march 2005

$4.45

“Instaurare omnia in Christo”

A Journal of Roman Catholic Tradition

POPE PIUSPope
IX of the Immaculate
Victim of the Revolution

The New Regulations
on Indulgences

E e of
E
R
F
as

Rev. Winfrid Herbst, S.D.S.

Outlines the nature and
value of indulgences and the
new regulations governing
them. Lists 27 prayers and
good works to which plenary
indulgences are attached,
plus gives 46 different ways to
gain a partial indulgence. The
book also includes a questionand-answer section covering
the most common questions
people ask about indulgences.

rch lta
u
p
o
with Racc
The



The Raccolta

This official collection (raccolta) of the Church’s prayers and devotions was
published in English in 1957. It includes a timely supplement of additional prayers
for many urgent needs all of which were composed under Pope Pius XII. Many
of the prayers and devotions are followed by the Latin text. These 800 prayers
touch practically every spiritual and physical need, and every personal and
societal hope. They are the confidently suppliant voice of the Catholic Church
752pp, bonded leather softcover, STK# 6765 $39.95

47pp, softcover,
STK# 8072 $3.00


1 free copy of New Regulations on Indulgences with
each copy of The Raccolta purchased–no limit!
(Offer expires June 30, 2005)

N EW I NGFor the first time on video, witness the
E R interview of a woman who suffered 26 years
O FF
of imprisonment for her Catholic Faith in

China. Mrs. Rose Hu, B.Ed., was imprisoned
in Shanghai shortly after her baptism at
the age of 15. She relates her story–and
the stories of the sufferings and martyrdom
of many heroic Chinese Catholic bishops,
priests, and faithful. These accounts, with
striking photos, show the tragic reality of
Dr. Karen Lee (left) interviews Mrs. Rose Hu,
Communism in China, and the unwavering B.Ed. (middle), longtime prisoner in China.
Fr. Trevor Burfitt, SSPX, explains the role
hope of those who have suffered.
Following this account is a detailed
analysis of the Communist infiltration
of the Catholic Church based upon the
Church’s documents and Our Lady of
Fatima’s warning in 1917. Fr. Trevor Burfitt,
of the Society of Saint Pius X, explains
the dangerous thread of Communist ideas
existing in the liturgical “reforms” of Vatican
II, especially in the Novus Ordo Mass.

“The Catholic bastions must be destroyed...” so said “Catho‑
lic theologian” Hans Urs von Balthasar. Cardinal Ratzinger
repeated it. In this booklet, Fr. Franz Schmidberger explains
how the Second Vatican Council brought about this destruc‑
tion of Catholic bastions by:
		 not clearly defining Catholic Truth
		 failing to definitively reject error
		adopting ambig­uous, contradictory language
		 establishing teachings very close to here­sy

W
E
N

The Church After 1945  Prophets of Gloom  A Reform of the Church
 Opening Speech of Vatican II Two Modern Errors Vatican II  Decree
on Ecumenism: (Unitatis Redintegratio)  No Salvation Outside the Church
 Ecumenical Practices  Who is to Blame?  Decree on the Church:
(Lumen Gentium)  Decree on Non‑Christian Religions: (Nostra Aetate)
 Hinduism  Buddhism  Islam  The Jews  Spirit of Indifferentism
 Declaration on Religious Liberty: (Dignitatis ­Humanae)  Decree on
the Church in the Modern World: (Gaudium et Spes)  False Solution
 True Solution  “Keep the Faith”–Pray

of Communism in the present crisis of the
Catholic Church.

Length: 45 minutes
DVD: STK# 8122D, $20.00
VHS: STK# 8122V $18.00
(VHS is in NTSC only)

We printed 100,000 copies. Why?
So we can sell them dirt cheap and
you can afford to give them away (to
friends, relatives, co-workers, etc.) like
there is no tomorrow! We know of no
better booklet to give to Catholics to
help them understand that the doctrinal
roots of the crisis lie in five key
Council documents. Short and easy to
understand. Once a man understands
this, he will quickly embrace Tradition.
32pp, color softcover, pocket-sized, blank area on back for stamping

STK# 8104 $0.25. Pack of 50. STK# 8104X $11.95

Over 16,000 sold in two months!

“Instaurare omnia in Christo—To restore all things in Christ.”
Motto of Pope St. Pius X

The

ngelus
A JOURNAL OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TRADITION

2915 Forest Avenue

“To publish Catholic journals and place them in
the hands of honest men is not enough. It is necessary to
spread them as far as possible that they may be read by
all, and especially by those whom Christian charity
demands we should tear away from the poisonous
sources of evil literature.”
—Pope St. Pius X

March 2005
Volume XXVIII, Number 3

• Kansas City, Missouri 64109

English-language Editor and Publisher
for the International Society of Saint Pius X
PUBLISHER

Fr. John Fullerton
EDITOR

Fr. Kenneth Novak
OPERATIONS AND MARKETING

Mr. Christopher McCann

POPE PIUS IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Fr. Peter Scott

PROTESTING THE PROTESTANT MOVEMENT . . . . . . . . 12
Dr. Gyula A. Mago

SECRETARIES

Miss Anne Stinnett
Miss Lindsey Carroll
CIRCULATION MANAGER

Mr. Victor Tan
DESIGN AND LAYOUT

Mr. Simon Townshend
SHIPPING AND HANDLING

Mr. Nick Landholt
Mr. Jon Rydholm
PROOFREADING

Miss Anne Stinnett
Miss Lindsey Carroll

Children of Eternity ................................................................................... 17
Mrs. Colleen Drippé
Fathers and Sons Spend Week at Monastery .......................................... 20
Mr. Nicholas Novelly

PURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Fr. Bernard-Marie de Chivré

BOOK REVIEW:
More Catholic Than the Pope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Fr. Stephen Somerville, S.T.L.

EDUCATION FOR WHAT? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Eric Gill

The Angelus (ISSN 10735003) is published
monthly under the patronage of
St. Pius X and Mary, Queen of Angels.
Publication offices are located at
2915 Forest Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri,
64109, (816) 753-3150, FAX (816) 753-3557.
Periodicals Postage Rates paid at Kansas
City, Missouri. Copyright © 2005 by Angelus
Press, Inc. All rights reserved. Manuscripts
are welcome. They must be double-spaced
and deal with the Roman Catholic Church, its
history, doctrine, or present crisis. Unsolicited
manuscripts will be used at the discretion of
the Editorial Staff.
Unused manuscripts
cannot be returned unless sent
with a self-addressed, stamped envelope.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to:
The Angelus, Angelus Press,
2915 Forest Avenue,
Kansas City, MO 64109-1529.

ON OUR COVER: The drawing of Blessed Pope Pius IX on the cover was drawn by
Christoph Häfliger of Design Atelier Häfliger, Opfikon, Switzerland.

THE ANGELUS SUBSCRIPTION RATES

US, Canada, & Mexico
Other Foreign Countries
All payments must be in US funds only.

1 YEAR

2 YEARS

$34.95
$52.45

$62.90
$94.50

2
R e v .

F r .

J u a n

C a r l o s

I s c a r a

Pope of the Immacu
On the night of July
13, 1881, in St. Peter’s
Square, the ancient bells
chimed out midnight.
On the echo of the last
peal, a simple cortege
formed in the piazza.
Two closed carriages
followed the hearse
carrying the mortal
remains of Pius IX, and
after these walked a
small number of clergy,
the diplomats accredited
to the Holy See, and a
considerable group of
devoted Roman citizens.
The mourners all carried
massive, lighted candles.
As the slow procession
went down the Borgo di
Santo Spirito, a crowd
suddenly materialized
from the shadows of the
narrow streets. They
shouted angry words
and made obscene
gestures of derision.

POPE
PIUS
Victim
IX
_____________________

a

culate

PE
S

3
In the wider space before Castel Sant’Angelo a larger crowd awaited,
ugly in temper and armed with knives, stones and clubs. There was
a rush towards the hearse and carriages; there were blasphemies and
torrents of horrible invective in a concerted scream, “Death to the Pope!
Death to the priests! The carrion to the Tiber! Throw the old pig in the
Tiber!” Knives flashed, clubs rose and fell, and the screams of the injured
rose through the shouting. The attending prelates, ambassadors and
faithful formed a thick cordon about the hearse. They used their massive
candles to good advantage in defense of their lives and Pius IX’s body.
Once across the bridge, the most serious rioting was over. The remaining
distance across the city up to St.-Lawrence-Outside-the-Walls was dogged
with shouted insults and blasphemies, and an occasional stone thrown at
the hearse. As in the ancient basilica
lines of soldiers were waiting, the
S AINT -L AWRENCE -O UTSIDE - THE -W ALLS
mob faded away. Three years after
his death, the mortal remains of
Pius IX were again entombed, in
an eloquent silence, while time
began the slow process of sifting the
massive lies against his memory.1
More than a century later,
the dramatic scene of Ponte
Sant’Angelo has become a
metaphor of today’s polemics
around Pius IX,2 of the
renewed hatred, of the lingering
misunderstandings and willful
distortions, of the ever repeated
attempts to reinterpret his figure
and his actions to fit personal
or party agendas. September 3,
2000, marked another chapter
in this effort at reinterpretation.
On that day, John Paul II placed
before the universal Church as
worthy of public veneration two
Popes separated by a century
P ONTE S ANT ’A NGELO
of time and by an unwavering
fidelity to diametrically opposed,
irreconcilable principles−Pius IX
and John XXIII. How can the
Pope of the Syllabus of Errors and the Pope of Vatican II be thus united?
At the homily given during the joint beatification, John Paul II
spoke of Pius IX’s personal virtues and holiness, of his faith and his
compassion, as if they were distinct and separated from his public life
as temporal ruler and of the “specific historical decisions he may have
made.” Such a statement seems to imply that there were in Pius IX two
completely different prudences regulating and directing two different
sets of actions in the same man: on the one hand, heroic practice of
virtues (individual and private), and on the other, questionable concrete

tim of the Revolution
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

4
decisions regarding
temporal matters (public
and social).
Pius IX himself,
however, never even
considered such a
specious distinction:
he saw his temporal
sovereignty as an
aspect of his spiritual
sovereignty, and even his
enemies considered them
as inextricably bound.
From the perspective
of Pius IX, the Church
was under attack both
militarily and doctrinally,
politically and spiritually.
His enemies could not
IUS
advance their political
purposes without
WAS
opposing the Church in
A FABLE
religious matters, and the
Pope could not defend
IMAGINED
religion without fighting
on the political as well as
TO TEACH
the religious front.
THE PEOPLE
This article is no
more
than a brief attempt
A TRUTH
to discern and show
Pius IX in his integrity,
one in doctrine, virtue,
and political thinking,
and to dissipate some of
the mists of the liberal
deception that has
affected even us, that
tendentious picture of
Pius IX as an enigmatic Jekyll and Hyde, a man of
divided principles and behavior.
We will consider only the main events in a
determinate period of Pius IX’s pontificate, from the
1848 revolution in Rome and his escape to Gaeta, to
the defeat of the pontifical army under La Moricière
at Castelfidardo, in 1860.
Why these dates? They are chronologically
equidistant−six years before, and six years after−from
the supernatural apex of the pontificate, the dogmatic
definition of the Immaculate Conception in 1854.
The number 12 has a particular symbolic value in the
Christian tradition, and thus, this 12-year period may
be given the symbolic value of what Pius IX was, on
earth and most visibly, the Vicar of a crucified Lord.
The period itself was one of beginnings and ends.
The year 1848 was the beginning of the revolutionary
onslaught on Rome, while the war of destruction
of the Papal States began in 1860. In 1848, Pius IX
ended the two-year period of a much-demanded
reform, having sufficiently exposed to public opinion

CARLO
CATTANEO
“P
IX

.”

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

the hypocrisy of the Revolution, showing that it did
not want reforms, but rather the annihilation of the
Papacy and even of the Catholic idea. And 1860
signaled the end of the grudging, hypocritical French
“protection” of the Papal States.
As Pius IX himself, Msgr. Pie saw clearly that,
in a world that was in desperate need of true reform,
buffeted by the winds of unbelief, and faced with
an enemy which would bear no quarter–because
“Liberalism is a beast that cannot be tamed”–the
only true solution of the problem was supernatural:
the conflict was a rehashing of the age-old battle
between Christ and Satan, and nothing less than a
re-enactment of Our Lord’s death on the Cross in the
person of the Pope would suffice to conquer Lucifer
once more.
Martyrdom is, I think, the evident mission of this Pope.
The Revolution enjoys sacrificing those that the day before
it has praised to the extreme. As this Pope is a saint, perhaps
the Church will add, in fifty years time, another name to
her Martyrology. At the very least, she will reap the fruits
of his immolation. Thus I judge the work of Pius IX: his
passion seems to me more important than his reforms for
the salvation of Church and society.

In the mind of Cardinal Pie, the mission of Pius
IX was “to render the Revolution inexcusable and to
prove that it is essentially satanic.” Thus, Providence
had assigned him a double role–that of Victim of the
Revolution and Doctor of the Immaculate.
Realizing this, Pius IX lived in hope, against
all human hope, submitting to those marvelous
dispositions that are the secret and the irony of
divine Providence−unfailingly and courageously
proposing the Truth to a world which increasingly
refused to listen−proving the vitality and authority
of the Church, just when more attacked and
contested−consolidating the figure and role of the
Pope, in the moment of the violent despoliation of
his temporal rule−never escaping into a consoling
but selfish “spiritualism,” never resigning himself
to accept the reduced role that the enemies of the
Church tried to impose on her…

T HE M YTH OF
THE “L IBERAL ” P OPE
As every one of us has had occasion to realize
in the course of our own life, any lie, however
outlandish, if sufficiently repeated, will be believed
and survive. Thus, by sheer force of repetition, a
sharp division of this pontificate into two periods
had become a dogma of historiography−first, a
period of liberal openness to the modern world, up
to 1848, and then, for the rest of the pontificate, a
sudden and unexpected betrayal, “an authoritarian
and reactionary involution,” 3 a reaction that, in
the judgment of our neo-modernists, revealed in
Pius IX the lack of prophetic spirit, of theological
knowledge, of historical and political sense, and a

5
good dose of superficiality, sentimentality and even
psychological instability….Fortunately, that is not
true, and historians are now acknowledging that this
sharp distinction of periods originated post-factum in
the intellectual circles of the victorious Risorgimento.
In fact, there was only continuity. Pius IX was always
himself, no separation whatever between his being and
his action−he was Pope, and even as a politician, he
acted as Pope.4
Throughout the 19th century, the turn of events
had made clear for the Popes that the revolutionary
movements in Europe and Italy were not simply the
expressions of legitimate desires of independence and
freedom, but were guided by a precise intent of deChristianization.
Thus, in the two first years of his pontificate, Pius
IX undertook most of those concrete reforms that,
although termed “liberal,” were compatible with
Catholic principles and his mission as Pope, but he
never wavered in the principles themselves, and his
essential mission was never compromised, either
before or after 1848.
In those first two years, he enjoyed a
great popularity, but much of it was based in
misunderstandings that had been carefully prepared
and orchestrated.
It was known that Giovanni Mastai-Ferreti, as
bishop of Spoleto and later of Imola, had expressed
criticism of, and suggested reforms for, the existing
administration of the Papal States,5 and for that he
was suspect to the most intransigent group in the
Curia. He was in favor of technological advances,
as railways and gaslight in the streets, which were in
any case inevitable. He had shown prudence and a
firmness tempered by compassion during the 1831
revolution, qualities that were less evident in the
acts of the other Cardinal-Legates. The first concrete
measures taken, especially the amnesty, increased
immensely his popularity, and the anecdote of the
Roman people taking away the horses of his carriage
and pulling it themselves up to the Quirinal, amidst
general rejoicing, is well-known.
Moreover, Pius IX appeared to moderate liberals
as the incarnation of the utopian neo-Guelph ideal
proposed by Vincenzo Gioberti, the unification of
Italy under the guidance of the Pope, considered as
the only principle of unity for states separated by
traditions, mentalities and history.6
To many other liberals, Pius IX was the answer
to that expectation that Félicité de Lamennais had
articulated, and Frederic Ozanam voiced then again,
“a Pope sent by God to accomplish the main business
of the century, the alliance of religion and liberty.”7
But his popularity was also owed to the
manipulation of public opinion, as the revolutionaries
“created a fictitious opinion by their discourses,
journals, books and pamphlets, and by their public
celebrations.”8 The sincere admiration for him and
the joy for his beneficial reforms were artificially

maintained and exacerbated to fever pitch. Giuseppe
Mazzini, from the Marseille headquarters of the
subversive “Young Italy” movement, ordered a
secret strategy: “We will make of him the fatted ox
of politics; we shall suffocate him with flowers.”9 The
multitudes threw themselves at the feet of Pius IX,
demanding his blessing, yelling at the top of their
lungs “Long live Pius IX,” but amidst the tumult
could also be heard “Death to the Jesuits!” Popular
enthusiasm was turned into “an endless riot.”10
Why? Carlo Cattaneo, one of the figures of the
Risorgimento, said years later that “Pius IX was a
fable imagined to teach the people a truth”11−the
fiction of a liberal Pope was created to make the
people realize that the accomplishment of their
expectations, their destiny, was in their own hands.
Giuseppe Montanelli, another Italian “patriot” of
the times, explained further that these enthusiastic
demonstrations increased
the pressure on pontifical
authorities, but above all,
fixed in the minds of the
multitude images of joy
and fulfillment that, under
the skillful manipulation of
the revolutionaries, would
turn into expectations
and demands, which,
further manipulated,
sooner or later would
generate the revolution.12
The people had to be
kept rejoicing for the first
reforms, not so much for
what they objectively
were, but for being
considered as the first steps
towards greater liberal
concessions−making the
people believe that such
greater concessions were
possible, that the Pope
E WILL
intended to yield to them,
and was impeded only by
MAKE OF
the reactionaries in the
HIM THE
College of Cardinals, in the
Curia, in the government.
FATTED
The aim was not so
much to make the Pope
OX OF
yield to the demands of
POLITICS
liberalization coming from
all quarters−something that
WE SHALL
the true revolutionaries
SUFFOC ATE
well knew that Pius
IX would not do−but
HIM WITH
to provoke the
disappointment of
FLOWERS
the people; after so
many daydreams, a

GIUSEPPE
MAZZINI
“W

,

.”

6
disappointment that could be easily turned into
revolution…
On their part, the European governments
demanded more, undetermined reforms, publicly, in
a loud voice, just when the Papal States were under
the pressure of sedition and invasion, thus effectively
putting the weapon of the pressure of international
public opinion in the hands of the revolutionaries,
and all the while pretending hypocritically to work
for the protection of the Pope and the peace of his
States…13
Pius IX may have been a moderate, but his
moderation had very precise limits, determined by
Catholic principles, which he would not trespass to
accommodate revolutionary demands. He was not
affected by “this plague of our times, this obsession
of modern thought, always ready to break away from
the truth to accommodate itself to the errors of the
day.”14 To the ambassador of Louis-Philippe, king of
France, he made clear
that, as Pope, he could
not throw himself into
the utopian schemes
proposed by liberals
of every shade−that
he will neither yield
to the abolition of the
temporal power of the
Papacy to make room
for an Italian Republic,
nor put himself at the
head of a confederation
of Italian “consultative
monarchies.”
His position was
clear, for all those who
wanted to see, in his
very first encyclical, Qui
Pluribus, which already
exposes the principles
that he will develop
years later in the
Syllabus of Errors [Quanta
Cura and The Syllabus of
Errors, available from
Angelus Press. Price:
$3.45]

GUISEPPE
MONTANELLI

CAMILLO
BENSO
DI CAVOUR
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

As a result of the filthy
medley of errors which
creeps in from every side,
and as the result of the
unbridled license to think,
speak and write, We see
the following: morals
deteriorated, Christ’s most
holy religion despised, the
majesty of divine worship
rejected, the power of this
Apostolic See plundered,
the authority of the
C h u r ch a t t a ck e d a n d

reduced to base slavery, the rights of bishops trampled
on, the sanctity of marriage infringed, the rule of every
government violently shaken and many other losses for
both the Christian and civil commonwealth.15
We hope that political leaders will keep in mind that
the kingly power has been conferred on them not only for
ruling the world but especially for the protection of the
Church. We hope that with their aid and authority they
will support the objects, plans and pursuits which we have
in common, and that they will also defend the liberty and
safety of the Church, so that the right hand of God may also
defend their rule.16

Msgr. Pie, contemplating from afar the beginnings
of the pontificate, was also happy and hopeful−“Here
is the hand of God!”17 he wrote to Archbishop Morlot
of Tours−but, knowing the Revolution better, took a
far more realistic view of these transports of public
joy. Moreover, he feared that the generous reforms
and concessions might turn against Pius IX, who
could be perhaps too trusting in the sincerity and
honor of men…18
Under the pressure of the popular agitations of
1848, Pius IX made a last concession, the most daring
of all. His approval of the “Fundamental Statute
for the Temporal Government of the States of the
Church” introduced the constitutional system in the
Papal States, establishing a popular representation in
the government, deliberative as well as consultative,
but carefully restricted, as all legislation was
subject to review by the College of Cardinals, and
ecclesiastical and foreign affairs were excluded from
the legislature’s competence. This measure did not
appease the popular movement; on the contrary,
it only excited it further. As the rumor spread that
Lombardy and Venetia had revolted against Austria,
the cries of “Away with the barbarians!” resounded
in Rome, and the mob called on the Pope to declare
the holy war against Austria. Pius IX refused. He
understood the desire and joy of an independent Italy,
but he was not to cooperate in a war in which he was
not attacked. Religion not being in danger, he chose
to remain foreign to it, as befits him who is common
Father of Christian nations.
The problem was not the formation of “Italy,”
but by which means, how was it to be done….He
opposed the artificial and violent homogenization
of the country imposed by violence by a sectarian
minority. He opposed the project of building a
“new” Italy according to the utopian categories of
the French Revolution, allowing the “old” Italy to be
swallowed by Piedmont, and with it, the States of the
Church, the providential guarantee of the liberty and
independence of the Holy See.19
The confrontation between the Pope and the
idea and then the reality of a unified Italy, was not
only regarding the temporal power, neither was it
a struggle for territorial conquest (at least not on
the part of the Pope), but a profound ideological
opposition.

