger-Thomas CALMEL O.P., « De l’Église et du pape», in Itinéraires 173, May 1973, p. 28.

6 — Conference in Ecône, 9 September 1988, cited in Fideliter 66, p. 28.

Can we Accept?

admin conciliar Church, FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, In defense of our convent, The Fight for the Faith

Can We Accept a Canonical Recognition Proposed by a Neo-Modernist Authority?

By Maubert

Published in Le Sel de la Terre 101

The answer is not self-evident. Indeed, for years Msgr. Lefebvre envisioned an accord as though it were possible; furthermore, he took steps in this direction, it being before 1988, let us not forget.

Before answering, it is first necessary to define the terms of the problem, because there is talk here and there of an “accord” or “canonical recognition“.

What is an “Accord“?

The etymology of this word indicates a harmony of hearts. The current sense of this word, in this context, is that of an “arrangement among those who are in agreement” (Petit Robert French dictionary). The same dictionary, defining the expression “in agreement,” says [“to be in agreement“]: “To have the same opinion, the same way of thinking, or the same intention (to work in the same direction, make a common cause, walk hand-in-hand as a single person, to be united).” In other words, an accord designates a community, be it in thought or action.

If one applies this to the relations between Rome and the Society of St. Pius X, as well as to the associated communities, the accord can be doctrinal or practical.

— At first, an Accord can be doctrinal

After the Second Vatican Council, a doctrinal ditch was dug between the Catholic hierarchy and the faithful who remained attached to Tradition. Thus there is no longer accord but divergence on questions of faith. After fifty years, neo-Modernist Rome is forced to reestablish an accord and lead the faithful of Tradition toward the doctrine of Vatican II; there is accord when they adopt the new doctrines. Msgr. Lefebvre and his successors were forced to bring the Roman authorities back to the traditional doctrine; in other words, they sought a doctrinal accord in the truth, which supposes the conversion of neo-Modernist Rome.

— Then an Accord can be practical

This is to say that it does not concern doctrine, because the two parties diverge, but action; one seeks an arrangement to live together, each remaining what it is. But action is governed by law. Thus, such an accord is sealed by a canonical structure conceded to the communities of Tradition. Is this modus vivendi possible without the latter changing doctrine? In fact, concretely, this has never existed, as the history of the successive accords since 1984 proves.

— Finally, an Accord can be simultaneously doctrinal and practical

There are two cases to envision:

* either the neo-Modernist Roman authorities propose a canonical statute, requiring at the same time adherence to some doctrinal points taken from the Council;

* or these same authorities, having returned to Tradition, recognize the canonical statute that the SSPX and associated communities already have, after having denied its existence (because the suppression of the SSPX in 1975 means nothing, and the erection of associated communities draws its legitimacy from the state of necessity – supplied jurisdiction applies here in this case).

An accord supposes that the two parties “are in agreement“. If one works for a practical agreement, one seeks an arrangement, modifying the conditions as needed, until one reaches an agreement.

What is a Canonical Recognition?

The current sense of the word “recognition” (in the context which concerns us) is “the fact of admitting (something) after having denied or doubted it“.

More precisely, it is the “action of formally, juridically recognizing. […] Recognition of a government, by which a State recognizes the legality of a government arising from a revolution” (Petit Robert French dictionary).

— Nature of a Canonical Recognition

A Canonical Recognition is the granting of a canonical structure by the ecclesiastical authority to an entity that does not have it. In reality, one speaks rather of an “approbation” or “canonical recognition” of an Institute. If one uses the term “recognition” here, it is because of the particular situation in which we find ourselves: the Pope recognizes the juridical existence of communities that already exist.

However, in the mind of the Roman authorities, these communities do not currently have any juridical existence. For example, the aforementioned authorities do not recognize the vows of these religious as public vows but they consider them private vows. On the occasion of various accords (at Le Barroux [Benedictine community of Dom Gerard], at Papa Stronsay [Redemptorist community of Fr Michael-Mary], it was necessary for the members of these communities to renew their vows in the hands of the local bishop or of a representative from the Holy See. Consequently, in the case of canonical recognition, it will be necessary to examine closely these circumstances. If the Holy See, either by words or actions, declares a work legal that until then it judged illegal, to accept this line is ipso facto, despite later rectifications, to admit that the aforesaid work was illegal. Implicitly, it denies the state of necessity that has legitimized our resistance to the self-destruction of the Church.

— Consequences of a Canonical Recognition

The first consequence is that the recognized institute acquires a legal personality, thus a certain autonomy in its internal government.