7
Pius IX saw in the kingdom of Italy, in Piedmont
first and then in the unified kingdom, the worst
of the spirit of the times, the most consistent and
enduring fruits of the French Revolution−rationalism,
naturalism, liberalism, and the independence of
politics from morality. To these errors, embodied in
Piedmont, and most particularly in Camillo Benzo
di Cavour, its Prime Minister, Pius IX opposed the
Christian proposition−keeping the temporal and
spiritual orders distinct but not separated, seeking
a balance that would preserve the principles while
granting the legitimate aspirations of the peoples. Pius
IX saw the temporal order as ordained to the supreme
end of the Church, and the Church as a teacher of
faith and morals, even in the civil and social orders.
Thus, Pius IX was one of the less “political” Popes
that have ever existed, and one of the most deeply
faithful to the spiritual mission of the Church.20
He judged everything from a religious point of
view−distinguishing in every occasion the part of
man, who in certain circumstances cannot act but
in a certain way, determined by his duty and the
oaths taken, and the part of God, Who can confound
human expectations and make even the most holy
desires to remain unfulfilled.

T HE R OMAN R EVOLUTION
In the wake of the revolutionary movements of
1848, Charles Albert of Piedmont, who called himself
the “Sword of Italy,” invaded the Austrian province
of Venetia, a move that provoked wild enthusiasm
in Rome. The Pope yielded to the popular demand
and allowed General Durando to depart with 12,000
newly recruited soldiers, but with strict instructions
for using his force only to defend the papal dominions
from foreign invasion, and not to attack Austria. In
the field, however, Durando began hostilities against
Austria and joined the Piedmontese army.
Pius IX reacted immediately, expressing his
distress and horror for this disobedience, repudiating
the actions of his troops, and threatening with
excommunication those who would persist in
disobeying his command. Those who until now had
pretended to picture the Pope as a revolutionary
liberal took off their masks, denouncing him as a
“traitor to his country” and a “friend of despots.” Riot
followed riot in Rome. The Pope’s Prime Minister,
Count Pellegrino Rossi, himself something of a
revolutionary in his younger days, was murdered
when entering the Cancelleria, where he had gone
to open the parliament. That night a ghoulish mob
screaming and shouting with delight carried the
dagger of the murderer in a torchlight procession
throughout the city. Around the streets they went, past
the house of the minister itself, where his weeping
widow heard their screams of delighted triumph.21
On the following day the Pope himself was
besieged in the Quirinal by the mob demanding more

and more impossible
concessions. Msgr.
Palma, a papal prelate,
who was standing at a
window, was shot, and
the Pope had to give
in to the revolutionary
demands, as advised by
the foreign diplomats
gathered at the Quirinal,
but Pius IX called upon
them to give witness
to the fact that such
concessions had been
wrung from him by
PON
force.
HEARING THE
With the assistance
of the Bavarian
NEWS OF HIS
ambassador, Count
ASSASSINATION
Spaur, and the French
ambassador, Duc
OPE IUS
d’Harcourt, who feared
he would be assassinated,
SAID
OUNT
Pius IX escaped from
OSSI HAS
the Quirinal in disguise
and fled to Gaeta, in
DIED A MARTYR
the kingdom of Naples,
OF DUTY
where he was joined
by many Cardinals
and by all the foreign
representatives before
the Holy See, except the
American.
In February, 1849,
the Roman Republic
was proclaimed. Rome
was ruled by traitors
and adventurers who
abolished the temporal
power of the Pope and in
the name of democracy
and liberty terrorized the
people and committed
untold outrages. Mazzini was granted Roman
citizenship and thus enabled to become the head
of the newly elected government, which, faithful to
the ages-old revolutionary ideal of restoring a pagan
Rome, was composed by Consuls…

COUNT
PELLEGRINO
ROSSI
U

P

R

P
, “C

IX

.”

T URNING T OWARDS
T HE I MMACULATE
The Pope’s passion had begun in earnest; the
crucifigatur had replaced the hosannas. Looking for
help, putting his trust not on the powers of this earth,
Pius IX asked from the Church a cry of faith and love,
to reach God and to avert the merited punishment.
Having to work for redemption of the world, Pius
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

,

8
IX started where God Himself had started, with Our
Lady.22
One of the first acts of his pontificate had been
the granting of the request of the American bishops
to proclaim Mary Immaculate as patroness of the
United States. Now, exiled in the kingdom of Naples,
he multiplied his pilgrimages to shrines in which Our
Lady was particularly venerated as the Immaculate
Conception, while new requests came to him in favor
of the definition of the dogma.
In 1830, the Blessed Virgin had herself proposed
her unique prerogative by thrice appearing to St.
Catherine Labouré and directing her to promote
the medal with invocation, “O Mary, conceived
without sin, have mercy on us who have recourse to
Thee.” Such medals began to appear in 1832 with the
authorization of Hyacinthe de Quélen, archbishop
of Paris, and the authenticated benefits, such as
the conversion of the Jew Alphonse Ratisbonne,
soon spread fame of the Miraculous Medal. These
apparitions at the convent of the Rue du Bac, in Paris,
and later at La Salette, in 1846, had an immense
impact and were received as Heaven’s answer to the
rationalism and naturalism of the times.
The definition of the dogma was thus intended as
a sign of hope for the Church−the Woman crowned
with the Sun, crushing under her heel the serpent
of Revolution! It was also an added confirmation
that, for Pius IX, the preaching of the Faith and his
own spiritual mission had primacy over political
contingencies, however urgent they might be.
On December 16, 1848, the Pope appointed a
commission of Cardinals, bishops and theologians
to study the opportunity of the definition, and this
commission suggested a consultation of all the
bishops. The answers received overwhelmingly
favored the definition.
The year 1854 was declared a year of Jubilee,
and wide indulgences were granted to those making
the pilgrimage to Rome. The people of the world
and their Bishops were quick to take advantage of
the occasion. Over seas and mountains they came.
The Pope multiplied his audiences and homilies.
He seemed to be everywhere, taking his people to
his heart. Once again the domes of the churches
were lighted at night, and the holy city was gay with
hymns and flowers. It seemed quite like the old days
before the revolution. Only the omnipresent red
pantaloons of the French soldiers indicated there was
a difference…23
All the Bishops of the world had been invited to
come to Rome, to give their advice in person, and
to attend the ceremonies of proclamation. By the
end of November, almost 200 of them were in Rome
and at the invitation of the Pope they assembled
in consistory. Four great sessions took place, from
November 20-24, and the definitive text was ready
on December 1st. On December 8, 1854, Pius IX,

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

surrounded by enormous multitude of prelates, clergy
and faithful, proclaimed the dogma.
Two days later, the Pope, accompanied by 185
Cardinals, Archbishops and Bishops, solemnly
consecrated the reconstructed basilica of St. PaulOutside-the-Walls, which had been destroyed by fire
in 1823, the very night of the death of Pius VII, who
had been also Bishop of Imola....The symbolism of
the ceremony could not pass unnoticed to the many
attendants: here was Rome, Catholic Rome, reborn
from its ashes, as the phoenix, eternal…24
All these events had not only a theological or
spiritual import. As Alphonse de Rayneval, the
French ambassador, reported to his government:
This great meeting has a particular importance, one that
goes beyond the avowed reason for it. Bringing together
people representing the same beliefs in different and far
away countries, it is clear that it will strengthen the bond
of religious brotherhood that unites the bishops, giving
thus a new strength to the principle of Catholic unity.
It is extraordinary to see such an agreement between
people coming from so different countries, and it reveals
the unity of the Roman Church and the extension of her
influence.25

Dogmas have their opportune moment; for their
definition coincide historical causes and occasions,
and even subjective conditions, but following a
path that has already been traced by God. We can
only admire the ways of divine Providence, how
God was preparing the future of His Church by this
proclamation, as it condemned anew the errors of the
time. By implicitly reaffirming the reality of original
sin, it refuted the modern deification of man. By
visibly affirming the power and infallibility of the
Pope, performing this formal act on his sole authority,
before the universal Church and demanding her
submission, it denied admission into the Church
to the democratism and equalitarianism of the
Revolution.26 And as it strengthened the spiritual
power of the Pope, and Catholic unity around it, it
gave the Papacy new forces to resist hostile political
powers when it would have lost the temporal power…

C ASTELFIDARDO

27

After Pius IX appealed to the Catholic powers
for help, Austria advanced in the north, defeating
Piedmont at Novara, and rapidly occupying Parma
and Florence, and continued towards the Romagna
and the Marches. When it became clear that Austria
was poised to restore single-handedly the Pope to his
States, the Prince-President Louis-Napoleon, after
months of delay due to his hostility and political
scheming, allowed French troops to disembark in
Civitavecchia. On June 1849, General Oudinot
restored order to Rome, and on April 1850, the Pope
returned to his City.
When Pius IX visited his provinces in the summer
of 1857, he received everywhere a warm and loyal

P
P

9
reception. But the fate of his temporal power was sealed when in 1858 Cavour
and Napoleon III met at Plombières, concerting plans for a combined war
against Austria, the subsequent territorial extension of the Piedmontese
kingdom, which would take over most of the Papal States, leaving the Pope
restricted to Rome and a small territory about it, and the constitution of an
Italian confederation, with the Pope at its head, as a compensation for the loss
of the greater part of his States, a gesture similar to “the purple robe thrown
across the shoulders of the dying Christ.”28
The war against Austria was declared in April, 1859, and ended with a
stunning defeat for Austria. During the war, the agents of Cavour completely
upset all possibility of a confederation for Italy. The revolutionaries in
Tuscany, Modena and Parma threw over their ducal rulers. With the
subsequent withdrawal of the Austrian troops from the Legations, insurrections
immediately broke out in Romagna, the Marches and Umbria. Piedmont,
answering to the “popular” request expressed in the suffrage, annexed the
Romagna in September, 1859. Early in 1860, Msgr. de Mérode, the minister
of war, persuaded the Pope to enlarge his army by asking for volunteers from
around the world, and putting at its head General de La Moricière. And the
volunteers came–10,000 Zouaves from France and Austria, from Ireland,
England, Spain and the Confederate States of America, at their own expense,

POPE PIUS IX’S
PAPAL ACCOUTREMENTS
being paid a salary that was not enough to support them.
At Chambéry, on August 28, 1860, Cavour and Napoleon III arranged the
final details of the attack. Raids and disorders were engineered throughout the
Papal States, in Umbria and the Marches, and these were exaggerated by the
liberal press in Piedmont, France and England, thus preparing the scene for
Piedmont to step in with the excuse of restoring order.
Cavour sent an ultimatum, demanding the Pope to restore immediately
order in his states, otherwise Piedmont would intervene. Before a reply could
be drafted, General Cialdini invaded the Papal States. La Moricière had
expected attacks from everywhere except Piedmont, and by forced marches
he tried to get his small army to the safety of Ancona, but he was caught at
Castelfidardo. After a heroic defense against vastly superior numbers, the
papal army was defeated and scattered. La Moricière and a small group of men
managed to get to Ancona, which finally surrendered on September 20, 1860.
The military defense of his States had been, for Pius IX, not only an
affirmation of his sovereign rights, but it had also a religious meaning: it
was a necessary political act to guarantee the independence, autonomy and
liberty of the Church.29 As he said in the apostolic letter Cum Catholica Ecclesia,
denouncing the French intervention at the side of Piedmont in the despoliation
of the Papal States, the temporal power was not an end in itself, but a means
to secure the survival of the Church, a condition of the political independence
necessary to exercise, without obstacles and in favor of all, the Pope’s spiritual
authority and jurisdiction. Later, in 1864, on the feast of the Cathedra of St.
Peter, he clearly said that “in the present order of Providence, the liberty of the
Church is indissolubly tied to the monarchy of the Pontificate”−the temporal
rule was a providential historical condition, not metaphysical or theological.
After the defeat of the papal army at Castelfidardo and Ancona, as Victor
Emmanuel deprived the Pope of all his possessions with the exception of
Rome and its vicinity, the temporal kingdom had begun to pass away, a
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

10
temporal sovereignty to which, per se, Pius IX had
never been personally attached:
I care neither for the royalty in itself, not for the pleasure
of commanding; I abhor all the trappings of domination….
And what are the kingdoms of this earth? Only misery, a
great misery!30

C ONCLUSION
Pius IX stood as a rock, refusing, in the name of
eternal truths, to accept the passionate enthusiasms
of modern man, those modern ravings about the
infallibility of progress, the moral authority of the
majority, and the omnipotence of the State. Faced
with the enormous social, political, doctrinal and
moral problems of his day, he could not count on
natural means, but could only hope to wage the war
after having enlisted her who is as an “army arrayed
in battle,” “glory, splendor and safeguard of the Holy
Church.”31 The Pope’s strength lay in his mysterious
alliance with the Immaculate. She strengthened him
to overcome much hatred in his own day and even
in posterity, and to restore to the Papacy authority
within the Church and an unheard-of prestige outside,
among men of good will.
That alliance with the Immaculate, sealed with the
dogmatic definition, could have signified an enduring
peace, but because of the crimes of men, it was only
a truce…32 Nonetheless, who can know how many
secret conquests for the Church were achieved, how
much of a reprieve, because of it?
Let us turn to the example of Pius IX. In human
terms, our horizon is equally somber. Like him, let
us be defenders of the Church, but first of Truth,
The description of this scene is taken almost literally from
Thornton, 254-255.
2
Gnocchi, 14.
3
Gherardini.
4
See Gherardini.
5
See the summary of his memoir addressed to Msgr.
Rioberti, in September 1845, in Chiron, 123-126.
6
Chiron, 121.
7
Quoted in Daniel-Rops, 241.
8
Baucher, 559.
9
Quoted in Daniel-Rops, 242.
10
Veuillot, Pie IX.
11
Quoted in Frigerio.
12
Quoted in Frigerio.
13
See Veuillot, Pape et diplomatie, 4.
14
Veuillot, Pie IX, 464.
15
Qui Pluribus, n. 18.
16
Qui Pluribus, n. 35.
17
Quoted in Baunard, Histoire, 1:169.
18
Letter to Count de l’Estoile, quoted in Baunard, Histoire,
1:169.
19
See Gnocchi, 29-30.
20
Giovanni Spadolini, quoted in Frigerio.
21
Thornton, 111.
22
Baunard, Pontificat, 5.
23
Thornton, 145.
24
Bruley.
25
Quoted in Bruley.
26
See Veuillot, Pie IX, 477.
27
All this section follows closely Thornton, 174-179.
28
Pierre de la Gorce.
29
Gnocchi, 27-28.
30
Quoted in Brunetti, Risorgimento.
31
Ineffabilis Deus.
32
Baunard, Pontificat, 8.
33
Veuillot, Illusion libérale, 67-68.
1

prudentially using the human means at our disposal,
but knowing that the true resolution of our trial
remains in the hands of God, and thus, “in hope,
against all hope,” in absolute trust, let us submit to
His will, even when it contradicts our most legitimate
expectations…
Allow me to quote once again Louis Veuillot, a
well-known passage of The Liberal Illusion [translated
by Angelus Press and to be published in Summer,
2005–Ed.] that, although not explicitly referred
to Pius IX, nonetheless sums up his exemplary
attitude, at the same time that it is for us a lesson of
supernatural hope:
Let us imagine the worst; let us grant that the flood of
irreligion has all the strength it boasts of, and that this
strength can sweep us away. Well, then, it will sweep us
away! It is of no importance, provided that it does not
sweep away the Truth. We will be swept away, but we will
leave the Truth behind us, as those who were swept away
before us left it….Either the world still has a future, or it has
not. If we are arriving at the end of time, we are building
only for our eternity. But if still long centuries must unfold,
by building for eternity we are building also for our time.
Whether confronted by the sword or by contempt, we must
be the strong witnesses of the Truth of God. Our testimony
will survive. There are plants that grow invincibly under
the hand of the Heavenly Father. There where the seed is
planted, a tree takes root. There where the martyr’s bones
lay, a church rises. Thus are formed the obstacles that divide
and stop the floods.33
Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara, a native of Argentina, was ordained in 1986 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Since 1993 he has been teaching Moral Theology and
Church History at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, Winona, MN. The talk was
given to the “Day of Tradition” Congress sponsored by the Society of Saint
Pius X (October 2004), Marseilles, France. Angelus Press will be publishing
a biography of Bl. Pope Pius IX in Summer, 2005.

B IBLIOGRAPHIC AL R EFERENCES
Baucher, Dom, OSB. “Les Papes et la franc-maçonnerie. VII: Pie IX.” Revue Internationale des
Sociétés Secrètes, June 15, 1930 (Vol. XIX, No.24).
Baunard, Emile. Histoire du Cardinal Pie, évêque de Poitiers. Poitiers: H. Oudin, 1886.
Baunard, Emile. Le Pontificat de Pie IX. Orléans: Blanchard, 1871.
Bruley, Yves. Pie IX, le vraie père de l’Immaculée Conception. www.historia.presse.fr/data/
mag/692/692052 01.html
Brunetti, Manlio. Pio IX e il dogma dell’Immacolata. In Mencucci, A. and M. Brunetti, eds., Atti
senigalliesi nell bicentenario della nascita di Pio IX. Senigallia: 1992.
Brunetti, Manlio. Pio IX e il Risorgimento italiano. In Mencucci, A. and M. Brunetti, eds. Atti senigalliesi nell bicentenario della nascita di Pio IX. Senigallia: 1992.
Chiron, Yves. Pie IX, Pape moderne. Bitche: Clovis, 1995.
François, Frère. “Blessed Pius IX, Pope and Doctor of the Immaculate.” Catholic Counter-Reformation, September 2000.
Frigerio, Alessandro. Pontificato a due tempi: dall’esordio riformista al conservatismo reazionario.
www.cronologia.
it/storia/biografie/pioix.htm.
Gherardini, Brunero. “Pio IX: Una parola chiara,” L’Osservatore Romano, August 26, 2000.
Gnocchi, Alessandro and Mario Palmaro. Formidabili quei Papi. Pio IX e Giovanni XXIII, due
ritratti in controluce. Rome: Ancora, 2000.
Gobry, Yvan. Pie IX: Le Pape des tempêtes. Paris: Jean Picollec, 1999.
Hales, E. E. Y. Pio Nono. New York: Kenedy, 1954.
Pesce, Francesco. La Reppublica Romana vista da Pio IX in Gaeta. Doctoral Thesis, Academic Year
2002-2003, Università degli Studi di Roma ‘La Sapienza’. www.santamelania.it/approf/dandrea/
pio9. htm.
Rumi, Giorgio. Quel che non si è detto attorno Pio IX. www.liberalfondazione.it/archivio/fl/
numero2/ Quel_che.htm.
Thornton, Francis Beauchesne. Cross upon Cross: Life of Pope Pius IX. New York: Benziger, 1955.
Veuillot, Louis. L’Illusion libérale. Dion-Valmont: Dismas, 1989.
Veuillot, Louis. Le Pape et la diplomatie. In Mélanges, Troisième Série, Vol. I. Paris: Louis Vivès,
1876.
Veuillot, Louis. Pie IX. In: Mélanges, Troisième Série, Vol. I. Paris: Louis Vivès, 1876.

F R .

p e t e r

Why is the second Confiteor omitted from the missal
just published by Angelus Press?

The 1962 Roman Catholic Daily Missal published by
Angelus Press in January 2005 is essentially a re-typeset
version of the Ideal Missal of 1962 with the addition of
certain commentaries and prayers. The publisher did
not make any modification to the rubrics of the Mass,
as published on July 25, 1960.
In these rubrics of 1960 the second Confiteor, that
immediately precedes the Holy Communion of the
faithful, was abolished. The reason for this abolition
was that it was a late introduction into the Mass (16th
century) from the ceremony of administration of
Holy Communion. It is certainly true that the second
Confiteor is not necessary to the integrity of the Mass,
being simply a repetition of what the altar boy recited
at the beginning of the Mass.
In the first years of the Society of Saint Pius X, the
second Confiteor was not recited, in accordance with
the rubrics. However, the universal custom beforehand
was to recite the second Confiteor. This universal custom
was maintained even after the introduction of the
rubrical changes of 1960. The reason for this can easily
be understood. It is a perfect preparation for Holy
Communion, and it helps the faithful to examine their
conscience to determine if their soul is in the state of
grace, in order to receive worthily the Most Blessed
Sacrament, and if it is to renew their sorrow for the
deliberate venial sins that could be an obstacle to the
reception of grace from Holy Communion.
In the Church, custom has force of law, unless
it is expressly reproved (Cf. Canons 5, 28 and 30 of
the 1917 Code). Archbishop Lefebvre, then Superior
General of the Society of Saint Pius X, acknowledged
the universality of this custom of reciting the second
Confiteor before Holy Communion, and in 1978
determined that the priests of the Society of Saint
Pius X would follow this universal custom amongst
traditional Catholics.
However, this being said, the Society of Saint
Pius X has no authority to modify the Church’s
liturgical books, nor does it pretend to do so. This is
why Angelus Press did not modify this rubric in the
publication of its 1962 Roman Catholic Daily Missal
[available from Angelus Press. Price: $59.95].

Q

May one offer prayers for specific intentions even
though one has made the total consecration to Our Lady
according to the method of St. Louis-Marie Grignon de
Montfort?

A

The total consecration to Jesus through Mary is just
what it says: a total offering of all that we are and have,
both interior and exterior, including merits and prayers:
I deliver and consecrate to thee (i.e., Mary), as thy slave,
my body and soul, my goods, both interior and exterior,

R .

s c o t t

11

and even the value of all my good actions, past, present and
future; leaving to you the entire and full right of disposing
of me.…(Formula of Consecration)

Consequently, the consecrated soul has nothing of
its own. Here lies the totality of the consecration:
...you abandon your own intentions and operations,
although good and known, to lose yourself, so to speak,
in the intentions of the Blessed Virgin, although they are
unknown. Thus you enter by participation into the sublimity
of her intentions, which are so pure. (True Devotion, p.162)

The totality of the consecration consequently means
that we cannot have any specific intentions of our own.
Living by Mary, our intentions are entirely lost in hers:
In order that the soul may let itself be led by Mary’s spirit,
it must first of all renounce its own spirit and its own proper
lights and wills, before it does anything. For example, it
should do so before its prayer…because the darkness of our
own spirit and the malice of our own will and operation, if
we follow them, however, good they may appear to us, will
put an obstacle to the spirit of Mary. (Ibid. pp.184-185)

A distinction must, therefore, be made in what
is meant by “specific” intentions. If by this I mean
something that is specific to me, as distinct from
Mary, then it is precluded and forbidden by the total
consecration. If it means that I am asking for a special
grace that it is Mary’s will to obtain for me because it is
God’s will to bestow it, then it is perfectly permissible.
Consequently souls that are consecrated to Mary
can certainly pray for their own friends and relatives,
for the state of their own soul, for their priests and those
who are in need of prayers, for the Church and for
vocations, but all of these “specific” intentions must be
understood as an extension of Mary’s intentions.
Inasmuch as we do not know Our Lady’s
intentions, then the condition under which any such
prayer must be uttered by the one who is totally
consecrated, is “in so far as it is Our Lady’s desire and
will.” In this way, the practice of the true devotion
obtains for us the grace of perfect detachment from our
own will, manifest even in our prayers, the gaining of
merits, and the formulation of our intentions. This is the
condition for union with Our Lady. Frank Duff, founder
of the Legion of Mary, put it this way:
That union is a life, and just like the common life of
the body, it demands the regular beating of the heart, the
steady movement of the lungs, the stimulus of periodic
nourishment. These are the impulses of prayer, ejaculation,
act, practice, thought and other reminders, which warm the
renew the soul and preserve in it the spirit of consecration.
(The De Montfort Way, p.24)

The totally consecrated soul is consequently not
at all indifferent to the specific needs of his soul and
others, but to the contrary filled with a burning desire
to pray for them, to the extent that this is the will,
intention and desire of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

● Abbott Loop Fellowship of Community Churches ● Aboriginal pentecostal congregations ● Absolute Maori Established
Apostolique ● Action Biblique ● Acts Mission Church of South Africa ● Acts of Apostles Christ Church, Nigeria ● Advent Chris
of the True Remnant ● Aethiopische Orthodoxe Kirche ● Africa Christian network ● Africa Evangelical Church ● Africa Ev
12 of Johane Maranke ● African Apost Church St Simon and St Johane ● African Apostolic Church of Johane M
Apost Church
Apostolic Faith Mission ● African Assemblies of God ● African Baptist Assembly Malawi ● African Born Full Gospel Apos
African Christian Church and Schools ● African Christians Fellowship ● African Church ● African Church Mission ● African C
Disciples of Christ ● African Divine Church ● African Evangelical Presbyterian Church ● African Faith Tabernacle Church ● A
Church (D Eirenopolis) ● African Holy Zionist Church ● African Independent Pentecostal Church of Africa ● African Indep
Zimbabwe ● African Methodist Episcopal Church ● African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church ● African Mission of Holy Ghos
Orthodox Autonomous Church SS ● African Orthodox Church in the Rep of South Africa ● African Orthodox Church ● Africa
Baptist Church ● Afrikaans Protestant Church ● Agape Fellowship ● Agape Ministries International ● Akha Church ● Alaph
Church ● Aliança Biblica do Brasil ● Aliança Bíblica e Missionária ● Aliança Cristã e Missionária ● Aliança das Igrejas Cr
Misionera ● All One in Christ Fellowship ● Allegheny Wesleyan Meth Connection ● Alliance Baptiste Evangelical de Paris
des Eglises Evangéliques ● Alliance des Egls Evangelical Indépendantes ● Alliance Evangelical Chr et Missionnaire ● Allia
et Fraternelle ● Alpha and Omega Christian Church ● Alt-Katholische Kirche in Deutschland ● Alt-Katholische Kirche in Ös
American Association of Lutheran Churchs ● American Baptist Association ● American Baptist Churchs in the USA ● Ameri
York ● American Episcopal Church of Norht America ● American Evangelical Christian Churches ● American Evangelistic Ass
Workers ● Amis de l’Homme (Freytag) ● Amis de l’Homme (Sayerce) ● Amis du Charpentier ● Amuri Free Church ● Anchor
Assyrian Church of the East ● Ancient Orthodox Church ● Angkola Christian Protestant Church ● Angl Church in Aotearoa,
in Australia ● Anglican Catholic Church of Canada ● Anglican Episcopal Church of North America ● Anglican Mission in A
Zimbabwe ● Anglican Orthodox Free Church ● Anglican Province of America ● Anglican Province of Christ the King ● An
Antioch Baptist Church ● Antioch Ministries ● Antioch Ministries International ● Antioch Network of Churchs and Ministrie
● Ap Commission of Christ Church Ministries ● Apatani Christian Fellowship ● Apocalyptic Orthodox Church ● Apocalyptis
South Africa ● Apostles and Christian Brethren Church of SA ● Apostles Gospel Outreach Fellowship Int ● Apostles in Zio
Jesus Christ ● Apostolic Bible Christian Church ● Apostolic Brethren ● Apostolic Church (Primitive Christian Brethren) ●
Malawi ● Apostolic Church of the Slovak Rep ● Apostolic Christian Assembly ● Apostolic Christian Church (Nazarean) ●
Apostolic Christian Church (Nazarean) ● Apostolic Church ● Apostolic Church (Apostle Unity) ● Apostolic Church in Canad
Church of Australia and New Zealand ● Apostolic Church of Christ ● Apostolic Church of God ● Apostolic Church of God Chri
● Apostolic Church of Light ● Apostolic Church of Nigeria ● Apostolic Church of Pakistan ● Apostolic Church of Pentecos
Apostolic Church, Ghana ● Apostolic Divine Church of Ghana ● Apostolic Door of Faith ● Apostolic Episcopal Church ● Ap
Apostolic Faith Holy Gospel Church ● Apostolic Faith Mission ● Apostolic Faith Mission Church of God ● Apostolic Faith M
of South Africa ● Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa ● Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa ● Apostolic Faith Mission
Fellowship Tabernacle (Ind) ● Apostolic God of Mercy Church ● Apostolic Hierarchy Church ● Apostolic Holy Zion Missio
Church of America ● Apostolic Orthodox Catholic Church ● Apostolic Overcoming Holy Church of God ● Apostolic Pentecos
● Apostolische Gemeinschaft ● Apostolische Kirche in Deutschland ● Arab Evangelical Church ● Arab Evangelical Church
Armenian Apostolic Church of America ● Armenian Apostolic Church: C Cilicia (Sis) ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D Bag
Church: D Sofija ● Armenian Apostolic Church: V Addis Abeba ● Armenian Apostolic Church ● Armenian Apostolic Church
India ● Armenian Apostolic Church: AD Cairo ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D Athínai ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D Can
V Kuwait ● Armenian Apostolic P Constantinople ● Armenian Apostolic P of Jerusalem ● Armenian Church of North America
● Armenian Evangelical Church ● Armenian Pentecostal Church ● Armenische Apostolische K: V Wien ● Armenische Apostoli
(El Shaddai) ● Assemblies (Jehova Shammah) ● Assemblies of Brethren ● Assemblies of Christ Church ● Assemblies of Chr
of God (Back to God) ● Assemblies of God (Filadelfia) ● Assemblies of God (North and South India) ● Assemblies of God (
Assemblies of God in Botswana ● Assemblies of God in Egypt ● Assemblies of God in GB and Ireland ● Assemblies of G
Assemblies of God in New Zealand ● Assemblies of God in Nigeria ● Assemblies of God in S and Central Africa ● Assemb
in Viet Nam ● Assemblies of God in Zimbabwe ● Assemblies of God International ● Assemblies of God of Fiji ● Assemb
Assemblies of the First-Born ● Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ ● Assembly Church of Jesus Christ Full Gospel ● Assem
● Association of Baptists for World Evangelism ● Association of Bible Churchs of the Philippines ● Association of Free Lu
Africa ● Association of Independentendent Holiness Churchs ● Association of Independentendent Methodists ● Association
Churchs of India ● Associacão das Igrejas Luteranas Livres ● Associação Evangélica Menonita ● Associación Adventista d
Reformed Presbyterian Church ● Associated Baptist Churches ● Associated Brotherhood of Christians ● Associated Chri
Assemblies ● Associated Gospel Churches ● Associated Mission Churchs of Australia ● Associated Presb Churchs of Scotl
des Eglises Vignobles ● Association des Egls de la Guadeloupe ● Association of American Lutheran Churchs ● Association o
of Christian Churches ● Association of Christian Foundations ● Association of Christian Ministries ● Association of Evang
● Association of Evangelical Churchs of Belize ● Association of Evangelical Churches ● Association of Faith Churchs and
of Vineyard Churchs ● Association of Vineyard Churches ● Associazione Missionaria Evangelical Italiana ● Assyrian Church
● Atos Igreja Crista ● Aumônerie Générale Indép Mixte ● Australian Aborigines Evangelical Mission ● Australian Bapti
Autocephalous Greek Orthodox Church ● Azione Biblica ● Azuza Fellowship ● Back to the Bible Truth ● Bafu Bay Church
Bambini di Dio ● Bambinos de Dios ● Bamu River Mission ● Bando Evangelistico Gedeón ● Bangladesh Baptist Fellowship
of the Race Church ● Bantu Baptist Church ● Bantu Bethlehem Church of Zion in SA ● Bantu Methodist Church ● Bantu N
Belize ● Baptist Association of Cambodia ● Baptist Association of Churches ● Baptist Association of Mauritius ● Baptis
Baptist Bible Fellowship International ● Baptist Bible Fellowship of Japan ● Baptist Bible Fellowship of the P ● Baptist C
Tripoli ● Baptist Church in Turkmenistan ● Baptist Church of God ● Baptist Church of Macedonia ● Baptist Church of Mizora
● Baptist Churches of Kirghizia ● Baptist Churches of Lesotho ● Baptist Convention ● Baptist Convention in Israel ● Bapt
of Kenya ● Baptist Convention of Malawi ● Baptist Convention of Namibia ● Baptist Convention of Pakistan ● Baptist C
Convention of Zambia ● Baptist Convention of Zimbabwe ● Baptist Co-operative Convention ● Baptist General Conference ●
International Mission ● Baptist International Missions ● Baptist Mid-Missions ● Baptist Mid-Missions in Japan ● Baptist M
● Baptist Union of Australia ● Baptist Union of Bulgaria ● Baptist Union of Croatia ● Baptist Union of Denmark ● Baptist
Baptist Union of Hungary ● Baptist Union of Ireland ● Baptist Union of Lithuania ● Baptist Union of Moldova ● Baptist Un
Union of Slovakia ● Baptist Union of South Africa ● Baptist Union of Southern Africa ● Baptist Union of Sweden ● Baptis
Baptist Union of Zimbabwe ● Baptist Unity of Brethren ● Baptiste Convention ● Barbados Baptist Convention ● Basic Lin
Beachy Amish Mennonite Church ● Beirut Community Church ● Believe in God Healing Church ● Believers’ Assemblies of
Believers in Christ ● Belize Mennonite Mission ● Belorussian Autocephalic Orthodox Church ● Belorussian Orthodox Churc
● Benin United Baptist Mission of N ● Berean Bible Church ● Berean Bible Churches ● Berean Fundamental Churches ● Be
Evangelical Mission ● Bethany Fellowship of Great Britain ● Bethel Assemblies ● Bethel Baptist Assembly ● Bethel Chap
Mission of China ● Bethel Pentecostal Church ● Bethel Pentecostal Temple ● Bethel Tabernacle Church ● Bethel Temples
Zion ● Bethlehem Faith Mission ● Bethlehem Revival Church ● Bhai Mission ● Bharat Evangelical Fellowship ● Bharatiya G
in India ● Bible Brethren Fellowship ● Bible Christian Mission ● Bible Christian Union ● Bible Church ● Bible Church of G
Churches ● Bible Holiness Movement ● Bible Methodist Church ● Bible Mission ● Bible Missionary Church ● Bible Pattern

ablished Church ● Acção Bíblica ● Acción Misionera Iglesia de Dios ● Achang Church ● Achewa Baptist Church ● Action
ent Christian Church ● Advent Christian Conference ● Advent Christian Conference of Japan ● Adventist Church ● Adventists
frica Evangelical Church of Malawi ● Africa Gospel Church ● Africa Gospel Unity Church ● Africa Inland Church ● African
ohane Maranke ● African Apostolic Church of Johane Masowe ● African Apostolic Church of Nigeria and Benin13
● African
pel Apostolic Church ● African Brotherhood Church ● African Catholic Church ● African Church of Jesus Christ in Kenya ●
African Church of the Holy Spirit ● African Church, The ● African Congregational Church ● African Covenant Church ● African
urch ● African Free Presb Church of Zimbabwe ● African Full Gospel Church ● African Gospel Church ● African Greek Orth
an Independent Church of Kenya ● African Interior Church ● African Israel Church Nineveh ● African Methodist Church in
oly Ghost Church ● African National Church ● African National/International Church ● African New Life Ministries ● African
● African Orthodox Church of Kenya ● African Reformed Coptic Church of God ● African Salvation Army Church ● Afrikaans
● Alaph Divine Temple ● Albanian Orth Archdiocese in America ● Albanian Orth Diocese of America ● Albanian Orthodox
rejas Cristãs Evangelical do Brasil ● Alianca Evangelica Missionaria ● Alianza Cristiana Pentecostal ● Alianza Cristiana y
d r .of Swaziland
G y u ●lAlliance
a
AChurch
.
M
a g ó ● Alliance
e Paris E et N ● Alliance Church in South Africa ● Alliance Church
of Zimbabwe
e ● Alliance for Renewal Churches ● Alliance of Christian Churches ● Alliance of Reformed Churches ● Alliance Spirituelle
he in Österreich ● Altreformierte Kirchen in Deutschland ● Amana Church Society ● American Anglican Catholic Church ●
● American Carpatho-Russian OGC Church ● American Cath Church (Syro-Antiochian) ● American Catholic Church, AD New
istic Association ● American Orthodox Catholic Church in Nigeria ● American Orthodox Catholic Church ● American Rescue
● Anchor Bay Evangelistic Association of the P ● Anchor Bay Evangelistic Association ● Ancient Assyrian Church ● Ancient
otearoa, NZ, and Polynesia ● Anglican Catholic Church in N America ● Anglican Catholic Church ● Anglican Catholic Church
ion in America ● Anglican Orthodox Church of North America ● Anglican Orthodox Church ● Anglican Orthodox Church of
ng ● Anglican Rite Jurisdiction of the Americas ● Anglo-West-Indian Assembly ● Antigua Barbuda Baptist Association ●
Ministries ● Antioch Zionist Church ● Antiochian Orthodox Christian AD New York ● Antiochian Orthodox Church: P Antioch
calyptists ● Apos Ministers Conf of Philadelphia ● Apostelamt Jesu Christi ● Apostelamt Juda ● Apostle Miracle Church of
es in Zion Church ● Apostles Revelation Society ● Apostolic Assemblies of Christ Int ● Apostolic Assembly of the Faith in
hren) ● Apostolic Church of God in Christ ● Apostolic Church of Pentecost in Canada ● Apostolic Church of Pentecost of
rean) ● Apostolic Christian Church of America ● Apostolic Christian Churchs International ● Apostolic Christian Church ●
n Canada ● Apostolic Church in Denmark ● Apostolic Church in the Netherlands ● Apostolic Church in Zambia ● Apostolic
God Christians ● Apostolic Church of Great Britain ● Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ ● Apostolic Church of Johane Maranke
Pentecost ● Apostolic Church of Pentecost in India ● Apostolic Church of Queensland ● Apostolic
Church of Singapore ●
1
rch ● Apostolic Faith ● Apostolic Faith and Acts Church ● Apostolic Faith (Born Again) Church ● Apostolic Faith Church ●
Faith Mission of Africa ● Apostolic Faith Mission of Canada ● Apostolic Faith Mission of Malawi ● Apostolic Faith Mission
Mission of Zambia ● Apostolic Faith of Africa ● Apostolic Faith Star Church ● Apostolic Fellowship Association ● Apostolic
n Mission of South Africa ● Apostolic Independentendent Missions ● Apostolic Life Mission Church ● Apostolic Lutheran
Pentecostal Church, India ● Apostolic Reformed Church of Ghana ● Apostolic Society ● Apostolic Temple Church of Nigeria
Churches ● Arab indigenous churches ● Armenian Apostolic Church (C Cilicia) ● Armenian Apostolic Church (C Cilicia): ●
h: D Baghdad ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D Bucuresti ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D England ● Armenian Apostolic
c Church (D Egypt) ● Armenian Apostolic Church (D India) ● Armenian Apostolic Church: ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D
h: D Canada ● Armenian Apostolic Church: D Cyprus ● Armenian Apostolic Church: V Amman ● Armenian Apostolic Church:
America ● Armenian Closed Brethren ● Armenian Evangelical Spiritual Brethren ● Armenian Evangelical Union of Churches
Apostolische Kirche ● Army of the Cross of Christ Church ● Asamblea Cristiana ● Asamblea Cristiana (Italiana) ● Assemblies
es of Christians ● Assemblies of God ● Assemblies of God (Apostolic Church) ● Assemblies of God (Assyrian) ● Assemblies
of God (Spanish) ● Assemblies of God Fellowship ● Assemblies of God Fellowship Int ● Assemblies of God in Australia ●
lies of God in Ghana ● Assemblies of God in Guyana ● Assemblies of God in Lesotho ● Assemblies of God in Malawi ●
Assemblies of God in Samoa ● Assemblies of God in Sri Lanka ● Assemblies of God in the Bahamas ● Assemblies of God
Assemblies of God of Myanmar ● Assemblies of God of Tonga ● Assemblies of God USA ● Assemblies of Jesus Christ ●
● Assembly Hall Churches ● Assembly of Christian Churches ● Assembly of God ● Association of Baptists for World Evan
Free Lutheran Congs ● Association of Fundamental Baptist Churchs in P ● Association of Independentendent Churchs in
sociation of Intern Gospel Assemblies ● Association of Regular Baptist Churches of C ● Association of Regular Independent
entista del Séptimo Día ● Associación de Templos Evangélicos ● Associación Misionera Evangelical Nacional ● Associate
ted Christian Church of Kenya ● Associated Churches of Christ in NZ ● Associated Churches of God ● Associated Gospel
of Scotland ● Association Baptiste ● Association Culturelle Antoiniste ● Association des Eglises de Siloam ● Association
ciation of Ancient Rite Christians ● Association of Baptist Churchs in Israel ● Association of Baptist Churches ● Association
of Evangelical Congs and Ministries ● Association of Evangelical Gospel Assemblies ● Association of Evangelical Baptists
chs and Ministries ● Association of Free Evangelical Congregations ● Association of Oriya Baptist Churches ● Association
Church of the East (P Tehran) ● Assyrian Church of the East ● Assyrian Evangelical Church ● Assyrian Evangelical Churches
an Baptist Missionary Society ● Australian Indigenous Ministries Churchs ● Authentic Old Calendar Orthodox Church ●
Church ● Bahamas Faith Ministries ● Bahamas National Baptist Union ● Bai Church ● Bali Christian Protestant Church ●
lowship ● Bangladesh Baptist Sangha ● Bangladesh Evangelical Lutheran Church ● Bangladesh Lutheran Church ● Banner
Bantu New Christian Cath Apostolic Church ● Bantu Swedish Free Church ● Baptist Association ● Baptist Association of
● Baptist Association of Zambia ● Baptist Bible Believers Assembly ● Baptist Bible Church ● Baptist Bible Fellowship ●
aptist Christian Association ● Baptist Church ● Baptist Church in Aruba ● Baptist Church in Bosnia-H ● Baptist Church in
f Mizoram ● Baptist Churches ● Baptist Churches in Belize ● Baptist Churches in Palestine ● Baptist Churches in Tajikistan
l ● Baptist Convention of Botswana ● Baptist Convention of Fiji ● Baptist Convention of Hong Kong ● Baptist Convention
Baptist Convention of Sierra Leone ● Baptist Convention of Southern Africa ● Baptist Convention of Tanzania ● Baptist
ference ● Baptist Gospel Association of Indonesia ● Baptist International Church ● Baptist International Churches ● Baptist
Baptist Mission ● Baptist Missionary Association of America ● Baptist Union in the Gambia ● Baptist Union in Uzbekistan
Baptist Union of Finland ● Baptist Union of GB and Ireland ● Baptist Union of Georgia ● Baptist Union of Great Britain ●
aptist Union of New Zealand ● Baptist Union of North India ● Baptist Union of PNG ● Baptist Union of Scotland ● Baptist
● Baptist Union of Trinidad and Tobago ● Baptist Union of Uganda ● Baptist Union of Wales ● Baptist Union of Zambia ●
Basic Link of Christ ● Batak Christian Church ● Batak Christian Community Church ● Batak Christian Protestant Church ●
blies of Nigeria ● Believers Church ● Believers Churches ● Believers’ Churches in India ● Believers Churches of Bhutan ●
ox Church: D Minsk and B ● Bengal Baptist Union ● Bengal Evangelistic Mission ● Bengal-Orissa-Bihar Baptist Convention
hes ● Berean Mission ● Bermuda Baptist Fellowship ● Bethany Christian Assemblies ● Bethany Church Mission ● Bethany
hel Chapel ● Bethel Church ● Bethel Church in Indonesia ● Bethel Church of Christ ● Bethel Full Gospel Church ● Bethel
Temples ● Bethel World Outreach ● Bethesda Church Mission ● Bethesda Missionary Temple ● Bethlehem City of Christ in
aratiya General Conference Mennonite Churchs ● Bible Baptist Church ● Bible Baptist Churches ● Bible Believing Churches
rch of God ● Bible Crusade Missionary Society ● Bible Evangelistic Mission ● Bible Fellowship Church ● Bible Fellowship
e Pattern Church ● Bible Pattern Church Fellowship ● Bible Preaching Church ● Bible Presbyterian Church of New Zealand

Truth requires us to combat
error. Justice demands
that we do so by honest
means. Charity would have
us combat only the error
itself, and not the human
being who is its victim.
In what follows, the words
Protestant and Catholic are
used with their traditional
meanings. Excluded
from consideration are
liberal Protestants and
modernist Catholics, two
groups of people who
seem to believe nothing
any more. Protestantism
can be summarized by
paraphrasing Mark Twain:

14
The trouble is not that Protestants are ignorant. Rather,
the trouble is with all the things they know that ain’t so....

Protestantism is negative: it is defined in terms of
Catholicism by emphasizing the rejection of various
teachings of the Catholic Church. These rejections are
justified by attempts to refute dogmas of the Catholic
Church, but these refutations are never successful
because they always contain factual errors.
In the US, Roman Catholicism2
by Loraine Boettner is considered a
comprehensive collection of refutations
of Catholic beliefs and practices. The
book rejects Catholic beliefs and
practices, but it does not succeed in
refuting a single one of them. The
book reveals that Protestants have little
understanding of Catholicism, and thus
little understanding of what exactly
they are rejecting. So in the strictest
sense it is true that “the trouble is with
all the things they know that ain’t
so....” A few comments on Boettner’s
Loraine Boettner
book:
The book was written for Protestants, and a
Catholic does not really know what they will make
of it. But the Catholic reader very quickly discovers
that the book does not present religious truth, but
anti-Catholic propaganda, and so predictably there
is almost nothing in it that is true. To Catholics,
the Protestant picture of Catholicism may appear
amusingly misinformed, deliberately misleading or
downright mean-spirited.
The book is characterized by an intense hatred
of the Catholic Church, which we shall discuss later.
The book is full of blatantly dishonest
arguments none of which will ever stand up in the
court of reason (e.g., Roman Catholicism is just like
communism; Catholics worship images, statues, and,
of course, also Mary; American civil law is superior
to Roman Catholic Canon Law; Catholics are poor,
ignorant, idolatrous, superstitious people, etc. ad
nauseam). It is written in the style of typical modern
propaganda or “hate literature,” i.e., it appeals to the
emotions rather than to the intellect.
When it comes to strictly religious issues, in
many cases various straw men are knocked down,
and caricatures of Catholic beliefs and practices
are refuted. For example, it is correct to denounce
idolatry, but it is completely bogus to accuse Roman
Catholics of idolatry.
Not surprisingly, Boettner fails to refute (i.e.,
to prove wrong) a single Catholic belief or practice.
For example, he announces that Mary is the mother
of Jesus but not the mother of God because God does
not have a mother (p.133). Anybody who says that
does not understand the Trinity, does not understand
the Incarnation, and is guilty of the heresy of
Nestorius. The Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D. settled
this matter once and for all: Mary is the Mother of
God, and this stands for all eternity.