The second consequence is that this Institute depends more closely on the local bishop, if it is a diocesan Institute, or on the Holy See if it is an Institute of pontifical right. In the latter case, the Institute is removed from the vigilance of the bishop in anything that regards its internal government. The reason for this vigilance (of the bishop or Rome) is that it is necessarily under the direction of the hierarchy of the Church that the institutes led their members to Christian perfection. Is this canonical dependence toward the neo-Modernist authorities compatible with the preservation of the faith and its public profession?

— Canonical Recognition and the Apostolate

The local bishop is responsible for all the faithful in his territory. Consequently, the entire apostolate of the priests—including those of the members of the exempted institutes—is ruled by the bishop and is exercised under his dependence and vigilance.

This is why Msgr. Lefebvre, envisioning the regularization of the works of Tradition, examined which structures could allow for continuing the apostolate beside the faithful in a certain independence from the bishops. This supposes the Institutions fall directly under the jurisdiction of the Pope.

Let us especially examine the case of a personal prelature, which is still on the agenda of Rome and of the Society.

The Second Vatican Council inaugurated personal prelatures. They are “jurisdictional entities, erected by the Holy See as instruments within the framework of the pastoral hierarchy of the Church, for the realization of particular pastoral or missionary activities“. These pastoral tasks are addressed to particular groups of people. So things are done orderly, the prelatures should be made known to episcopal conferences, before their erection, to coordinate their work.

At the head of the prelature is a prelate who has jurisdiction over the faithful upon whom particular pastoral activities are exercised by the priests of the prelature. However, to be able to exercise its apostolate in a diocese, the prelature should have obtained the preliminary consent of the local Ordinary. The personal prelature is thus an auxiliary of the diocesan clergy. The faithful who benefit from its apostolate are thus submitted principally to the local Ordinary and, in addition, to the prelate of the personal prelature.

This concerns the prelatures envisaged by the 1983 code. To tell the truth, the structure foreseen by the SSPX and by its related communities will enjoy, it seems, an almost complete independence with respect to the bishops; in any case, this independence will be much greater than that of the Opus Dei. Nevertheless, it cannot be complete, because by divine right the diocesan bishop is the head of the territory confided to his care.

Also, the simple juridical recognition implies all this: by the recognition of the Institutes, there is a dependence on the Holy See, normally on the Congregation for Institutes of consecrated Life (although the Holy Father is free to associate them with another congregation); for the erection of personal prelature—if applicable—there is a dependence on the Congregation for Bishops; then, a certain harmony with the local Ordinaries is necessary. Finally, the prelature depends on the Roman Congregation for Bishops.

— “Unilateral” Recognition?

This is an expression that is frequently heard recently. What does it mean? A recognition can be bilateral?

We limit ourselves to the case of a canonical recognition: the recognition is the act of who recognizes. Yet, who recognizes the traditional communities? The Holy See. It is not we who recognize the latter and who give it a canonical structure. Consequently, a canonical recognition is essentially unilateral. So, why the pleonasm?

On the one hand, this expression seems to mean that the act of the pope would be without “doctrinal compensation“. The proposed canonical structure would not be accompanied by a preliminary doctrinal declaration to sign. In this case, it would be better to speak of a “canonical recognition without a doctrinal compensation“. On the other hand, this expression gives the impression that the works of Tradition will be regularized despite them, that they will not be for nothing, and that they will not be able to refuse.

Msgr. Rifan 1 said in 2002: « The Pope has offered to recognize our bishop with the promise of a successor; it remains for us to get out of the irregular situation in which we find ourselves. We accept and, in conscience, we cannot refuse this offer. »

Now, this is evidently false; it is necessary to agree on a document, which necessarily implies an acceptance or a refusal on the part of the aforementioned works [of Tradition]. Thus, in 1988, the Monastery of the Holy Cross 2 made a declaration refusing the agreement established between the Holy See and Dom Gérard 3. « Our Monastery of Santa Cruz, it was said, was included in the terms of the agreement that we come here to refuse, without our having been consulted about it. At the time Msgr Lefebvre fully approved this conduct. »

This brings us to a third possible sense of the expression “unilateral recognition“: it suggests that there would not be a compensation on the practical level; everything would continue as before, without any change, if only we would be officially recognized. This masks an aspect of capital importance, which is the effective submission to Roman authorities, and the inevitable influence that these would exert on us. Indeed, law is never “unilateral“; it rules the relations between persons (physical or moral) in view of the common good, thus the relations between superiors and subjects. It is inconceivable to imagine a subject who only has rights and a superior who only has duties; this would be revolutionary. Thus, the subjects necessarily have duties toward their superiors. So, if the superiors grant something, even more so do the subjects concede their submission; the right is thus essentially bilateral. Whence the question it will be necessary to examine: Does not this dependence risk leading to a doctrinal agreement on the Council?