•

•
•

•
•

St. Thomas Aquinas explains (Summa Theologica,
III, Q.35, Art.4) that when a mother gives birth to
a child we do not say that the mother is the mother
of the “body of the child” but simply that she is the
mother of the person of the child. The Blessed Virgin
Mary gave a body to the person of Jesus Christ, but
this person was the God-man, with both a human and
a divine nature. Therefore, the Blessed Virgin, being
the mother of the person of Christ, is justifiably called
the Mother of God.
Boettner grudgingly admits that the Council of
Ephesus did say that Mary is the Mother of God,
but then takes it on himself to explain what “Mary
is the Mother of God” really means, arriving at
the conclusion that it should have never been said
because it is “unscriptural.” (This turning things
upside down is typical Protestant “scholarship.”)
Finally, p.135 concludes with the following nonsense:
“The correct statement of the person of Christ in this
regard is: As His human nature had no father, so His
divine nature had no mother.” Natures have no father
and mother, only persons have a father and mother.
The book of Boettner, being a typical presentation
of the stock Protestant arguments, suffers from the
same basic problem the whole of Protestantism
suffers from: it is inconsistent, which means that
all its arguments are worthless. (In an inconsistent
system when a proposition P is provable, then so is
its negation). See below “Why believe the Bible?–
Inerrancy.”
Protestantism is not a single religion that could be
examined and debated. It only has some “principles”
which can be invoked with flexibility and can be used
to generate the religion congenial to the Protestant.
In these pages, as examples, we discuss two
Protestant “principles,” one Protestant doctrinal error,
and the rejection of two Catholic doctrines, each in
deliberately simple terms.

SOLA SCRIPTURA

AND PRIVATE JUDGMENT
Sola Scriptura means that (supposedly) Divine
Revelation is contained in Scripture alone. This
is expressed in popular language by saying that
Protestantism is “the religion of the Bible.”

Reading the Bible Cannot
Be a Requirement for Salvation
According to Protestants, a Christian is supposed
to save his soul by acquiring a book called the Bible;
read the Bible, make up his mind about what the
Bible means (principle of private judgment), and now
he is supposedly in possession of Divine Revelation.
Unfortunately, the Bible did not exist for the first
400 years of Christian history (the canonical books
were selected by the Catholic Church only at the
Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.):

15
The whole revelation of Christianity was given by the
Holy Spirit and preached also and believed among the
nations of the world before the New Testament existed. The
knowledge of God through the Incarnation, and the way of
salvation through grace, was revealed partly by our Divine
Lord, and fully by the Holy Ghost at His coming. The faith
or science of God was infused into the Apostles by a divine
illumination. It was in itself the New Testament, before a
line of it was written....3

For the subsequent 1100 years the Bible was
completely inaccessible to most ordinary mortals
because there was no way to reproduce the Bible
cheaply. Thus, apparently Our Lord Jesus Christ has
completely failed to provide for His followers for 75%
of Christian history. Since such charge of failure is
untenable against God, these Protestant ideas must be
wrong.

The Bible Is Not the Sole
Source of Divine Revelation
It makes little sense to consider the Bible the
only source of Divine Revelation in the light of the
following consideration:
St. John put on Our Lord’s lips about 8,000 words. Sts.
Matthew, Mark and Luke about three times as many. To
speak slowly and distinctly, all the words of Our Lord
recorded in St. John would take less than an hour, the words
given in the Synoptics about two and half. Now the Gospels
give us to understand that during His Public Ministry Our
Lord spoke practically, day by day, for many hours. If
Our Lord spoke only one hour a day in public, His public
speeches would occupy say one thousand hours, but Our
Lord did not merely speak in public. He spoke continually
in private to His disciples. His longest recorded speech
in St. John (12-17) was spoken entirely in private to His
disciples. Considering that apparently, Christ devoted all
His time to speaking and teaching, somehow, His twelve
Apostles must have heard him for thousands of hours, and
what is contained in the Gospels is in consequence not onethousandth part of what they heard Him say.4

Indeed, Tradition is another important source of
our knowledge of Divine Revelation. For example,
the Catholic is not impressed at all when Protestants
question the existence of purgatory; the Catholic
knows that not only the most ancient liturgies, but
also the Roman catacombs were full of proofs of
purgatory, because purgatory was always believed.
This also explains the fact that all the frenzy
of Protestants fulminating against something
“unscriptural” leaves the Catholic absolutely cold. He
knows that everything does not have to be in Holy
Scripture.

Why Believe the Bible?
Unfortunately, Protestants have no conceivable
right to base any argument on the inspiration of the
Bible, for the inspiration of the Bible was a doctrine
which had been believed, before the Reformation, on
the mere authority of the Church; it rested on exactly

the same basis as the doctrine of Transubstantiation.
The only reason for holding the Bible worthy of
credence is because the Catholic Church has said
so. St. Augustine stated this very clearly: “I would
not believe the Gospel unless moved thereto by the
authority of the Church.”5
Protestantism repudiated Transubstantiation, and
in doing so repudiated the authority of the Church;
and then, without a shred of logic, calmly went on
believing in the inspiration of the Bible as if nothing
had happened! It is a most absurd and untenable
position to be in, but most Protestants do not even
realize this.
Of course, for liberal Protestants, literal
inspiration led to literary inspiration, which then
led to the total disintegration of the authority of the
Bible. Only fundamentalists still hold on to the old
inconsistent position.

The Protestant Bibles
Johann Gutenberg (1397-1468), inventor of the
printing press, was a Catholic, and numerous (47)
Catholic Bibles were printed in the vernacular (in
many languages) between 1466 and 1520, but the
Protestant propaganda is persistent that Luther
somehow found the Bible and gave it to the people
for the first time in their own language.6 Another one
of the things they know that ain’t so...
So what did the Protestants do with the Bible
as it now became easily available? First, they have
mutilated the Bible, the book for which they claim
to have such high regard. They dropped typically
six books from the Old Testament. For example,
the second book of Machabees had to go because it
proves the existence of purgatory beyond a shadow of
doubt.
They left out parts of the books they kept (e.g.,
seven chapters of the Book of Esther, and most of
the third chapter of Daniel), and they mistranslated
key passages to suit their purposes. A theologically
important example is from the prophecy of Malachias
(Douay Version), which predicts a sacrifice that would
be offered universally even among the Gentiles: “In
every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to
my name a clean oblation” (Mal. 1:11). The King
James Version deliberately mistranslates it as: “And
in every place incense shall be offered unto my name,
and a pure offering” (Mal. 1:11). Of course, having
refused all sacrifice to God, Protestants should now at
least offer incense to Him (to be consistent with this
Scripture passage), but they probably declare that
practice “unscriptural” too.
As a result, even the very best of the Protestant
Bible translations (such as the King James Version) are
very faulty translations, full of errors.
But worst of all, they systematically misinterpreted
the Bible. The Protestant revolution involved a great
“explaining away” of many of the doctrines that the
Catholic Church held for 1500 years. Without the
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

16
divinely appointed interpreter, the Word of God
preserved in Scripture is just a lifeless text, defenseless
before the wildest interpretations. Propagating and
respectfully accepting wild interpretations of Holy
Scripture is an undeniable fact of Protestant life,
which led to a proliferation of sects. The resulting
doctrinal anarchy is in itself a complete condemnation
of Protestantism: Protestants are inherently incapable
of agreeing on what exactly Divine Revelation is
supposed to be.
Although it is hard to find two Protestants who
agree on all they believe (in the sense in which
all Catholics agree on what their Faith is), it is
still possible to comment on the range of beliefs
Protestantism has generated. Opposition to the
Catholic Church, the Catholic priesthood, the
Sacrifice of the Mass and the Catholic sacramental
system are certainly common to them all.
Although the Catholic Church had always had to
contend with heresies, Protestantism was a totally new
class a heresies. Nobody had ever believed the kinds
of things Protestants came to believe. Protestantism,
with its individualism, complete refusal of authority
and anti-sacramental nature is absolutely alien to
Christianity as it existed for 1500 years.
Boettner is flagrantly lying when he writes: “Ever
since New Testament times there have been people
who accepted the basic principles now set forth in
Protestantism.”7 He cannot support this with any
citation because it is not true. Anybody familiar
with history knows that the “basic principles of
Protestantism” did not exist until Luther scraped them
together in a most haphazard fashion. And the irony
of it all is that Luther ended up with his feelings hurt
when his fellow “reformers,” instead of admiring his
principles, overruled him, and started producing their
own “principles.” Pandora’s box was open.
And of course St. Paul has warned against such
things: “But though we, or an angel from heaven,
preach a gospel to you besides that which we have
preached to you, let him be anathema” (Gal. 1:8).

Private Interpretation
Of the Bible
One of the “principles” of Protestantism is private
judgment: “I deny the authority of the Catholic
Church: every man must examine the credibility of
every doctrine for himself.” The result is a complete
anarchy not only in belief but also in practice. Using
this “principle,” well-meaning Protestants, Lutherans,
Episcopalians, Baptists, Presbyterians, Unitarians,
Methodists find different things in their Bibles. A
humorous result of private interpretation is the Shaker
(now virtually extinct):
You are a presumptuous people. Do you not know that the
Bible tells you that you must work out your salvation in fear
and trembling, and you do not tremble at all. My brethren,
if you want to go to heaven, shake, my brethren, shake!

All of which proves that the Bible is not easy to
understand. The chief of the apostles said so:
As also our most dear brother Paul, according to the
wisdom given him, hath written to you: As also in all his
epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are
certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned
and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to
their own destruction. (II Pet. 3:15, 16)

Private judgment is implicit in all heresies, but
Protestants were the first to state it explicitly as one
of their “principles.” St. Augustine commented on
private interpretation:
If there is no branch of teaching, however humble and easy
to learn, which does not require a master, what can be a
greater sign of rashness and pride than to refuse to study
the books of divine mysteries by the help of those who have
interpreted them?8

When some Protestants say that it is not the whim
of the individual, but the inspiration of the Holy
Ghost that produces the Protestant interpretations
of the Bible, their position gets even more awkward.
Since the interpretations contradict each other (just
take two well documented cases like Luther and
Calvin), we must conclude that the Holy Spirit
is contradicting himself. Since this assertion is
blasphemous, private interpretation of the Bible
must be a false concept. And it should be pointed
out that what Protestants here claim for themselves
(i.e., the Holy Spirit guides the reader of the Bible to
the knowledge of the truth) is much more than the
Catholic Church has ever claimed even for the Pope
himself.
Although Protestants claim to derive their
whole religion from the Bible, their “principle of
private interpretation” cannot be found in the Bible.
Protestant groups often try to counter the resulting
doctrinal chaos and inherent fragmentation by
instituting some kind of a “Confession of Faith.” But
these are not tolerated well: imposing any kind of
norms is in contradiction with Protestantism, to which
all fixed dogma, all immutable morality and any
definitive rule is absolutely foreign.
It is easy to verify that the Catholic religion is
clearly contained in the Bible, but the Protestant
religion cannot be found in the Bible. If a Protestant
honestly examines his own mutilated Protestant Bible,
even there he can find the Catholic religion.
This has happened many times, and occasionally
it was documented. Paul Whitcomb, who eventually
converted to the Catholic religion, describes himself:
I was born of Protestant parents, was baptized a Protestant,
was reared a Protestant, married a Protestant, and for a
number of years held down a Protestant pulpit. If ever there
was a ‘thoroughbred’ Protestant, I was one.9

His conversion began with the painful realization that
the Church, the Body of Christ is one, and he, as a
Protestant, is not a member of it.
The Protestant misinterpretations of the Bible
and the persistent errors of Luther and Calvin are
propagated by means of a Protestant oral tradition
(continued on p.24)

Catholic

y
l
i
Fam
Angelus Press

Children
Eternity
of
Colleen Drippé

Funny thing, the idea
of “childhood.” As
far as the Pilgrim
Fathers were
concerned, there
was no such thing.
They dressed their
children as miniature
adults and waited
with very thin
patience for them
to grow up. A child,
to early Protestants,
was no more than
a potential human
being. And for this
reason, many sects
did not even baptize
them until they
reached maturity.
Maybe this was the
beginning of the
abortion mentality–
that full humanity is
something you grow
into, not a condition
of your creation.

18
And then came the Victorians, who created a
complex and sentimentalized cult of childhood,
complete with its own myths (Santa Claus, elves and
fairies, and so forth), and the idea that children came
straight from the hands of some very feminine angels,
innocent and sweet, ready to lisp out words of piety.
Only certain children fell into this category, of course.
Quite a few others were simply used as labor or
sources of entertainment for the others.
There is nothing sentimental about today’s child.
He or she is a junior consumer, a wedge for outside
interests to infiltrate the family, and a
source of revenue for school boards.
Almost any bizarre doctrine can be tried
on your child, as long as God is not
mentioned. He can be taught anything
from communism to sexual perversion in
public schools, from watching television,
even from reading library books. As the
Victorian factory child was “used” to
make money, so can your child be used–
to make money, to gain political power,
or even to “get even” with you. Parents
have to be mighty careful these days.
So what is childhood, anyway? And
what are its limits?
We grow up–if we ever do–through
more than one stage of childhood. First
we are all red and wrinkly, then pink and
chubby, then we grow longer and leaner
until we become awkward and gangly for
a time, and finally we are adults, more or
less in good physical order. And we grow
mentally, spiritually, as well.
The red and wrinkly stage is pretty
free of ego. We exist, but don’t know
it. We ask nothing. We merely react to
hunger, warmth, and various discomforts.
This hardly seems like childhood at all.
But then, as we grow cuter, we grow into
a very great ego indeed. We demand.
We yell. We want food, Mama, toys,
attention–and we want it NOW! We are
selfishness incarnate.
This is the age when our training should begin.
Slowly we must learn that we are not the center of
the universe, that others have needs too. We learn
patience and, slowly, very slowly, charity. The charity
of a child is not always as enduring as that of an adult,
mainly because a child’s attention span is short. So
also is the experience a child may draw on. It is not
possible to know the suffering of others if you have
not suffered similar things. Nor can you know how to
ease that suffering.
A child’s charity takes odd forms. A headache (or
broken leg) may receive sympathy in the form of a
loan of a teddy bear. Daddy may be offered a lick of

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

a slightly used lollypop or Aunt Mabel may be given
a chance to hold an adorable fuzzy caterpillar. Still,
charity is charity, and it is nothing to sneer at. After
all, it is a sign of growing maturity.
But poking through all efforts at virtue, there
remains that oversized self. I loaned you the teddy
bear. I shared the lollypop. And aren’t I good? Don’t
you think I am the best child there ever was? (And I
wonder what I’ll get for Christmas. I wonder if I can
have another cookie. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could
go to the toy store?)

This self-centeredness extends, as we grow older,
to our feelings as well. My feelings are hurt. Why don’t
they pay any attention to me? Well, I have a right to
get mad!
A little boy once got in trouble for breaking a
statue at school. He brought it home to his mother for
repairs. Naturally she asked him what happened.
“I knocked it off Sister’s desk.”
“Was it an accident?”
“Yes.”
“Then why did you get in trouble?”
“I don’t know.”
“So tell me how it happened.”

Catholic Family

“Well, I was trying to punch Brian in the tummy
and I hit the statue instead.”
This boy was convinced he had been treated
unjustly. Why? Well, he obviously considered himself
justified in punching poor Brian and, as for the statue,
it just happened to be in the way. This is the behavior
of a child on the edge of moral reason but not yet
very good at it.
Unfortunately there are plenty of grown-ups who
never reach beyond this point. Some fail to develop
because no one taught them responsibility or selfcontrol. Others are stunted because of mental illness.
An extreme example of this would be a psychopath,
someone who has no conception of the rights and
feelings of anyone outside himself.
In her autobiography, The Story of a Soul, St.
Therese, the Little Flower, tells a remarkable story
about what she calls her own “emergence from
childhood.” Early Christmas morning (right after
midnight Mass) she came home “excited at the
thought of my shoes standing full of presents, in the
fireplace.”
Since she was 14 years old at the time, her father
rather tactlessly remarked that this was the last time
they would have “this kind of thing.”
Therese went upstairs to take off her hat. She
had two choices before her. She could take to herself
this “traumatic experience” and let everyone know
that she had been hurt. Indeed, there is something
satisfying in being the “victim,” as we all know, and
she might have felt perfectly justified in remaining in
her room, refusing the goodies and hurting her father
more than he had hurt her.
Or she could give up her self and go down joyfully
to take the presents out of her shoes.
And there is still another level of choice here. She
might do as one girl did, who was rather grudgingly
given a doll (by a mother who could not really afford
it and let her daughter know this) and who took the
doll without gratitude because of the way it was given.
To know that someone has hurt you and to set
aside this hurt is to behave like God who is said to
forget the things He forgives. And to go on to the
next step–to gratefully accept what the other is giving and
the terms on which it is given–requires an even greater
sacrifice of self. It is on a par with “giving in” to
someone else’s ideas, to someone else’s will. When
there is no sin involved, it is a heroic thing.
For St. Therese the will to behave thus was the
heroic thing. As she puts it, “Jesus...accomplished
in an instant what I had been unable to do...” She
was able to run downstairs and pull out the surprises
with such eagerness (and gratitude) that her father
was utterly charmed and her sister flabbergasted that
“little” Therese has pulled it off. Therese had in that
instant realized that she was childish, that her father
saw her as childish, and just as she ceased to actually
be childish she chose to let him think of her as a child

Catholic Family

in order to make him happy. It was a very un-childish
thing to do.
And yet, isn’t St. Therese the saint of spiritual
childhood? Here she is recording her emergence
from childhood and instead of becoming an adult she
remains a child. Obviously there must be more than
one sort of childhood–and there is.
That fat self which shrinks as we mature must
in the end be sacrificed entirely. The day comes for
most of us (perhaps not as dramatically as it did that
Christmas of 1886 for Therese Martin) when we
lay our first childhood to rest. Plain generosity isn’t
enough. We cannot just give what is external, we must
give of our very selves. Perhaps it is some truth we
must tell, some misunderstanding we must willingly
endure–whatever the occasion, whatever our age
(and many of us are late bloomers) we cease to be the
tyrant of the playpen.
Then what happens?
Well, that depends on whether our coming of age
was as thoroughgoing as that of St. Therese–whether
we let God have a hand in it. If our “sacrifice” was a
superficial one, we become a more responsible person
than we were, certainly, but we can still have lapses
into childish behavior. Worse, we may very well
come to take ourselves too seriously–and to demand
that others take us seriously as well. We may become
conventional “adults.”
This semi-maturity is a road many take, but it
is not the best road. St. Therese did not stop with
her one great sacrifice. Only when we finally cease
to think of ourselves as the center of things are we
free to enjoy the things and people round us, not as
possessions or adjuncts to ourselves, but as they are in
themselves. We are free to rejoice without envy in the
good fortune of others and to admire work we have
not done, to praise especially the handiwork of God.
And we are free to love others, not as a dog loves the
giver of dog biscuits, but rather because God created
them. Best of all, we love God Himself–because He is
God.
To become as a little child–not in the innocent
(and not so innocent) selfishness of the very young,
but rather in the humility and openness of one
who waits on the will of another–this is how we fit
through the door of heaven. This is the quality of
childlikeness that keeps all creation beautiful in our
eyes, that fills us with wonder long after our first
childhood is past.
The eternal childhood of the saints is as different
from the sentimentalized childhood of Victorian
fiction as the glorified bodies of the saints will be
from those of their own babyhood. As different as
fruit from seed.
Mrs. Drippé is a free-lance writer and author of several children’s books. She
lives with her family in St. Mary’s, Kansas, where she teaches First Grade at
St. Mary’s Academy.

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

Peter Severin Kroyer (1851-1909), Hip, Hip Hurrah! Artists’ Party, Skagen.

19

20

Ora et Labora
Fathers and Sons Spend a Week at Monastery

For an entire week last summer, ten fathers from
St. Mary’s, Kansas, assisted at a camp for 69 local
boys and young men at the Benedictine monastery of
Our Lady of Guadalupe near Silver City in southwest
New Mexico. The campers were aged 12 to 22. The
camp provided recreation for the boys, but its primary
purpose was to observe and participate in the daily life
of the monks and to help the monks with some needed
work projects at the monastery: “Ora et labora”–pray
and work.

The Monastery
Fr. Cyprian, an American Benedictine monk
formed in a monastery in France, founded Our Lady
of Guadalupe Monastery in 1991 with the blessing of
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The monks, now 21 in
number from seven countries, range in age from 20
to 49 with most in their 20’s. Monastic vocations are
increasing. A week of praying, working, and hiking
with the monks taught us visitors why this vocation is
attractive. Approximately 100 locals have formed a
congregation who attend the two Sunday Masses here
and join in for portions of the Divine Office.
All the buildings have been constructed in the
past 13 years with most of the work being done by the
monks themselves. With its 68 acres nestled on the
edge of one of America’s largest national forests, the
cloister of the monastery overlooks a large, untouched
valley of the southern Rocky Mountains filled with pine
trees and cactus. The air is dry and, at 7000 feet, very
temperate.

Prayer
The monks arise every day throughout the year
at 3:10am to gather in the chapel for Matins, the first
prayer of the Divine Office. Throughout the day, they
will return seven more times for the other prayers
of the Divine Office–Lauds, Prime, Tierce, Sext, None,
Vespers and Compline. Interspersed throughout the
day, they will assist at two Masses, study the Psalms,
read the Martyrology, hear the rule of St. Benedict,
attend class on Monastic Doctrine, and recite the
Rosary. The Divine Office and High Mass are sung in
Gregorian chant without organ or other instrumental
accompaniment. The monks retire at 8:00pm.
The prayers of a monk are offered for the benefit
of souls. Historically, bishops in the New World would
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

Catholic Family

21
establish contemplative monasteries and convents
focused first on prayer before bringing more active
orders of priests and religious to minister directly to
the laity. The concept is that prayer was necessary if
action was to be successful. It is also predicated on the
understanding that prayer is productive and effective.

Work
Between their prayers, the monks work hard.
They have gardens and livestock to tend, furniture
to build, firewood to cut and gather (all rooms are
heated with wood burning stoves), and construction
projects to accomplish, which include stonework,
masonry, carpentry, and finish work.
During prayer and work, the monks maintain
silence, using sign language to communicate. Each
monk has a name; for instance, “Brother Elias” or
“Brother Jerome,” which is represented by a sign
which becomes part of the monastery’s common sign
language. Visitors are interested in the monks’ signs.
Br. Andrew, for example, explained that his sign is
an “X” formed with the two forefingers, representing
the cross of St. Andrew, found in many European
flags and even that of the former Confederate States
of America.

chapel. We filled all the chairs. The chapel is true to
Benedictine monastic style—simple and immaculately
clean. As we faced east, the morning sun shone
through the stained glass windows behind the altar.
After Mass, the boys pitched camp in an area
being cleared for a large garden. The monks had set
up a covered area with folding tables and chairs for
meals and provided toilet and shower facilities for the
camp. The curious boys were something to watch.
(Why do we ever buy toys for them?!) They lost no
time balancing sticks on their fingers or using them
as swords, rearranging rocks of all sizes, and chasing
lizards. They were told to be on the lookout for
scorpions, and, if they picked up a horned toad, not
to look it in the eye because it would spit poisonous
venom into their eyes. This did not put the fathers at
any ease and I quickly inquired if the monks had a
well-supplied medicine chest. They did.

Recreation
Throughout the week, and more so on Sunday,
the monks have appointed recreation times. Some
play musical instruments, many take hikes–there are
many trails in the neighboring forest–and others play
football.

The Drive
Our week’s visit was preceded by a Friday
evening spent packing a trailer with the campers’
luggage, tents, duffle bags, and sleeping bags.
Passengers were assigned to vehicles, which included
four large vans and an SUV as well as a motor home
owned by one of the four football coaches that came
on the trip. After having attended 7:30am Mass the
next morning, we gassed up and started off on the
1,048 miles to Silver City. Coordinating fuel stops,
lunch, dinner, pit stops, and a detour to pick up
donated meat was a challenge, but we managed to
pull into the monastery sometime after 7am Sunday
morning.

Our Arrival
Bros. Bernard and Vincent greeted us. They said
the monks had been looking forward to our visit.
Fr. Cyprian had scheduled a Mass for 8am. The
monastery’s chapel has very little seating for laity. For
the growing local congregation that assists at Mass on
Sundays, the monks bring in folding chairs which are
set up between the choir stalls beyond the iron gates
that separate the laity from the monks. Additional
chairs are set up outside the front doors of the

Catholic Family

Sunday afternoon was spent doing one of two
things. Since Sunday is the biggest day of recreation
for the monks, half played football with the boys.
The rest worked to complete the unfinished showers
using a backhoe, Bobcat, and hand tools. Normally,
the monks do not work on Sunday, but the arrival of
the boys threw off their schedule and it was necessary
that they be permitted to finish the camp for the
boys. The monks collaborated flawlessly and the
facilities were quickly finished. Watching the monks
play and work, I saw the active side of what most of
us in the world tend to think is an entirely quiet and
inactive existence. The monastery grounds reveal
an incredible amount of work in process, work that
is getting accomplished through the hard work and
relentless activity of these monks. But there is a peace
amidst the activity—a peace that carries over from the
silence of the monks into their work and recreation.
The chapel’s large bell started to ring and I saw
that it was 3pm. One of the monks was pulling the
large rope for the bell in front of the wide wooden
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

22
chapel doors through which
I passed. Quietly, the monks
had disappeared from the
camp and I watched as 15 of
them entered the chapel from
a side door. Most were dirtied
from the football game, but
that made no difference as
they spent the next 15 minutes
chanting the prayers of the
Divine Office ascribed to that
time of day. This contemplative
part of the monks’ life, larger
and more important, was quiet
and somber, yet was full of the
vigor that characterized their
work. Their work and prayer
are united, even blended.
At 4:30pm the boys prayed
the Rosary with the monks.
Following it were Vespers
and Benediction. Later that evening, Fr. Cyprian gave a
conference to the boys explaining the schedule for the week.

Camp Schedule
While the monks would rise at 3:10am, the campers
were allowed to sleep until 5:30am. The campers were
required to assist at 6am Mass and then eat a breakfast
of cold cereal and milk. At 8am they were to start their
morning work assignments which lasted until the noon
lunch. The afternoon work assignments were shorter, lasting
from 2pm until the 4:30 Rosary at which attendance was
required. Supper was served at 6pm and a conference
scheduled every night at 7:30pm. The monks retired at 8pm
while the boys were allowed to stay up until 10pm.

Camp Work
There were two principle areas of work with which the
monks needed assistance along with some smaller projects.
The largest project was putting up a fence for the new sheep
and cattle the monastery was to receive in the near future.
This included setting fence posts in very rocky ground. Even
using a jack hammer, one of the post holes took two hours
to dig! The other large project was cutting and stacking
an immense pile of wood. Some of it was already cut, but
nearly all of it still needed sectioning into smaller pieces.
The monks had obtained the logs from the National Forest
Service, which had needed to thin some wooded areas. One
of the slide presentations we viewed that week showed the
monks cutting trees in full religious work-habit, donning also
a logger’s hardhat with ear covers and eye shield. The entire
monastery is heated with wood, including each monk’s
cell and the main chapel itself, the dining hall, and chapter
room.
Besides helping with the fence and woodpile, the boys
were assigned other chores such as kitchen duty, working in
the woodshop, or helping to lay tile. The monks are building
a new novitiate building, which includes making its doors

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

Catholic Family

23
Br. Andrew, a transplant from South Africa, gave
Tuesday’s conference. He told the story of an Irish priest that
stopped into a pub and called out “Who is willing to die for
Christ?” to which he received an overwhelming response
from the men inside, each standing and pledging to die for
the faith. Then he shouted, “Who is willing to live for Christ?”
to which he received a paltry silence. All men die, but not all
men live. He then spoke at length about the vocation to the
religious life and the signs of a religious vocation.
Br. Thomas Aquinas, a graduate from St. Mary’s College,
Kansas, gave Wednesday’s conference, giving some history of
ancient Greece and Rome and comparing the battles of those
times to battles in the spiritual life and the role that the monk
plays in that spiritual warfare.

Thursday’s Hike
After the regular daily work schedule for Monday through
Wednesday, Fr. Cyprian gave the boys off on Thursday. The
monks also were given the day off and organized a hike into
the National Forest to Preacher’s Point. Someone asked Father
why it was called Preacher’s Point and he replied he did not
know but that was what it was called on the map. The boys
recited the Rosary as the hike started and sang some hymns.
During the course of the day, the monks stopped three times
to say the Divine Office. This was a unique experience. We
watched them chant in Latin as they arranged themselves
along side a stream or under pine trees. The boys enjoyed
seeing different species of cactus, century plants, and yucca as
well as chasing the ever present lizards and catching a glimpse
of a rattlesnake. Because the monks are so physically fit, the
hike they led was strenuous, but it was a welcome change
from the work of the previous three days.

Departure
and windows, and laying the large orange-red
tile found on all the monastery floors.

Conferences
Fr. Cyprian’s Monday night conference
consisted of a slide presentation prepared by
Br. Bernard, who, we learned, had been a
member of the wrestling team at Columbia
University before entering the monastery. His
slide presentation reviewed the day in the life
of a monk at the monastery starting with the
brother who rings the bell to awaken the other
monks, through each part of the Divine Office,
Mass, Rosary and Benediction, showing the
meals, study and classroom sessions, work
responsibilities, and recreation times. It was an
expertly done slide presentation and it may be
distributed to chapels throughout the Americas
in order to provide priests with a tool to help
young men considering a vocation to the
religious life.

Catholic Family

Friday was our last day of work, which ended with one
last conference. On Saturday morning, the boys were allowed
to sleep in until 6:30am before rising to break camp, pack
up the vehicles, and get ready for High Mass at 9:30am.
Afterwards, the monks offered a good-bye to each camper
individually. Then, Father Prior Cyprian passed out some
awards and a St. Benedict Medal to each participant. He gave
each of us his priestly blessing and then we began our long
trip back, returning around 10am on Sunday morning in St.
Mary’s.
We learned later that two young men in our group had
already been thinking about entering the monastery. It was
rewarding to learn that these high school graduates had
solidified their plans during this trip. Two others, who still
need to complete high school, are considering a vocation to
the monastery. One young man, age 22, stayed behind to help
the monks for a few more weeks and consider his own future.
And who knows what other seeds were planted in the minds
of the boys, between bouts of chasing lizards, that will bear
fruit in the future as they mature into young men.
The author of this account, Mr. Nicholas Novelly graduated with a BBA in accounting
from the University of Texas at Austin. Starting in 1982, Mr. Novelly volunteered on
the staff at St. Mary’s College. He is now married with a family of eight living near St.
Mary’s and running a CPA firm with offices in northeast Kansas. To contact the monastery, write to: Our Lady of Guadalupe Monastery, 142 Joseph Blane Road, Silver City,
NM 88061-9799.
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

24

(continued from p.16)

whose existence only few Protestants are willing to
admit.
The doctrinal error of the “reformers” easiest to
explain is their erroneous concept of being justified.
It also proves that Protestants–in violation of their
principle of Sola Scriptura–also have an oral tradition:
what Luther and Calvin (for example) said often
decides what a Protestant is going to believe.

THE PROTESTANT
CONCEPT OF
“JUSTIFICATION”
The issue is what did St. Paul mean by the
expression “to justify.” (Catholics use “sanctifying
grace” as a synonym for “justification.” Justification is
effected through the infusion of sanctifying grace into
the soul.) Protestant exegetes from Luther and Calvin
all the way to Barth maintain that it means nothing
more than “to declare just,” that it applies merely to
extrinsic justice, which has nothing real to correspond
with it in the person justified. God only declares the
sinner to be justified, although he remains intrinsically
unjust and sinful. On the negative side, justification
is not a real eradication of sin, but merely a nonimputation or covering of the sin. On the positive
side, it is not an inner renewal and sanctification but
merely an external imputation of Christ’s justice.
This is sometimes illustrated by saying that
according to Luther a justified soul is like a pile
a dung covered by snow. So then heaven would
eventually be populated with, and God would for all
eternity be surrounded by, piles of dung. This concept
is truly repulsive and absurd.
The correct meaning is “to make just,” or
“to declare officially just someone who is so in
reality.” The correct, Catholic understanding is that
justification sanctifies the soul, bestows supernatural
beauty on the soul, makes the just man a friend of
God, makes the just man a child of God and gives him
a claim to the inheritance of heaven, and makes him a
temple of the Holy Ghost. The justified man has been
remade by God; he is truly a “new creation.”
This explains why not only there are no saints
in Protestantism, but there cannot possibly be any.
The saint is a person converted and newly created in
the grace of God, and Protestantism refuses even to
consider the existence of such a thing.
The rejection of the Catholic Church and that
of the Catholic sacramental system are closely
connected.

REJECTING THE CHURCH
What did Our Lord leave behind him at his
Ascension? Merely an example, and fleeting
memories? (At that moment no words have yet been
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

written down.) His primary legacy to the world
was a society which he originated; a society which
consisted in the first instance of his own immediate
followers, and which has become known as the
Catholic Church. The Divine Redeemer, who brought
us the final revelation of God, would see to it that
His purposes were not frustrated by the infidelity
of his legatees. He gave His Church a monarchical
organization, with the Apostle St. Peter as the first
head.
The Church is the most sore subject for the
Protestant, the truth he most bitterly rejects, denies or
tries to evade, and therefore it is the pivotal issue in
trying to comprehend Protestantism.
Since it was necessary that the divine mission of Jesus
Christ should be perpetuated to the end of time, Jesus Christ
took to Himself disciples, trained them Himself, and made
them partakers of His own authority. And when He had
invoked upon them from heaven the Spirit of Truth, He
bade them to go through the whole world and faithfully
preach to all nations what he had taught and what He
had commanded, so that by profession of His doctrine,
and the observance of His laws, the human race might
attain holiness on earth and never-ending happiness in
heaven. In this wise, and on this principle, the Church was
begotten.10

The unspeakable tragedy of the Protestant revolt
was the wholesale rejection of the Church Jesus Christ
had founded. It deprived Protestants of the Truth, and
deprived them of the means to save their souls. Pope
Pius IX correctly described Protestantism in all its
forms as a “revolt against God,” it being an attempt to
substitute human for divine authority.
The true Church of Christ is both natural and
supernatural; it is both external and spiritual.
If we consider the chief end of this Church and the
proximate and efficient causes of salvation, it is undoubtedly
spiritual; but in regard to those who constitute it, and to the
things which lead to these spiritual gifts, it is external and
necessarily visible.11

The Church being both natural and supernatural
simultaneously is a reflection of her Divine Founder,
who is True God and True Man at the same time.
It is an error to imagine that the Church is only
natural or that the Church is only supernatural. In the
words of Pope Leo XIII:
It is assuredly as impossible that the Church of Christ can
be the one or the other as that man should be a body alone
or a soul alone. The connection and union of both elements
is as absolutely necessary to the true Church as the intimate
union of the soul and body to the human nature.12

The human body without a soul is merely a
corpse, and the human soul separated from the body
is not a living human being either. Separating the
body and soul of a human being is equivalent to
killing it. And that is what the Protestants tried to do
with the Church.
According to Protestant beliefs, there is really no
vital need of a Church. For Catholics, the Church is a
vital fact; for Protestants it is an intellectual figment.

25
Unfortunately, the Bible is too full of references to
the Church for the Protestants to make it completely
disappear. So the wholesale rejection of the Catholic
Church by Protestants was accomplished by declaring
the Church either 1) only natural, visible and
external (a merely human organization, convenient
for organizing the energies of individuals) or; 2)
only supernatural, invisible, intangible, merely
“pneumatological” (i.e., united by a bond that eludes
the senses).
Unfortunately (or rather fortunately), nobody
is at liberty to “redefine” the Church of Christ. The
Church has been perfectly clearly defined by Jesus
Christ Himself, and His definition cannot possibly be
changed.
The Church is certainly mysterious: the Church is
the Mystical Body of Christ (Rom. 12:4-5), the Church
is the Bride of Christ (Eph. 5:25-27), and the Church
is a continuation or an extension of the Incarnation of
Jesus Christ, Christ continuing to dwell among us.13
The words of Jesus Christ in Holy Scripture
announce a certain identity of Himself–and not
merely His presence–with those who corporately
represent Him: “I am the Vine, you the branches”
( Jn. 15:5), or “As the Father sent Me, I also send you”
( Jn. 20:21), or “He that heareth you, heareth Me: he
that despiseth you despiseth Me” (Lk. 10:16).
Even after the Ascension Jesus Christ most clearly
identified Himself with His Church in His encounter
with Saul. “For I am the least of the apostles who
am not worthy to be called an apostle because I
persecuted the church of God” (I Cor. 15:9). But in
persecuting the Church, Saul was persecuting Jesus
Christ Himself: “Who art thou, Lord? And he: I am
Jesus whom thou persecutest” (Acts 9:5).
The Church is Jesus Christ still living with us,
she is Jesus Christ still at work in the world. As Jesus
Christ lived His natural life on earth 2,000 years
ago in a body drawn from the Blessed Virgin Mary,
so now He lives His Mystical Life today in a body
drawn from the human race in general, and this body
is called the Catholic Church. In the words of St.
Gregory the Great: “Christ with His whole Church,
in heaven and on earth, is one single person. And as
there is only one soul vivifying the different members
of a human body, so the Holy Ghost vivifies and
enlightens the Church.”
Indeed, the Church is mysterious, there is nothing
like it in the whole world. No community in the
merely natural order can be called a person. For
example, no nation is a person, no nation has a divine
mission, nor any promise of lasting always and being
constantly assisted by God. Only the Catholic Church
has these properties, given to her by her divine
founder.
It is this personality of the Church that we
affirm in the Nicene Creed: “I believe in One, Holy,
Catholic and Apostolic Church....” “Apostolic” means
that the personnel of the Church can be traced back

all the way to the 12 Apostles of Jesus Christ, i.e., that
the Church existed at all times without interruption.
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter, and upon this rock
I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom
of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it
shall be bound also in heaven: And whatsoever thou shalt
loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. (Mt.
16:18-19)

Our Lord means that His Church, built on
Peter, will never be destroyed. To “give the keys” of
a storeroom, a house, or a city, to someone meant
to give him delegated control of all that is in it. “To
bind and loose” means to forbid and permit in a wide
sense: Peter is to be the visible “master of the house,”
Our Lord of course being the invisible foundation
and controller by whom all power held by a visible
representative is delegated.
All power is given to me in heaven and earth. Going
therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even
to the consummation of the world. (Mt. 28:20)

In this tremendous declaration Our Lord sends
the apostles, with delegated power 1) to teach and
2) to baptize all nations–no more only Israel–in the
name of the Trinity. The last sentence implies the
indefectibility of the Church, i.e., the Church will
never fail. This clearly contradicts the Protestant myth
that the Catholic Church has somehow “failed,” the
Church has become corrupted, has fallen into error,
and Protestantism had to step in to take her place. If
this myth were true, then Our Lord would be a liar.
But that cannot be: “And I will ask the Father, and he
shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide
with you forever”( Jn. 14:16).
That the Church is not a merely human
organization, but is truly Christ continued is not an
obscure dogma for Catholics but a self-evident fact.
The Catholic knows that Christ really and truly lives
and acts in His Church: the grace of every sacrament
comes from Christ, the Catholic makes his confession
to and receives absolution from Christ, and in the
Holy Eucharist he receives Jesus Christ Himself.

THE REJECTION
OF THE CATHOLIC
SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM
“I am the Way, and the Truth and the Life” ( Jn.
14:6) means that Our Lord is Lawgiver, Teacher and
High Priest. Correspondingly, the Church governs,
teaches, and dispenses the fruits of the Redemption
through the sacraments. Protestants reject all that,
but most of them especially vehemently reject the
Catholic sacraments. Some Protestant groups claim to
recognize a few (typically two) sacraments, but these
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

26
claims are completely misleading. When a Protestant
says “sacrament,” what he means is not a sacrament
at all. A Protestant “sacrament” is not a channel of
divine grace, rather it is a means of stirring up faith.
There are strong similarities between the most
dramatic examples of opposition in the Gospels
against our Lord’s teachings, and the most violent
rejections of Catholic teachings by Protestants.
“How can a man be born when he is old?” ( Jn.
3:4)–a challenge against Baptism;
“Who can forgive sins save God only?” (Mk.
2:7)–a challenge against Christ forgiving sins;14
“How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” ( Jn.
6:53)–a challenge against the Eucharist, and finally
“Before Abraham was made, I am. They took up
stones to cast at Him” ( Jn. 8:58)–a challenge to the
divinity of Christ.
As Christ was rejected then, the Catholic
Church is rejected by Protestants now, some of the
most violent rejections being leveled against the
Catholic sacraments (including Baptism, Confession
and the Eucharist) and against asserting the divine
prerogatives of the Catholic Church.
Even Protestants tend to admit that God had
to become man to redeem us. Our Divine Lord
redeemed us in a most unspiritual way, through His
bodily sufferings and His death. God could have
done it differently but that is how He did it. And the
Incarnation did not end with the Ascension. The
Eternal Son of God assumed a human nature never
to lay it down. Our Lord Jesus Christ will remain
a man forever. And thus the religion he founded
is also incarnational. The principle implicit in the
Incarnation is that matter is not bad, nor is it to be
despised, but can be made use of by God in the work
of our sanctification.
G.K. Chesterton offers the following explanation:
The sacramental system is based on the idea that certain
material acts are mystical acts; are events in the spiritual
world. This mystical materialism does divide us from all
those forms of idealism that hold all good to be inward and
invisible and matter to be unworthy to express it.15

Since the Incarnation, no one can possibly
criticize a religion because it is not wholly “spiritual.”
We, humans, are not wholly spiritual, and Christ
is not wholly spiritual. Therefore, the religion that
He gave us is not wholly spiritual either; it does not
disdain material elements but includes them.
Just as the Incarnation was believed from day one,
but began to be understood only later, the situation
was similar with the sacraments. All the sacraments
were used from day one, but an understanding of
them was only gained gradually. Jesus Christ Himself
instituted all seven of the sacraments, and they are
not haphazard but form an orderly series, a central
idea giving coherence and unity to their number and
nature.
The Seven Sacraments of the Church are a Record, or
Scripture of God anterior to the written Gospels of the
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

Evangelists....The Church, its sacraments, and its worship
were spread throughout the world before as yet the books
of the New Testament were written.16

All seven sacraments give sanctifying grace. God
does the work, He gives the grace, but the minister
and the recipient have to cooperate. Lack of proper
cooperation prevents reception of grace. So it is not
God who is tied by the sacraments, but we. God is
merely fulfilling His promise to give grace.
When G. K. Chesterton was asked by horrified
fellow Anglicans why he chose to become a Catholic,
his answer was: “To get rid of my sins.”17 He wanted
certainty that he was forgiven, and the Catholic
Church, and she alone, can give such a certainty. All
the sacraments provide such certainty: if the minister
and recipient do their (easily verifiable) part, God
gives sanctifying grace according to His promise.
Of course, God in His omnipotence and freedom
can communicate grace in a purely spiritual manner
also, but about that, being the exceptional case,
we know very little. The Sacraments of the New
Covenant are necessary for the salvation of mankind,
exactly because Christ gave them to the Church to be
used as the ordinary channels of divine grace. God
is the one who determines the way He is pleased to
bestow His graces.
One of the sacraments, the Holy Eucharist, is
special, because in it we not only receive sanctifying
grace (a participation in the divine life) but in it we
receive Christ Himself. In the account of the Last
Supper we read:
And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to
them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do
this for a commemoration of me. In like manner the chalice
also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the
new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you.
(Lk. 22:19-20)

The men to whom He was speaking were not
modern psychologists and symbolists but men of
antiquity who thought simply and in a corporeal
way. When Jesus said to them, “This is my Body”
and, “This is my Blood...,” then it is that and does
not merely signify it. So they knew that here He
was giving them Himself, in the mystery of an
inconceivable sacrifice. This too is contained in the
new Community which was here established. It is the
central point, the Holy of Holies. Here again we are
told what the Church is–the living Christ who imparts
Himself to His own throughout the ages.18
The Catholic Church is the heir to the rights
of Jesus Christ. She is the faithful guardian of the
spiritual treasures of Jesus Christ. She is the infallible
teacher of the doctrines of Jesus Christ. She wields
the authority of Jesus Christ. She lives by the life
and spirit of Jesus Christ. She enjoys the guidance,
protection and help of Jesus Christ. She speaks,
orders, commands, concedes, prohibits, defines,
looses and binds, in the name of Jesus Christ. But
when the Catholic Church claims her uniqueness,