— De Facto Recognition?

This expression indicates the act of a Pope who, seeing that the negotiations with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are stalemated, would pass over any doctrinal, canonical, or liturgical condition. It would be a recognition above all of the facts than by way of legal or canonical right. The Pope has already begun in this direction (notably in conceding the jurisdiction for confessions, then the recognition of the priestly ordinations, and now of the marriages).

We remark that what is called “de facto recognition” has some juridical consequences. Indeed, to declare that the confessions of the priests of the Society are valid amounts to saying that they are legal, conforming to the right, to the law. Although the Pope does not explicitly say: “I give jurisdiction to these priests,” it is a matter of delegated jurisdiction; in fact, it is he who set the duration of it (at first in restricting it to the limits of the year of mercy, then in deciding to continue it afterwards). What was done for confessions has now been done for other acts of the ministry of the priests of Tradition. It is a sort of “piecemeal” or “step-by-step canonical recognition“.

What the distinction between “de facto recognition” and “legal recognition” could indicate is the difference between the phase where some aspects of the ministry of the priests of the Society are recognized as legal, and the other phase where all the aspects of their ministry would be (which necessarily implies a juridical statute, because one cannot be associated with a Society without following its law). And it is only in this phase that the submission to the Roman authorities would become effective.

This distinction suggests that there could be a total recognition of the legitimacy of the Society without a dependence on the current Roman authorities, which is impossible. It is better to speak of an “ongoing canonical recognition” or an “ongoing canonical regularization” than of a “de facto recognition” as St. Thomas said, II-II q. 1 a. 3 : « Movements are specified by their terminus, and receive their name from it. For example, a casserole that heats on the stove warms, tending toward the state of heat in stages ». So here, according to the Roman authorities, the term is the canonical statute. The movement that leads there is the canonical regularization. Consequently, the movement where we find ourselves is an ongoing canonical regularization.

Canonical Recognition and Agreement

As it is now understood, the term “agreement” generally designates a practical agreement, with or without a doctrinal declaration (the current project includes one). The canonical recognition is included in the practical agreement.

— The clarity of words

But why make all these clarifications of vocabulary? They are necessary if we want to be “children of the light“. In her language the Church supremely adheres to clarity of words. Firstly in the expression of dogmas; but this holds true in all the teaching of the Church, from encyclicals to the simple children’s catechism course.

On the contrary, the Revolution dreads clear expressions. Abbé Joseph Lémann 4 said:

“One cannot be careful enough, in France and elsewhere, of the manner in which evil men come to invade bit by bit all avenues of society. Their ability has been infernal. They have seized language before seizing your schools, oh Catholics, your hospitals, your courts of law, your institutions […]. The invasion began in words, in ideas; it is achieved in institutions. It was logical. A profound thinker made this reflection that one cannot meditate on enough: “As long as a people is invaded in its territory, it is only defeated; but if it allows an invasion of its own language, it is finished. The language of a people […] is the supreme bulwark of a people, its last sanctuary.” Behold why it is to render a service to the patriotic cause of the nations than of theirs to cry: Carry, before all, the battle into language, call things by their true name, and for that purpose use a naming that clarifies and disenchants the poor deceived populations.”

Alas! Modern Rome has abandoned this clarity. It would above all not be necessary to let it impose vague language on us.

This is thus the objective of these reflections: to establish clarity of language. It is necessary to call a spade a spade. If a canonical recognition undergoes negotiations where each side makes accommodations, it is necessary to call that an “agreement“. For example, the regularization of the priests of Campos 5 (Brazil) was an agreement. When signing, Abbé Rifan said: “This is not an agreement; it is a recognition.” He implied that Rome recognized the validity of Tradition, which was false. The faithful believed Abbé Rifan, and cried for victory. They have been deceived.

We would prefer to cast aside the expressions “unilateral recognition” and “de facto recognition” and simply speak of a “canonical recognition, with or without a doctrinal compensation“; things will thus be much clearer.

Translation by AA

(to be continued)

1 — Brazilian bishop consecrated by cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos, successor of Msgr Rangel consecrated by the bishops of the Society to succeed to Bp de Castro-Mayer (note of the Editor).

2 — Ruled bt Fr Thomas Aquinas, now Bp Thomas Aquinas, in Brazil (note of the Editor).

3 — Superior of the benedictine of the Monastery of Le Baroux in France (note of the Editor).

4 — Famous convert from Judaism in France in the 19th century, who converted with his brother. Both became priests, and worked for the conversion of the Jews to save them (note of the Editor).

5 — Former diocese of Bp de Castro-Mayer (note of the Editor).