27
that she is Christ continued, that she is the Truth,
the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth, then
Protestants are ready to take up stones to cast at her.
Msgr. Robert Hugh Benson, a convert from
Anglicanism described England in 1911:
It is a very delicate and significant compliment to the
Catholic Church that religious people are bound to hate
her more than anything else in the wide world. Religious
people may differ among themselves on every other
imaginable point, but they are at any rate agreed on this,
that the Church is the enemy and must be annihilated. Now
surely this is a remarkable phenomenon–that one religion
should have such a monopoly of being hated by religious
persons. Anglicans do not hate Wesleyanism; Wesleyans do
not hate Congregationalism; Congregationalists do not hate
Christian Science. They disapprove, and they disagree, but
their emotion is not vivid enough to be called hatred. But
they hate Catholicism. There is no question about that.
The Inquisition, or the massacre of St. Bartholomew
are alleged as reasons for this hatred when it makes its
appearance; but it is not really these things. It is Catholicism
itself.
It is what is called “intolerance”–that is, the claim of the
Church to be the Truth–that is at the bottom of the trouble.
And so we see religious persons rending their garments in
horror at this blasphemous arrogance; and we see Jesus in
His Church, bound, spat upon and condemned, standing
at the bar.19

In the US, Jimmy Swaggart, Jack Chick, Alberto
Rivera, Tony Alamo and men of that ilk not only
personify but also fuel the hatred of the Catholic
Church.
Bishop Fulton Sheen in his preface to Radio
Replies tried to minimize the extent of this hatred:
There are not over a hundred of people in the United
States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions,
however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the
Catholic Church–which is, of course, quite a different
thing.20

Whether all the slander is motivated by malice
or ignorance is a moot point. But Jesus Christ clearly
predicted this hatred. It started with Caiphas, was
given a strong boost by the vulgarities of Luther, and
will only end at the Last Judgment:
If the world hate you, know ye that it hath hated me
before you...because you are not of the world but I have
chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth
you. Remember my word that I said to you: The servant
is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me,
they will also persecute you: if they have kept my word,
they will keep yours also. But all these things they will do
to you for my name’s sake: because they know not him that
sent me. ( Jn. 15:18-21)

BEING SEPARATED
FROM THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH
To the Protestant, the Christian religion consists in
the union of the individual with Christ–of individual

with individual–the Church having nothing to do
with the whole thing. The Divine Person lived on
earth 2,000 years ago, performed actions, spoke
words, finished His work and went back whence He
came; and true religion consists in the adherence
of the human to the Divine Person, with no priest,
prelate, church or sacrament involved, since none are
thought necessary. (This individualism in religion is
repudiated by few Protestants only, most notably the
Anglicans.)
The Protestant, not understanding that the
Catholic Church is Christ, thinks in terms of
intermediaries. Even if the Church is considered
an intermediary, it does not have to be an obstacle,
preventing access to Christ. On the contrary, it is
an aid, greatly helping us to have access to Christ
(as in the Holy Eucharist) or to the benefits we
hope to obtain from Christ (divine grace in all the
sacraments).
But not only is the Church very beneficial to
our salvation, she is absolutely necessary to it. The
claim of the Church that she alone can lead men to
salvation, what men call her “intolerance,” is not a
mere trick, a human invention to get ahead in a crowd
of equal rivals. The Catholic Church has no equals.
She is absolutely unique. She is the Bride of Christ,
she is the Mystical Body of Christ, she is Christ
continued. That is why the Fathers of the Church like
to compare the Catholic Church with the ark in which
Noe and his family were saved, while all those who
were outside the ark perished.
To be saved, we must do the will of God: “Not
every one that saith to me Lord, Lord, shall enter
the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of
my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 7:21). The will of God the
Father is that men hear and believe his Son, Jesus
Christ: “This is my most beloved Son. Hear ye Him”
(Mk. 9:6). Now Jesus Christ said to His apostles and
lawful successors: “He that heareth you, heareth Me:
he that despiseth you despiseth Me” (Lk. 10:16).
From these words it is clear that it is not possible
to be united with Jesus Christ while despising His
Church. Yet Protestants despise the Catholic Church,
they turn their back most contemptuously on the
Catholic Church, they slander her at every turn, and
follow their own will in all religious matters. It is a
delusion and a tragic mistake for anyone to count on
gaining his salvation outside the Catholic Church.
Holy Scripture, the Fathers and the Doctors of the
Church all warn against it.
Jesus Christ:

If he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the
heathen and publican. (Mt. 18:17)

St. Cyprian:

Whoever has been separated from the Church is yoked with
an adulteress, is separated from the promises made to the
Church. Nor shall he who leaves Christ’s Church arrive at
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

28
Christ’s rewards. He is a stranger, he is sacrilegious, he is an
enemy. Who has not the Church for mother can no longer
have God for father. (On the Unity of the Catholic Church, 6)

It is impossible to be just to the Catholic Church. The
moment men cease to pull against it they feel a tug toward it.
The moment they cease to shout it down they begin to listen
to it with pleasure. The moment they try to be fair to it they
begin to be fond of it. But when that affection has passed a
certain point it begins to take on the tragic and menacing
grandeur of a great love affair. The man has exactly the
same sense of having committed or compromised himself;
of having been in a sense entrapped, even if he is glad to
be entrapped. But for a considerable time he is not so much
glad as simply terrified. It may be that this real psychological
experience has been misunderstood by stupider people and
is responsible for all that remains of the legend that Rome is
a mere trap. But that legend misses the whole point of the
psychology. It is not the Pope who has set the trap, or the
priests who have baited it. The whole point of the position
is that the trap is simply the truth. The whole point is that
the man himself has made his way toward the trap of truth,
and not the trap that has run after the man. All steps, except
the last step, he has taken eagerly on his own account, out of
interest in the truth; and even the last step, or the last stage,
only alarms him because it is so very true.21...After nearly
2,000 years, Catholics have come to regard Catholicism as
one thing, all the parts of which are in one sense equally
assailed and in another sense equally unassailable. Now it
is unfortunately impossible for a Roman Catholic to state
the principle without its sounding provocative and, what is
much worse, superior; but unless he does state it, he does
not state Roman Catholicism. Having stated it, however, in
its dogmatic and defiant form, as it is his duty to do, he may
afterwards suggest something of why the system seems, to
those inside it, to be not so much a system as a home, or
even a holiday.22

St. Isidore of Seville:

Therefore heresy is so called from the Greek word meaning
“choice,” by which each chooses according to his own
will what he pleases to teach or believe. But we are not
permitted to believe whatever we choose, nor to choose
whatever someone else has believed. We have the apostles
of God as authorities, who did not themselves of their
own will choose what they would believe, but faithfully
transmitted to the nations the teaching received from Christ.
(Etymologies, 8,7)

St. Augustine:

•

In the Catholic Church there are both good and bad. But
they who are separated from her, as long as they remain in
their opinion against her, cannot be good; ...the separation
itself makes them bad, the Lord saying: “He who is not
with me is against me; and he who gatherest not with me,
scattereth.” (Ep. ccviii, n.6, col.1177)

•

No one, indeed, attains to salvation and eternal life
except he who has Christ as his head. But no one can have
Christ as head, except he who is in His body, which is the
Church. (Ep. ad Cath. contra Donat. xix, 49)

•

The Christian ought to fear nothing so much as to be
separated from the body of Christ. For if he is separated
from the body of Christ, he is not a member of Christ; if
not a member of Christ, he is not quickened by his Spirit.
(Tract. xxvii, in Joan., n.6, col.1992, tom. iii )

•

Outside the Catholic Church one can have anything
except salvation. One can have honor. One can have the
sacraments. The “Alleluia” can be sung. The response
“Amen” can be given. One can hold to the Gospel, and
can have and preach the faith in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. But one can never
find salvation except in the Catholic Church. (Sermo ad
Caesariensis ecclesia plebem, 6. MPL., XLIII 695 )

Dr. Gyula Mago was born in 1938 in Hungary and raised a Catholic. He lived
under Communist rule for 20 years. Dr. Mago obtained his Ph.D. from Cambridge University, England, in 1970, and was a professor of Computer Science
at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (1970-99). He presently lives
in retirement in Durham, North Carolina, and assists at the Latin Mass at Holy
Redeemer Catholic Church in Raleigh, North Carolina.

These quotes have the full authority of the
Catholic Church, and therefore the full authority
of Jesus Christ behind them. By contrast, it is both
comical and tragical, when, aping the Catholic
Church, Protestants make statements in a similar
fashion, usually assigning all Catholics to hell on their
own authority.
The meaning of the statement “There is no
salvation outside the Catholic Church” is not that
all Protestants necessarily lose their souls. The
meaning, admitting no qualifications, is that the
Catholic Church is the only religious body in the
world through which salvation can be procured.
Membership in any other religious body will not
contribute to any man’s welfare in eternity. So if a
Protestant eventually manages to gain his salvation, it
will be not because he was a Protestant, but despite it.
Finally, some words of G.K. Chesterton, one
of the greatest converts to Catholicism in the 20th
century, describing what is it like having arrived
home:

A. G. Sertillanges, Spirituality (McMullen Books, 1954), p.180.
Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism (Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1962).
3
Ralph Woods, The Catholic Companion to the Bible (Lippincott, 1955), p.199.
4
J. P. Arendzen, The Gospels: Fact, Myth or Legend? (Sands, 1923), pp.64-65.
5
Contra Epis. Manich., Fund., n. 6
6
Woods, The Catholic Companion to the Bible, p.76.
7
Boettner, Roman Catholicism, p.11.
8
Woods, The Catholic Companion to the Bible, p.95.
9
Paul Whitcomb, The Bible Made a Catholic Out of Me (Gregorian Press, 1956).
10
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (On the Unity of the Church), June 20, 1896, §5.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid., §8.
13
Tihamer Toth, The Catholic Church: A Course of Sermons (Herder, 1943), pp.3639.
14
Not surprisingly, Boettner uses it to attack Confession in the Catholic Church
(p.202).
15
G. K. Chesterton, The Catholic Church and Conversion, (Burns & Oates, 1926),
p.122.
16
Woods, The Catholic Companion to the Bible, p.200.
17
G. K. Chesterton, The Autobiography of G.K.C. (Sheed & Ward, 1936), p.341.
18
Romano Guardini, The Church of the Lord (Henry Regnery, 1966), p.24.
19
Robert Hugh Benson, Christ in the Church (Sheed & Ward, 1911), pp.145-150.
20
Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies (TAN Books, 1938).
21
Chesterton, The Catholic Church and Conversion, pp.53-54.
22
Ibid., pp.117-118.

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

1
2

29

Fifteen Minutes

with Fr. de Chivré:

Purity
As long as we insist on classifying the problem
among the sickly fears of a grotesque moralism—or
moralizing—it will always explode in a vicious
liberation. Rigorism inclines us to vice much more
than to virtue. Laxism diminishes a man far more
than it reinforces his dignity.
The sole transcendent dignity of a man arises
from his spiritual life. The spiritual life is necessarily
associated with the life of the senses, either to
receive a loyal expression or else to be stifled and
betrayed in its manifestation.

A theory of blind, automatic, or sheer willpower will never be able to give us the complete
solution. In reality, there are two aspects to
the question of purity, just as with all the other
virtues: First, there is an aspect that is general and
obligatory for absolutely everyone: “Thou shalt
not commit adultery.” Then there is an aspect of
purity that is individual: it is none other than the
obligatory aspect as applied to our life, according
to our differences of temperament and physical and
moral state; according to unforeseen and necessary
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

30
circumstances; according to the light received by
each one of us, either blinding in its demands, or
else veiled and obscure; all falling under the same
general “obligatory” but applied to the individual.
What does obligatory mean?
It means indispensable to retaining the
characteristic of man: an incarnate spirit. What
do we mean by that expression? We mean that
two contraries are bound together toward a shared
action: a pure spirit, with no blending of nonspiritual elements; a flesh composed of non-spiritual
elements: instincts, passions, emotions, lower
desires, etc.
So how can we resolve the problem? By
studying the two opposed realities each in its proper
light, with an exact knowledge of each reality and of
the natural and supernatural mission proper to each,
a knowledge which ought then to move the will
toward a decision, not based on a blind formalism
but based on real circumstances in the light of one’s
conscience and of God’s grace.
There is an unceasing obligation to purity,
governed by laws which are very precise indeed, but
there is no obligatory formula for purity separate
from the given moment in which an individual
ought to be pure; or decreed before that moment
without any practical relation to that particular
moment in time. Gluttony, too, falls under an
obligatory command, but I should not dissociate that
command from the moment in which I am going
to pose an act which is materially close to gluttony
but which will in fact be morally virtuous: the act of
enjoying taking that extra apple out of the basket,
freely and voluntarily, but for an overriding motive
of good health and as directed by the mind.
So what is it to know? In French, connaître, like
the Latin, nascere cum, to be born with: Deciding in
favor of an act of the senses because a legitimate
spiritual reason is born with the sensible desire,
giving the act a reasonable and virtuous direction.
For what regards purity, this knowledge can take
three forms: prudishness, the sense of decency or
shame, and purity.

Prudishness
Prudishness can be described as the anxiety to
preserve the spirit to the point of wanting to see it
disincarnated: of wanting it to act without opening
its eyes, without feeling any emotion, without
participating in the physical and physiological
reality of the body. It is a sort of absurd constraint
betraying a formal ignorance of the real, since an
incarnate spirit is specifically designed to collaborate
with the reality of the flesh. Prudishness can even
reduce personal grooming to the anti-virtuous

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

absurdity of the “strict necessary” at the expense of
cleanliness and general hygiene.
In this domain, then, what should be the
participation of the spirit? How do we act in a way
worthy of the soul? By granting to the real, fully
and honestly, what is physically due to it, without
abasing the soul by an excessive participation in
activities to which the soul is suited only in order to
assure to the body its existence.
Prudishness encourages a repression that is
dangerous for those moments in which the soul,
bound to participate in the life of the body but no
longer taking its inspiration from reason governing
the real, tumbles into the opposite excess of
wicked participation. The spirit is swept away by
the violence of emotion because it never learned
to participate in a healthy way in the emotions
inseparable from the taste of the apple and the savor
of the fruit and of well-being, appreciated without
being allowed to overflow dishonorably into roles
they are not meant to fill.
The prude is a moral cripple by his ignorance
of reality; he is all dressed up as an advocate
of the spiritual but is only a pitiful counterfeit.
The mentality of a prude renders a normal life
impossible, in the name of an imaginary dignity.
There are cases commanded by reason and basic
prudence which impose a realistic action–action
the prude would heartily denounce as immodesty
or vice. I was careful to say “commanded” by
reason and therefore morally virtuous despite an
activity which is materially immoral. There is the
amusing example of the seminarian who jumps in
the water in full cassock to save a young lady, clad
in just a bikini, who was about to drown and the
scolding he received from his most saintly superior,
to whom he mischievously replied: “Have no fear,
Father Superior; the young lady was in my arms
but not in my heart.” Everything depends on our
understanding the goal without prudishness, and on
our willing the goal without dishonesty or deviation.
Could it be that the most prudish epochs in
history were secretly the most riddled with vice?
That would be an interesting study.

The Sense of Decency
The sense of decency or shame is not a virtue,
but a natural or acquired disposition that comes
to the aid of virtue. What is the nature of this
disposition?
It is a spontaneous expression of the delicacy
of the spiritual and higher faculties, anxious not
to profane their integrity by obligatory or useless
realism and refusing to stoop down to merely
carnal expressions of sight, touch or gesture. It is
the attitude of a sensibility eager to cling to the

31
spirit rather than to know itself flesh. The sense of
decency expresses a dignity determined to exist and
a formal refusal of any vulgarity that could dull or
deaden it. It comes from being used to living on
the summits of a mentality worthy of the heart and
mind. The sense of decency perceives the danger
before it materializes; it flees from danger, not from
cowardice but from the intense freedom of the soul
choosing always what is most favorable to avoiding
what is base. It expresses a respect for self and for
others out of a concern not to be a mere animal for
oneself or for others. Consequently, in our social
life, it is the sense of decency that fosters refinement
of feeling, delicate courtesy, and the very pure joys
of the heart. It preaches the spiritual.
The lack of a sense of decency betrays a certain
abdication which accepts a closer resemblance to
the behavior and the attitude of animals. It is the
symptom that you have in fact chosen to follow
animal instinct as your reason for acting. It is a
forerunner of impurity, and betrays an ignorance
of the fact that people who see you have enough
delicacy of mind and psychological health to be
wounded by your lack of dignity and vigor.
When nudity is no longer commanded by
reason and conscience together, it becomes useless
exhibitionism, and we fall from the moral dignity
of governing our body into the demeaning cult of
the body. It is a worship of the body which is full
of a false dignity because it stifles the manifestation
of the soul, mistress of a spiritually legitimate
demeanor.
The sense of decency can be defined as selfrespect. Now, the self is both a duality–soul and
body–and a hierarchy–the soul above the body, or
the body in the service of the soul. It is inscribed
in natural law—even animals possess a certain
instinctive sense of shame. It goes before purity
and ensures to it the exercise of its rights and its
duties by preparing the reason to maintain control
over real, physical activities, commanded by the
conscience, in relation to ourselves or to others.
The sense of decency accompanies real, or
physical, activity by the discretion it imposes: the
surgeon who is operating and the patient who is
naked can very well act with unoffended decency
without having to close their eyes! What it does not
want is any compromise of our moral and spiritual
integrity, more precious than anything.
When clothing, demeanor, entertainment, etc.,
spontaneously give to someone who is balanced,
master of his reason and his soul, the impression
that priority is unnecessarily given to sensuality,
then there is absence of the sense of decency.
When, abruptly or progressively, fashions,
games and pleasures start to destroy our taste for
healthy thinking, our spiritual attachment to duty

of state, our attention to the dictates of conscience,
the need to maintain ourselves virtuous, the sense of
honest effort, and our taste for God: then decency
is no longer the inspiration for our behavior. We
have begun giving precedence to the world, which
is the sign that the soul no longer has any instinctive
defense against sensuality.
How many parents and young people no longer
consider the question of dress, pleasure or demeanor
except in function of whether “it’s cool,” “it’s in
style,” “it’s the latest thing,” without at all realizing
the state of spiritual baseness and of carnality to
which they have fallen. No longer to sense the
gap between dignity and fashion is to betray the
animalization of your heart.
Show to him who would fear the fortress too high
That it’s only his heart which is too low.
(Au gré des flots–Texier)

Exhibitions of nudity are in keeping with
a bewildered conscience in full flight; with a
conscience that has slunk back down into the sewers
somewhere far below the spiritual beauty of man.
The absence of delicacy, as expressed by the
false delicacy of a style strictly concerned with
the body, is a sign of mental perversion and of
an intellect extinguished under a flurry of kisses,
caresses, contortions, and barbaric fashions. The
death of shame announces the disappearance of the
sense of decency; it marks the appearance of the
jackal on the hunt for tainted meat.

Purity
Purity is the positive virtue of real or realist
action. It draws all of its vigor and decisiveness not
from denial, nor from fear, nor from formalism,
nor from scrupulosity, but from a free knowledge,
because it is full of grace (Ave Gratia Plena), of the
rightfulness of the decision to act, basing itself on a
virile and healthy understanding of the act willed
and chosen as best, in spite of its materiality. Purity
bursts forth from a mind strengthened by integrity
and grace, just as light bursts forth through a prism
untarnished and unbroken. A moral state of purity
arises from a clear knowledge of what remains pure
in a given action, which may seem impure but which
is only real or necessary.
The starting point for purity is a healthy
education in the natural law and supernatural duty,
with a concrete application coming from an integrity
keeping a close watch over behavior without ever
allowing it to deviate and follow instinct to the
detriment of the soul. It lets instinct play its proper
role, as set out by its knowledge of a necessary
reality, but it never permits instinct, with its appetite
for pleasure or sensual emotion, to be the sole
inspiration of an act.
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

32
Any corporal activity is necessarily a blend of
mind and instinct. Duty lies in obliging both to
stay within the boundaries of their mission. The
goal of instinct is to feel: you force me to hold an
ice cube in the palm of my hand by keeping me
from opening my fist, so, voluntarily, I squeeze my
hand tighter to feel the ice even better. Cum sentire:
instinct was limited to a certain animal sensation,
but now I sense the same thing by the participation
of my will. Purity does not forbid sensation to
accompany a necessary act; but it does forbid
the mind and the will to cede their proper role to
instinct. The shore does not forbid the waves to
break at its feet, but it never invites the waves to
come flooding over it.
The general law of purity therefore requires that
knowledge always maintain a loyal, supernatural
control over its decisions. In practice, the general
law adjusts to circumstances, yet always in view of
the general obligation. Purity is not received simply
by education. It is in fact the most noble way to
gain mastery of ourselves to the benefit of God’s
life in us. Its importance also arises from the results
of its contrary, impurity. In de-spiritualizing man,
impurity separates him from God, from his spiritual
destiny and from his present occupation of enabling
the definitive reign of the soul in man’s actions.
Purity therefore presupposes above all else an
intelligent and firm education of the child, in order
to avoid forming children who are unbalanced,
scrupulous, fearful, curious, morbid, or perpetually
anxious, and to avoid ending in an explosion of
instincts kept packed down and undisciplined by
years of prudish coercion. Above all, banish readymade, one-size-fits-all explanations. Then, explain
without mystery but not without delicacy. Teach the
child how to make decisions purely, and make him
understand the benefit of prayer and the life of the
sacraments. Finally, never consider the case at hand
to be irreparable.
To educate a child to purity, do not simply
abstract; know and understand the psychology
and temperament of the child to whom the lesson
is directed. Do not cheat a question by taking an
escape-hatch, but answer it with a truth adapted to
the child’s age and emotional development, as a
doctor would adapt a prescription to the size and
shape of his patient. Finally, show him that purity
is not the privilege of a particular class of society,
or of a school of thought, or a human conception of
life, but that it is inherent to the dignity particular to
man. Remember that a child is all instinct, otherwise
he would not be a child, and hence the absurdity of
treating adolescents like grown men. Why not treat
all adults like wise old men?
Teach the child to dominate his instinct by
reflection, nourished by an enthusiastic spiritual life
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

that strives for an ideal. Never excuse any yielding
to instinct; remember that to punish is to love,
when reasoning with him is fruitless. Encourage
him toward noble, generous, and beautiful activities
in which the quality, excellence and perfection of
the mind appear. Instill in him a passion for one of
these. Show him that a decision never involves only
his body but also his heart and soul and conscience;
make him realize the grace that dwells in him and
the relationship he should form with God. Finally,
make him understand that sacrifice is not meant to
traumatize him but to liberate him from the chains
of his instincts, constantly jerking him here and
there, by voluntarily placing them back under the
control of his will through privation and endurance,
or through an effort, or through a confession.
Deprived of that education, a great many calls
to moral grandeur–a vocation to the religious life,
to the priesthood, to the military, to heroism–have
suffocated during the years of instinct which stifled
the freshness of the soul. Wilted by sins of the flesh,
his soul has lost the taste for interior beauty and
turned away from the ascensions that alone could
have made him a man.
To be pure is to begin life by a recovery
of the strength that we lost with original sin: a
spiritual strength animating our decision in the
use of corporal forces in order to maintain them
subordinate to our spiritual growth.

● The real is pure;

Unreasonable realism is impure.

● The necessary is pure;

The imprudent useless is impure.

● Active or passive prudence is pure;
Carnal impulse is impure.

Purity manifests itself by an authoritative reserve
toward all that touches the dangers of instinct. It
is an intelligent and free reserve, which is the
contrary of ignorance or formalism. Its mission is
to guarantee the intense interplay of the mind, the
superior faculties and sublime, enduring sentiments.
It is not a list of do-not-do’s roared out by moralism;
it is an imperious invitation of the love of God
calling us back toward the possession of His own
way of loving.
And how did He love?
He loved in associating the sense laws of His
body to the imperious immolation which His soul
and His Divinity, from Christmas all the way to the
Resurrection, imposed on the instincts of material
possession, of well-being, of pleasure, of easy,
automatic satisfaction of the natural sense life, even
unto the voluntary martyrdom of His crucified body.

33
In so doing, He reminded us that there are
two ways of loving: The first is to follow the
laws of instinct without letting them infringe
on the rights of morality and the soul; and
the second, to immolate those very laws
under the superior demands of the spirit
to the benefit of the general resurrection
of men, redeemed from their sensuality
and their vices, from their animality and
their baseness, by the heroism of personal
sacrifice and by the example it creates for
each one of us.

The Moral Authority
of a Man at Peace
It is six o’clock in the evening in this
beautiful month of June, and my 20 years
have only just come to know the prodigious
balance that a soul rebuilt by forgiveness can
savor in a pacified body. Inside me, everything
is daylight, calm as a summer night. I can
sense that my return to God has destroyed
nothing of that beauty to which I succumbed,
a little like a young animal who let himself
be tempted by the bait…But this return is a
stepping into broad daylight, illuminating
the hierarchy of things and beings and giving
me henceforth a wild desire to respect them
with infinite discretion; not to fear them or
deny them, but to set them never again in
disharmony with my heart, so weakened every
time I have senselessly let my senses grow.
Inside me, everything is resplendent with
the beauty of God’s daylight: an untouchable
beauty, and so true that it cannot be expressed
in words, but can be seen with a soul which has
become again a mirror of God. I sense that I
am ready to live, ready to love with nobility,
ready to struggle, ready even to die, because I
possess in my being the strength of a stability
the peace of which has enchanted me even to
the strength of sacrifice.
How I can now pity those who are truly
“seated in the shadow of death”—of their own
spiritual death, whose disorders they cannot
even see, since they are covered over by the
accursed darkness; disorders which can only
be seen in their true, horrific value, by the
light of forgiveness, giving back the sense of a
beauty that makes you pray, that makes you
act, and that even makes you weep for joy, as
I do this evening.

Translated exclusively into English for Angelus Press and published in this language for the first time. Fr. Bernard-Marie de
Chivré, O.P. (say: Sheave-ray´) was ordained in 1930. He was an
ardent Thomist, student of Scripture, retreat master, and friend of
Archbishop Lefebvre. He died in 1984.

Dilexit Eos
You love us the way we are
And that’s what’s so great about it!
Admirable realism of love, that rules out repugnance
Toward a single one of us.
You love the mud we are made of, You love our blood
Because there You inscribe the most luminous expressions
With our falls, bathing us
In our tears of shame, until at last
We dare to smile at Your crucifying proposals.
You didn’t come here to dust off angel wings,
You came to resurrect our slime
By blending Your courage into our helplessness;
Your blood-stained energy into our sensuality;
And it’s beautiful that way,
For we become inseparable from You.
When desire, or determination, or flight,
Blossom into purity, perfuming all our virtue,
We are truly together:
I am there because You are there,
And You are there because I am there.
For You, a man is an irresistible urge
To sculpt a masterpiece,
To give back to his countenance something of Your own–
Until the finishing touches,
When exquisite purity is no longer at a cost.
He who does not struggle does not know You,
And whoever decides to love only his body
Deprives himself of that irreproachable tenderness
Of which, alone, the kiss of God is capable.
–Fr. Bernard-Marie de Chivré

✱

Jn. 13:1. Ante diem festum Paschae, sciens Jesus, quia venit hora ejus, ut
transeat ex hoc mundo ad Patrem: cum dilexisset suos, qui erant in mundo,
in finem dilexit eos.–Before the festival day of the Pasch. Jesus knowing that
His hour was come, that He should pass out of this world to the Father, having
loved His own who were in the world, He loved them
unto
the end.• March 2005
THE
ANGELUS

✱

BOOK

34

REVIEW

TITLE: More Catholic Than the Pope: An Inside Look at
Extreme Traditionalism
AUTHORS: Patrick Madrid and Pete Vere
PUBLISHER: OSV Publishing Division
REVIEWER: Fr. Stephen Somerville, S.T.L. (Licentiate
in Sacred Theology)
Fr. Stephen Somerville is a collaborator with the Society of St. Pius X though not one of its
member-priests. He was born in England (1931) and soon after moved with his family to Toronto,
Canada. He was ordained in 1956. He earned several music degrees and various appointments
to liturgy and music commissions in addition to his parish assignments. He was a member of the
Advisory Board of the ICEL, the committee responsible for the English version of the Novus
Ordo Missae, a service which he repudiated in an “Open Letter to the Church” published in
The Angelus (Oct. 2002) after his return to Tradition in 2001. His chaplaincy to Mel Gibson’s
film crew for The Passion of the Christ, for whom he offered the traditional Mass, and his
subsequent collaboration with the Society of Saint Pius X in Canada earned him the Cardinal
Archbishop of Toronto’s disapprobation and ultimately his suspension on July 15, 2004. He
currently is chaplain of the Regina Mundi Retreat Center (Queensville, Ontario, Canada).

“He certainly does go to church! Why, he is
more Catholic than the Pope!” This colloquial
Catholic humorism was well-known in the past, but
is less so nowadays. It has been chosen as the title
of a recently published criticism or attack on the
international Priestly Society of St. Pius X. Once
popularly intended as a compliment, it is here a
critical epithet leveled by the authors at the traditional
Catholic Society of priests founded in 1970 by
French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to train future
priests for the old Catholic Latin Mass and teaching,
in the turbulent wake of the modernizing, indeed
revolutionizing, Second Vatican Council (1962-65).
The book More Catholic Than the Pope has for
subtitle An Inside Look at Extreme Traditionalism.
Although a somewhat serious work, it is hardly an
“inside” look, since it invites little or no comment
from the inside leadership of the Society of Saint Pius
X. It repeatedly describes the Society as “extreme,”
doubtless to forestall the notion that its authors are
not traditional at all, or the idea that traditional
Catholics are the only ones who preserve and care
about Catholic Tradition. To constantly add “-ism” to
“traditional,” as the book does, is another subtle slur
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

that puts the Vatican II Church in a less awkward
stance.
Words are risky, as politicians of “left” and
“right” know so well. It is a growing fact that the
Catholic Church today is seen as either “progressive,”
“conservative,” or “traditional.” The Progressives look
for ongoing change and adaptation to “society” and
“today’s needs.” The Conservatives want caution, a
return to supposed majority views of the bishops at
the Second Vatican Council, and to selected Catholic
positions, including “a reform of the reform” in
Liturgy. The Traditionalists want a whole-hearted
return to the Latin liturgy and Catholic teaching
and practice obtaining up to Pope Pius XII (d. 1958)
before the Second Vatican Council.
Authors Madrid and Vere, in this view, seem to
be conservative and traditional respectively. Here
one need not insist. What is clear, nevertheless, is the
hostility of the authors for the Society of Saint Pius X.
This is not unusual, for the present writer, on friendly
terms with the Society for a couple of years, often
meets this suspicion or rejection in many quarters.
The Vatican, though cautious, has certainly fostered
the negative view, not without the help of Canon
Law. But one does challenge the epithet “extreme.” In

35
Catholic moral tradition, one discerns two extremes,
based on excess or defect on opposite sides of a moderate
position. Thus, for example, we have presumption (by
excess), despair (by defect) and hope (moderate). Surely
the excessive (or extreme) traditionalists are those who
reject every pope since Pope John XXIII (1958-63)
as illegitimate, in so-called “sedevacantism” (i.e., vacant
seat). To reject the Pope is an extremely drastic move,
even though grave reasons may seem to support it.
Some of these extremists go so far as to create their
own Pope (five in the US alone, recently), while
others simply ignore him.
Now we come to the moderate traditionalists.
Surely these are they who neither reject the Pope nor
follow the Vatican II changes. Putting it positively,
they recognize and respect the Pope (although
criticizing his teaching and policy), and they reclaim
all, not just some, of the old Catholic liturgy and
doctrine. There was still some hope in 1970 that
this might be possible when the Society of Saint
Pius X was enjoying cautious Vatican approval. It
may even be that Pope John Paul II in his more
“liberal” moments would have approved freedom
for this living concept of Catholic tradition in a sort
of bi-ritual Church, one part “traditional” and one
“modern.” But we must return to the book More
Catholic Than the Pope.
The reader will perceive that I simply do not see
Catholic Tradition surviving with all the Vatican II
changes, and especially the new Mass (i.e., the Novus
Ordo Mass). Messrs. Madrid and Vere obviously think
otherwise, and seem to remain curiously blind to the
full extent of the destruction of Catholic faith and
piety in what other writers call “the Neo-Catholic
Church” of Vatican II. Nonetheless, their Chapter
1, “What Led to the Founding of the SSPX,” has a
welcome frankness about the growing disorder in the
Church, painfully perceived by Archbishop Lefebvre.
The Society soon sailed into rough waters. In 1975,
the new bishop of the territory in which the Society
had been erected (Fribourg) saw fit, under Vatican
pressure, to disqualify and suppress the Society.
Rome evidently was alarmed at the growing power
and attractiveness of this anti-Vatican II movement.
It moved quickly to attempt to undo it. Here begins
the canonical struggle between the Society and the
Vatican. Author Vere has his licentiate in Canon
Law, and I would not enter a canonical debate with
him. Canonists of the Society of St. Pius can and do
mount a strong defense of their Fraternity. But my
lament against More Catholic Than the Pope is its heavy
emphasis on legality. It makes me think of the Scribes
and Pharisees who attacked Jesus relentlessly with
“the law, the law, the law” without concern for faith in
the new Messiah who stood before their unbelieving
eyes. From a legal point of view, they certainly had
an advantage. The Mosaic Law protected their very
system and high position. Jesus was indeed able to
defend Himself by legal appeals here and there, but

His main strength was Old Testament prophecy and
His own signs (miracles) and witness to God, His
Father. Those Pharisees would “strain at a gnat and
swallow a camel.” Well, conciliar Catholics will echo
cries of “schism” and “suspension” and “lost faculties”
against the Society, but will blandly swallow the
outrageous irreverence in many modern Catholic
churches, disdain for the Real Presence, for the true
Sacrifice, disregard for steeply falling attendance, for
dying seminaries and convents, and so much more.
Canon Law itself tells us that the supreme
law is the salvation of souls. When Church abuses
undermine this salvation seriously, as the post-Vatican
II history shows, then this higher law kicks in, and
some disobedience to lower authority is warranted.
As St. Peter declared to the Jews, it is better to obey
God rather than men. More Catholic Than the Pope fails
to give due place to this salvation crisis and state of
grave necessity in today’s Church. “Necessity knows
no law,” and the fruitfulness of so much traditional
Catholic ministry today, including that of Society
priests, is surely a clear sign of God’s grace supporting
Tradition. Canon 1323, §4 of the 1983 Code of Canon
Law permits disobedience based on necessity and
disallows punishment in such cases. Chapter 3 of
More Catholic Than the Pope takes pains to show that
the Lefebvre ordinations of deacons and priests were
illegal. Here again, law would triumph over faith,
but More Catholic Than the Pope sees only the canonics
manipulated by Vatican Churchmen presiding over
a Church that shows less and less of the ancient
Catholic Faith.
On page 54, Archbishop Lefebvre addresses a
fearful warning to Pope Paul VI (which I abridge):
Your Holiness, abandon the ill-omened program of
compromising with the ideas of modern man, drawn from
a secret pact between Cardinals and high Freemasons
dating from before Vatican II. This will destroy the
Catholic Church. You will see that we in the Society cannot
collaborate in such a calamity, and this we would do if we
closed our seminaries as you are insisting. (Cf. letter of
Marcel Lefebvre to Pope Paul VI, June 17, 1976)

This statement shows that the Church’s troubles are
not the result of innocent errors by some theologians,
but the result of traitorous Catholic collusion with
Masonry, whose object has always been, along with
Communism and Zionism, to destroy the Catholic
Church.
The presence of evil conspiracy in the upper
Church levels, before, during, and since Vatican
II is the developed theme of many studies. Some
knowledge of this conspiracy is necessary in
appreciating the Society of Saint Pius X. Its founder’s
writings are also abundant and profound. More
Catholic Than the Pope fails to balance these in its
adverse judgment on the Society.
Chapters 6, 7, and 8 of More Catholic Than the Pope
treat of some major questions of Faith and doctrine.
Chapter 6 is a lengthy but confusing aside on Vatican
II as “pastoral” and not “doctrinal” or “dogmatic.”
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

36
Obviously “pastoral” means of or pertaining to
a pastor of souls or his duties (Webster). This is
a permanent dimension of Church teaching and
practice, from Biblical times onward. But More Catholic
Than the Pope quotes Pope John XXIII saying that we
must teach in “reply to the demands of our time,” as if
unfriendly society or the world should dictate how the
Church should express the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus
Christ. After eight pages of “pastorality,” one remains
confused. Is “pastoral” just a catchword that vaguely
means “modern” or “practical,” “flexible” or “nondogmatic”? Is it a smokescreen for the subtle doctrinal
changes that Vatican II architects slyly intended?
Lefebvre wrote and spoke with unusual clarity,
lucidity, and Catholic sense. His Society strives to
do the same in its many publications. It is probably
nowadays a good rule to avoid the use of the word
“pastoral.”
Chapter 7 of More Catholic Than the Pope is on
the “Eucharist” (i.e., referring to the Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass). I could cite many instances of faulty
expression or content in the authors’ theology.
More serious is the prevailing vagueness and even
confusion of the text. The authors are attempting to
explain away the obvious harm done to the Mass in
post-Conciliar liturgy, for indeed the central thrust of
traditional Catholics is to simply restore the old Mass
and discontinue the changes. In order to excuse the
Council More Catholic Than the Pope speaks repeatedly
of the “intention” of the Second Vatican Council, or
of the bishops, as originally being sound and good
but later perverted. It is naïve to suppose that total
adherence to the texts of Vatican II would have
saved the modern Church. That Council was clearly
infected from the beginning with modernist attitudes.
Its very “letter” and not just its so-called “spirit” could
be manipulated to advance modernist changes.
Interestingly, the authors rather praise Pope Paul
VI for Mysterium Fidei, his encyclical on the Real
Presence and Sacrifice (September, 1965), published
just before the end of the Second Vatican Council and
without the collaboration of the Council. It seems that
the ecumenical thrust of Vatican II was incompatible
with such an emphasis on the Real Presence, but
salvaging this Catholic dogma was judged necessary
to protect the Vatican from losing face. In the same
way, Humanae Vitae (1968) had to be published to
save Catholic morality, but would never have been
decreed by a commission or Council of modernist
bent. It has even been ventured that some hand other
than Pope Paul’s wrote them–a more traditional hand.
These documents are truly pastoral, the shepherd
pastor addressing the faithful sheep.
Chapter 8 treats of “Ecumenism.” For Webster,
this is a promotion or fostering of Christian unity
throughout the world. For More Catholic Than the
Pope it is another wading in a swamp of confusion
and vagueness. More Catholic Than the Pope begins
by citing Vatican II: “The restoration of unity
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

among all Christians is...[a] concern of [Vatican II].”
Restoration? When did we ever have full Christian
unity? Perhaps for a few intoxicated days after
Pentecost? Jesus prayed ardently for unity at the
Last Supper, as if He saw it would not be realized
fully or easily. Vatican II goes onto say “division
[of Christian communion] scandalizes the world....”
Certainly not! The world does not care, and is even
more divided than the churches. More Catholic Than
the Pope (p. 113) denies the allegation that ecumenism
undermines Catholic faith in the Real Presence and
the True Sacrifice. Yet the Vatican II Novus Ordo Mass
is accepted by several Protestant leaders as a suitable
formula, the same leaders who disbelieve both the
Real Presence and the Sacrifice of the Mass! It is
fruitless for the Vatican to reaffirm Catholic truth in
various damage-control statements (cited by More
Catholic Than the Pope) when a grassfire of Catholic
disbelief is already raging through a protestantized
Liturgy. In all this treatment of ecumenism, More
Catholic Than the Pope continues casting the slurs of
“schismatic” and “extreme” at traditional Catholics.
The bishops of the Society of St. Pius X should
demand a retraction from authors Madrid and Vere,
or else request a canonical enquiry of the Vatican to
investigate their charges.
In Part 3A (Chaps. 9-13) More Catholic Than the
Pope answers some particular arguments of Catholics
defending Tradition. In Chapter 9, Madrid and Vere
attack the use of the papal bull Quo Primum of Pope
St. Pius V when used to defend the celebration of the
Tridentine Mass. All that More Catholic Than the Pope
manages to do is to confuse the reader. On page 124,
the authors say a “declared” (I believe they rather
mean “defined.”) dogma can be later “clarified.” But
I remind them that to define a dogma is precisely to
clarify it. Perhaps More Catholic Than the Pope meant
that preachers or thinkers can help us to deepen
our understanding of a dogma. One hopes so, and
wishes that More Catholic Than the Pope would write
with more clarity. Quo Primum is said to be a “merely
disciplinary” document of St. Pius V (introducing
the 1570 Roman Missal). This use of “merely” is an
enormity. It implies “not doctrinal nor dogmatic.”
This is to belittle the marvelous stability that the
Missale Romanum of St. Pius V brought to the Faith of
Catholics because of the holy, meticulous, disciplined
manner of celebrating the Mass that it imposed on
the priest and his fellow ministers. Moreover, it
marshaled or preserved a magnificent assemblage
of texts, duly expressing the Real Presence, the True
Sacrifice, and many other Catholic doctrines. All
of this is the lex orandi–the law of praying–which,
as theology tells us, establishes the lex credendi–the
law of believing. To call this “merely” changeable
discipline is grossly misleading, especially in view
of the catastrophic degradation of the Catholic
Church since around 1969, the year of Pope Paul VI’s
revised Missale Romanum. Truly, modernist rot was at

37
work among many theologians, especially since the
late 19th century, but the solidity of the old Missale
Romanum and Quo Primum deserve great credit for
preserving the faith of ordinary Catholics. The Novus
Ordo surely deserves primary blame for the present
Catholic debacle. Some observers do not hesitate to
call it the prophesied Abomination of Desolation (II
Thess. 2).
This train of thought leads into Chapter 10 where
the authors take up the allegation that the New Mass
is “evil.” More Catholic Than the Pope continues here
its muddling of language by insisting that only “the
liturgy” has changed, not “the Mass,” (p.127) and that
“the soul and divinity of Jesus are transubstantiated
into the Eucharist,” a theological howler (p.128). But
in regard to th question, “Do the new liturgical rites
incite to impiety?” all we can say to More Catholic Than
the Pope is, “By their fruits you shall know them.”
Is the Society of Saint Pius X in “schism” by
virtue of its consecration of four bishops in 1988
without papal permission? This very important
question receives only one page of treatment in
Chapter 11. I have read many reputable authors on
this topic strongly arguing that the Society of St. Pius
X is not “schismatic” but none are cited here. Beside
this, the discomfiting evidence that the Vatican of the
last four popes has cut itself off from its own Catholic
tradition is not mentioned. The signs that a “silent
apostasy” (Pope John Paul II’s words) is spread within
the Catholic Church are not addressed. The simple
notion that the Catholic Church is being reduced
to a faithful remnant, principally among traditional
Catholic groups, is unthinkable to More Catholic Than
the Pope, for whom the Vatican can do no wrong. All
the bishops and priests of the Society of Saint Pius X
pray at every Mass expressly “for peace, protection,
unity, and guidance for the Catholic Church, together
with the Pope ( John Paul) and the local bishops and
all right-believing Catholics.” Do men in “schism”
employ such language?
Archbishop Lefebvre made a practical distinction
in his famous statement in 1988 when he declared
his loyalty to “traditional Rome” while rejecting
“modernist Rome.” In Chapter 13 (only two pages)
More Catholic Than the Pope declares that these
two notions are practically the same. In attacking
Archbishop Lefebvre, it further confuses the reader
by various woolly and senseless comparisons,
saying this is to “divide the Church into a mere
communion,” to “separate the Church into a mere
human institution,” that “Christ founded His mystical
body upon the rock,” and “tradition is passed down
by Christ.” (Actually, the authors are wrong here. The
apostles handed on or passed down [“tradere ”] the
Gospel as must their successors; the action of Our
Lord Jesus Christ is to reveal, bestow, or proclaim it).
More Catholic Than the Pope astounds the reader by its
blindness to the novelties in post-Conciliar teaching.

The eight pages of Chapter 14 present five
significant traditional Catholic agencies other than the
Society of Saint Pius X which are “recognized by the
Church.” They are all much smaller than the Society,
which the media says enfolds a million Catholics
worldwide. It remains to be seem how well they will
survive and grow. They are surely obliged to bite
their tongue when Vatican deviations in doctrine or
practice are exposed. But they are further evidence of
the beauty and attraction of Catholic Tradition. May
their peaceful co-existence help restore the Church
eventually, according to the mind of God.
So ends the book. There follows Pope John
Paul II’s letter Ecclesia Dei published promptly after
the unauthorized consecrations of four bishops for
the Society of St. Pius X performed by Archbishop
Lefebvre and his co-consecrating bishop, Antonio de
Castro Mayer (1988). It is, of course, an act of damage
control, politely but firmly adversarial to the Society,
which invokes the new notion of a “living character
of Tradition” to explain the division. “Living” would
indicate that there is growth (a sign of life) in insight
into Tradition (§4; p.l50). But this insight, I observe,
is in the thinkers, not in Tradition itself. The Pope
says it comes partly from bishop preachers who have
received “the sure charism of truth.” May it be so.
He adds that a notion of Tradition which opposes,
the universal teaching office in the Pope and Body of
Bishops is “contradictory.” I ask, “Does any genuine
‘notion of Tradition’ oppose the pope and bishops?”–
Certainly not! “Tradition” is that which all the popes
and bishops handed on down to Pope Pius XII.
Traditional Catholics have precisely this notion. It is
they themselves, especially their trained theologians,
who oppose the deviant teachings of the four recent
popes and many bishops, who have precisely deviated
from the true, immemorial Catholic teaching or
Tradition. In §5a of Ecclesia Dei, the Pope invites all
to “reflect on their fidelity to Tradition, authentically
interpreted...in the Ecumenical Councils from Nicaea
to Vatican II (325 to 1965)…[thereby] rejecting
erroneous interpretations….” Indeed, may it be so!
In §5b, he calls for “deeper study to reveal clearly the
Council’s continuity (?!) with Tradition.” Very well: It
will reveal also dis-continuity and novelty, as many
writers have already shown.
Pope John Paul II goes on to express sympathy
for Catholic faithful who “feel attached to,” have
“rightful aspirations” for, and whose “feelings...are
attached to the Latin liturgical tradition.” This is well
and good, but surely he knows that these Catholics
are Tradition-oriented not by sentiment, but by
conviction and love of the Truth which they know.
After three more worthwhile appended articles
and endnotes, there is a Glossary of Ecclesiastical Terms
(seven pages). Although helpful, it contains rather
many imprecisions, ungrammatical expressions,
confusions, and minor errors.

THE ANGELUS • March 2005

38

E r i c

What is the general object and end of Education?
Obviously, you cannot lead a person in a way
unnatural to him. When you teach, bring up, train a
horse, it is always remembered that it is a horse you
are dealing with. We do not try anything else. But
with human beings we are much more muddled. It
seems as though we hardly know what human beings
are or what they are for. Yet, obviously, that is the first
thing to find out. What is a human being? What end is
he made for?
In the world today, whatever we say about it,
we act almost entirely as though human beings had
no reason for being except to get on in the world–to
acquire a lot of material possessions–to get a good
paying job. That seems to be considered the first
and most important thing. On top of that we think
it would be a good thing if people had a sort of
ornamental veneer of culture and good manners–that
they be able to appreciate good books and to speak
with a refined accent.
This ambition of parents to give children such an
education as will enable them to get on and get a good
job is obviously due to a certain view of what a human
being is. Whatever we may say, we act as though
a human being was simply a creature, an animal,
whose sole job it was to earn his living, acquire ample
means to live comfortably, and then pass out. This
seems to be the sole object of existence of other
animals, and we seem to think that man is only an
animal among animals. The only difference between
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

G i l l

man and other animals seems to be that whereas
other animals reproduce their kind to the utmost of
their powers and without consideration of their own
comfort or convenience, men and women, on the
other hand, though they have as strong an instinct for
mating as other animals, do not proceed in this matter
unselfishly or without regard to their own comfort and
convenience. And so we find that the more successful
we are in the pursuit of riches, the more we get on and
get rich, so much the more we think of our comfort
and so much the more we restrict our families.
Perhaps other animals would do the same if they had
more wits. But they do not, and so it seems that the
main difference between man and other animals is
that men are cleverer and more cunning and more
self-regarding and more selfish, and that our desire for
culture and good manners is bound up with getting
on; for the better your manners, the more likely you
are to beat your more boorish competitors, and the
more proofs you can show of having learnt poetry
and foreign languages, so much the more will you
outshine your fellows.
So it seems that today our definition of man is:
That he is an animal who exists in order to enjoy
himself while he lives, and therefore the object of
education is to draw out all those faculties which
are suitable to that end. First of all, he must learn
how to acquire a good living, and, secondly, how to
enjoy it in the manner least likely to endanger it. We
must learn how to acquire riches and we must learn

39
not to squander them in riotous living. Shorn of all
camouflage, that represents the general line of people’s
ideas today. That is not what we say, but it is how we
act. And even the more highbrow people are really
acting in the same way; for though, perhaps, they say
that the object of education is to draw out the very
best that is in us–to teach us to know ourselves and
control ourselves so that we may enjoy ourselves even
more–it all comes to the same thing–to acquire the
means to live well and then to enjoy life. For, after all,
the saying; “Eat, drink and be merry,” depends upon
its interpretation. It does not necessarily mean eat and
drink as much as possible, but eat and drink as much
as will enable you to be merry. And being merry does
not necessarily mean buffoonery and horseplay and
drunken revelry; it may mean the most refined high-art
enjoyments. So whether we are highbrows or lowbrows,
the definition of man which is accepted today comes to
the same thing: in either case it means that we have no
idea of man except that his only reason for existence
is to get on in this world and have as good a time as
possible.
Perhaps there are two chief causes of this rather
limited view of man: 1) The decay and disappearance
of unity in religion; and 2) The tremendous growth of
the power and prestige of the commercial world.
But perhaps these two things are two sides of the
same thing; for where religion is strong, commerce is
always weak. So perhaps we may say that the one and
only cause of our limited and materialistic view of man
is the decay of religious unity, for where there are a
hundred rival sects there cannot be power. The devil
may well approve of the military rule, “Divide and
conquer.” For where, instead of one religion swaying
the hearts and minds of men, there are a hundred
rival religions, it is obvious that no one of them can be
really powerful, and no one of them can unite us all
together and inspire us.
There is no need for me to say here which, if any,
of the rival religions is, in my opinion, the true one, I
am only pointing out that, in the absence of religious
unity, the one and only thing which can unite men is
the desire of material riches. Religion, they now say,
is your private affair–nothing to do with how the state
is run–nothing to do with how you earn your living–
nothing to do with your work.
But if the common materialistic view of man leaves
much to be desired–and few people are really satisfied
with it–it is obviously a very limited view and takes no
account of those qualities in men which we all agree
to admire most: humility, unselfishness, tenderness,
except insofar as they help us to get on–and it takes
no account of the quite common appetite of men for
something real and unchanging and not liable to decay
and death–I say, if the common materialistic definition
of man leaves much to be desired, what other view
is there? If man is not just an animal among animals,

what is he? Well, I think, even without entering into
the awful field of religious controversy, we may say
certain things. God exists; He is a Person–the Personal
Author and Ruler of all things. And we are His people
and the sheep of His pasture. And we are made in His
image–that is to say, we share in God’s spiritual nature.
We are rational beings and can deliberate and weigh
the pros and cons of action; and having thus weighed,
we can act freely. Whether or no we can do good of
ourselves, we can certainly refrain from evil, even if
we are to some extent–perhaps to a large extent–the
victims of our physical and psychological make-up.
We are, therefore, rightly held to be responsible persons
and not automatons obeying willy-nilly the forces to
which we find ourselves subjected. And if we are thus
children of God–for we are, in this religious view of
man, more than just animals without responsibility
(after all, you can punish a dog, but you cannot really
blame him)–if we are children of God, then we are heirs
also. We are called to some sort of sharing with God
in His own life. We have what we call a vocation. We
have, in fact, a destiny independent of our physical life
on this earth. A destiny for which this physical life is a
training ground and place of preparation. It is, in fact,
a school–a place where we are educated.
It is clear then, is it not? By accepting the religious
view of man’s nature, we are compelled to take a
very different, a radically different view of education.
No longer can we think merely of getting on in the
commercial and materialistic sense. We must now
think of getting on in the sense of getting heavenwards.
And in everything we learn and in everything we teach
to our children or our pupils, we must bear this fact in
mind. We must learn to get on in the world–not as an
end in itself, but as a means to getting heavenwards.
Any education which neglects this fact, and to the
extent to which it neglects it, is false education, because
it is false to man. It is untrue; it is not in accordance
with his nature as child of God and heir also.
All this sounds very pious–though there is no harm
in that–and some people will think that I am advocating an almost total neglect of practical things–that
perhaps I despise worldly success, that I despise
reading, writing, and arithmetic and dancing and gymnastics and science and history. That is not so. What
I am saying is simply that as parents and teachers we
must teach these things with an eye on our goal. If, like
the materialists, and that is, in practice, most people
today, we think there is no goal, then of course, there
is nothing to be said against that kind of education
which has for its sole object the training of children
to win prizes and get good jobs, and we should then
approve of the London County Council which says in
its advertisements of its evening classes:
Turn your energy into pounds, shillings, and pence.
London County Council evening classes offer a good
return on your investment.

And we should approve of our men of business, who
see everything in terms of money–who think that the
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

40
production of dividends is the first object of industrial
enterprise (as the Railway Stockholders’ Union says:
“British Railways are in business to earn dividends”).
To the man of business, the only criterion of what is
good is what will sell.
But if we do not accept the materialist philosophy,
if we do not agree with the economic interpretation
of history, if we do not think man is nothing more
than a creature made for gaining material wealth, if
we take the religious point of view–because, if we
think for half a moment, we know that we are not
satisfied with working merely to make money to buy
things which have been made by people who only
made them in order to sell them...then we shall take
a radically different view of education. We shall even
take a radically different view of arithmetic and of
reading and writing–because we shall attack them in a
totally different frame of mind. That is the point. It is
not that we shall do nothing but write hymns, though
the best poems are hymns. It is not that we shall only
read the Bible, though the Bible is the best book, or
that we shall only count how much we can give away
(instead of counting how much we can spend), it is
simply that we shall see all things as in some way
heavenly or leading heavenwards. For education
will not then mean drawing out those faculties which
make us successful worldlings, but drawing out those
faculties which make us better fitted for an eternal
rather than a merely temporary existence. We shall
see everything, as the philosopher says, under the
light of eternity–that is to say we shall see everything
in its real shape, its eternal shape, the shape of its being
rather than the shape of its doing. For it is not what
we do that matters most, but what we are. And it is
the same with things as with persons. Being is more
important than doing. But if, like the materialists and
their followers, the business men of today, we say
there is no being behind doing, but only doing, then
we shall not only lose the Kingdom of God in heaven
but also the Kingdom of God on earth. Newport
and Swansea, Birmingham and the Black Country,
Manchester, Glasgow, the wilds of east and southeast
London! What could be more ungodly? [At the time
of this essay (1940), these were blighted industrial
cities–Ed.] And what could more plainly be the proper
reward of our greed and avarice and our refusal to
educate ourselves and our children except to get on
or get out? And the war, pestilence, and famine which
are upon us, what are they but the due reward of our
sins? [At the time World War II was underway–Ed.]
But in spite of our enthusiasm for worldly success,
we all know that a worldly view of education is very
unsatisfactory–to say the least. It does not satisfy us.
We want something more. And very often we think
that all will be well if, in addition to learning things
which will be useful to enable us to get on, we add
what we call cultured subjects–a spot of art, a spot
of poetry and foreign languages, just in the same
way as people build banks and town halls with iron
frames and concrete and all the cheapest and most
THE ANGELUS • March 2005

labor-saving methods, and then cover the front with
elaborate stonework in imitation of a classical temple,
with columns and carvings.
So we think that children should have a good,
sound practical education, which will enable them to
make money–that is the iron and concrete part–and
that then they should have culture–that is the
pillars and carvings on the front. We all know those
buildings (they are everywhere), which have fine
imitation Queen Anne or Gothic or Classic fronts
and then when you go into the backyard you see only
white glazed bricks and drain pipes–as someone said,
“Queen Anne fronts and Mary Anne backs.” But we
can easily see that this is all nonsense; for if we cannot
make our buildings fine and noble and beautiful all
through, front and back and inside and out, then it
would be much better, more honest and more holy,
to confine ourselves to the Mary Anne part alone,
and see how truly well and nobly we can do the
drains and the drainpipes, and leave out the sham
architecture.
And so it is with education. If we cannot give
our children a truly religious education, through
and through, so that everything they learn is in
harmony with their ultimate heavenly destiny, then
it would be much better if we confined ourselves to
the plain bread-and-butter part of the business and
simply taught them practical things–the three R’s
and physical calisthenics and how to read a railway
schedule and drive a car–and leave out the classics
and Shakespeare and all the sham culture.
For culture is a sham if it is only a sort of Gothic
front put on an iron building–like the Tower Bridge–
or a classical front put on a steel frame–like the Daily
Telegraph building on Fleet Street. Culture, if it is to be
a real thing and a holy thing, must be the product of
what we actually do for a living–not something added,
like sugar on a pill.
So it all comes back to this: What is man? Is he
just an animal for whom earthly life is all? Or is he a
Child of God with eternal life in view?

Arthur Eric Rowton Gill (1882-1940),
an Englishman who converted to the
Catholic Faith in 1913, not only had a
distinguished career as a thinker, social
critic, and art philosopher, but he was
also a highly skilled engraver, sculptor,
and typographer. [He designed the Gill
Sans typeface often seen in Angelus Press
publications–Ed.] Some of his books are
Art and Love, Art and Prudence, Art and
Manufacture, Money and Morals, and
Christianity and the Machine Age. This
article was used with the kind permission
of Mr. Adam Tegetmeier from Essays
by Eric Gill.
An essay by Eric Gill, “Painting and
the Public,” appears in Distributive
Perspectives, (IHS Press), available from
Angelus Press. Price: $8.95.

The Pope Chart Poster

With the passing of
Pope John Paul II and
the Papal Election, the
attention of the whole
world momentarily focuses
on the Successor of St.
Peter. One is pleasantly
shocked to hear secular
news outlets refer to the
“263rd successor of St.
Peter!” There is no
better time than now
to use this poster
to teach people that
the Catholic Church
is the true Church of
Christ. A 40" x 28" poster
of the history of the Papacy (Peter to John Paul II) showing on
one page the direct link Catholics have to Our Lord Jesus Christ
through the Roman Pontiffs. Full-color, printed in Italy (the same
one available in the Vatican bookstore), features a biographical
sketch and a medallion-sized image of all 264 Popes. The
images are reproductions of mosaics from the nave of the
Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls. Fascinating. Excellent
apologetic tool.

Economics
for Helen

Una Colección
Pequeña de
Oraciones y
Devociones Basicas

Hilaire Belloc

This classic
introduction to the
basics of economic
theory offers
a constructive
approach to
economic education
E
L
by defining terms
B
LA !
I
and introducing
A
AV GAI N
key concepts
A
without using special
jargon and complex theories.
The fundamental questions about why
the economy fluctuates and how small
farmers, small business people, families,
consumers, and innovators are affected by
these fluctuations are considered. Serious
Catholic alternatives to modern economic
theories are explained, with attention to the
realities that have been largely unchanged
through the last century.
170pp, softcover, STK# 7024 $12.95

3' 4" x 2' 4", STK# 8027. $19.95

N EW I NG
ER
O FF

The Blood Red Crescent
and the Battle of Lepanto
Henry Garnet

It was fall 1570, and rumors of an invasion
by the Turks were spreading throughout
Venice. Down by the docks, Guido Callata
listened to the sailors as they discussed past
battles and speculated about more fighting
in the future. From the altar of St. Mark’s,
a message from His Holiness Pope Pius V
N EW I NG
had been read, calling for a crusade to repel
R
E
F
Turkish advances. A fleet of Venetian and
F
O
Spanish vessels would be assembled, and
Guido’s father, like other wealthy Venetians, had agreed to build and
equip a galley for the Christian fleet... How Guido finally manages to join
the fleet and help to defeat the Turks in the memorable Battle of Lepanto
is a colorful tale of danger, suspense, and adventure in 16th-century Italy.
(First published in 1960.)
188pp, hardcover with dust jacket, illustrated, STK# 8121. $14.00

(Small Collection of
Basic Prayers & Devotions)

 Como Rezar el Ro-

sario (How to Say the
Rosary)  La Medalla
Milagrosa (The
Miraculous Medal) 
El Escapulario Verde
(The Green Scapular) 
Déle Mucha Importancia a Su Escapulario (The Great Impor‑
tance of Your Brown Scapular)  El Cielo
Abierto por la practica de las Tres Avemarias (Heaven Opened by the Practice of the
Three Hail Marys)  5 Primeros Sabados
de Reparacion al Inmaculado Corazon de
Maria (5 First Saturdays of Reparation to the
Immaculate Heart of Mary)

pack
0
5
h
s
Spani vailable!
a

6 great pamphlets, one low price.
In convenient resealable plastic bag.
STK# 8113.
Single: $0.95.
STK# 8113X  Pack of 50: $44.95

The Blue Gonfalon
at the First Crusade
Margaret Anne Hubbard

A panorama of Europe in 1099 set in a thrilling story
of the First Crusade. Ever since he could remember,
Bennet wanted to become a knight. No matter that
he was the son of an armorer on the estate of Lord
Godfrey, Duke of Lorraine; no matter that a peasant’s
son could never see the realization of such a fantastic
dream....Then one day Peter the Hermit rode through
Lorraine, describing atrocities committed by infidels
in Jerusalem and calling for an army of Christians to
march to Palestine. Bennet’s chance had come at last,
for when Godfrey took the crusader’s cross, he asked Bennet to accompany him
to the Holy Land as his squire. With the blue gonfalon flying at the head of the
French troops, Bennet began the long journey to Jerusalem–toward adventure,
danger, and the possibility that a courageous deed would make his dream of
knighthood come true.

187pp, hardcover with dust jacket, illustrated, STK# 8119. $14.00

The un-Ordinary Magisterium: Encyclicals with a Twist!
People often find Papal encyclicals to be daunting and difficult reading...or just plain boring. We are dead set on changing
that view with these three FASCINATING encyclicals that Catholic should find interesting. “Try them; you’ll like them!”

On St. Benedict

W
NE

Pope Pius XII writes
on the life, times
and the message of
the great Father of
Western Monasticism:
St. Benedict. Pius XII
explains and insists on
the relevancy of the
Rule of St. Benedict
to the modern world.
“The more things
change, the more they
stay the same.”

23pp, softcover,
STK# 8117 $2.95

On St. Boniface

Pope Pius XII tells
the riveting story
of the life of the
English Benedictine,
St. Boniface, who
became the apostle
of Germany and the
true “Father of the
German people” by
giving them life in
W
E
Christ–incorporating
N
them into His
mystical body–all the while demonstrating a
steadfast obedience to the Bishop of Rome. A
martyr, he is buried in Fulda, Germany, where,
to this day, the German bishops continue to
hold their conferences.
26pp, softcover, STK# 8116 $2.95

On the Promotion
of the Spiritual
Exercises

Pope Pius XI reminds
us who live in a
world inundated with
materialism and external
activity, that we must
turn our hearts and
minds towards God in
W
silent contemplation,
NE
enabling us to better
know, love, and serve Him. A must read for
every retreat-master and excellent for all
retreatants as well. Briefly covers the history of
the Spiritual Exercises.
23pp, softcover, STK# 8118 $2.95

ngelus Press announces the publication of the
first totally retypeset, 1962 Latin-English daily
missal for the laity since Vatican II. This is the
most complete missal ever produced in the English
language. We have included everything in a missal that
is affordable while being of the highest durability. The
Roman Catholic Daily Missal will become your lifelong liturgical companion—at Church, at home, and on
the road.
 All new typesetting—not a photographic
reproduction. Clear and crisp type.  According to the
1962 juxta typica edition of the Missale Romanum
 1,980 pages  All liturgical texts in Latin and English
(both Propers and Ordinary)  All readings in English
(Douay-Rheims) and Latin  All music in Gregorian notation  Ordinary with
rubrics in red  Gilt edges  5 liturgically-colored ribbons  Smythe Sewn,
rounded back binding with durable, leather-like Skivertex polymer gold-embossed
flexible cover  Rounded corners on pages and cover  Reinforced 80 lb. resinimpregnated endsheets for extreme durability (which will not tear like printed paper
endsheets)  Fully and thoroughly Indexed  Printed and bound in the USA
 The finest ivory Bible paper (imported from France–Bolloré Primalux)

A

1980pp, sewn binding, gold-embossed skivertex cover, STK# 8043 $59.95

ents rs)
m
a
r
e
Ord
Sac
All t Holy in
ep
ete
(exc compl nglish
E
n&
Lati

Why is this the most complete missal ever?
 All the Masses of the Liturgical Year according to the Roman Calendar of 1962—Temporal and
Sanctoral Cycles and accompanyin g rites (Blessing of Ashes, Blessing of Palms, Chrism Mass, and
the Blessing of Holy Oils, etc.)  Complete Holy Week Liturgy of 1962  Supplements containing the
additional Masses for the United States and Canada  Feasts of particular Religious Congregations
 Liturgical Calendar  Table of Movable Feasts updated to 2050 AD  Masses for the Dead
(including infants), Complete Burial Service, Prayers for the Dead  Marriage Service  Special
Commemorations  39 Votive Collects  17 Votive Masses  Common Masses of the Saints
and the Blessed Virgin  Conclusions of Collects  Rite of Baptism  The Churching of Women
 Rite of Confirmation  Rite of Extreme Unction  Various Blessings  Vespers for Sundays and
Feasts  Compline for Sundays  Office of Tenebrae  The Itinerary or Office before a Journey
 Various Devotions and Prayers including favorite Litanies, the Way of the Cross, prayers of the
Rosary and others  Morning and Evening Prayers  Devotions for Confession  Litany of the
Saints  Devotions for Communion  Anthems to the Blessed Virgin  Hymns in honor of Our Lord
and Our Lady  An explanation of “The Liturgy or Public Worship of the Catholic and Roman Church”
 A Summary of Christian Doctrine  Kyriale with Tones for the Most Common sets of Masses (I Lux
et Origo, II Kyrie Fons Bonitatis, IV Cunctipotens Genitor Deus, VIII De Angelis, IX Cum Jubilo, XI Orbis
Factor, XVII Sundays of Advent & Lent, XVIII Deus Genitor Alme)  Tones for Asperges and Vidi Aquam
 Tones for three of the most common Credos—I, III, IV  Te Deum  and much much more.

Shipping & Handling
US/Canada

Foreign

$.01 to $10.00
$3.95
$7.95
$10.01 to $25.00 $5.95
$9.95
$25.01 to $50.00 $6.95
$12.95
$50.01 to $100.00 $8.95
$14.95
Over $100.00
9% of order 12% of order
Airmail surcharge (in addition to above)
Canada 8% of subtotal; Foreign 21% of subtotal.

angelus Press
2915 Forest Avenue,
Kansas City, Missouri 64109

1-800-96ORDER
1-800-966-7337

www.angeluspress.org
Please visit our website to see our entire selection of books and music.